Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sy Borg]

@Spyrith

If this is Heaven, we live in a tough universe!

If being alive

Life is hard.

conscious

So is being conscious.

and

And what? Please explain.

aware

Aware of what? Who is aware?

is

Is or are?

not

No need to be negative about it.

heaven

Just an ideal.

to

A preposition.

you

It's not about me.

then

What does this relate to? Where is the context?

so

Again, where is the context for this word?

be

In a bonnet?

it.

What is it?

You will either understand what I am trying to tell you with the above context-free absurdities, or not. It will be interesting to see.

[Jklint]

If heaven is above us then NO.

If hell is beneath us then NO.

If both are in-between, then YES.

[Sy Borg]

If heaven is above us then NO.

If hell is beneath us then NO.

If both are in-between, then YES.

Living in such relatively dangerous times, the ancients would have figured that somewhere there must be a place that's peaceful and decent. They looked into the quiet night sky or the fluffy clouds above and saw heaven. Now we see water vapour in the atmosphere, that would be far from heavenly to be in. As for the stars, an entity a million kms in diameter, consisting largely of highly radioactive superheated plasma needs to be quite a long way away to be even remotely heavenly for life.

Then the ancients look at volcanoes and saw Hades. Down in the heat and fire was Satan torturing those who did not mindlessly obey arbitrary rules. Now we know it's just rock and magma, with microbes been found some kilometres deep into the Earth. Not exactly a place for eternal punishment, since it would kill you in seconds at most.

[Jklint]

I guess it's hard for humans, having lived here for so long, to recognize where Paradise - though not of the biblical kind - is actually located compared to the actual real hell, no matter how grand it appears, which we're surrounded by and protected from. You'd think humans would be smart enough to return the favor...if for no other reason than to save themselves. It would behoove us (love that word) to sacrifice to planet Earth rather than the gods to insure it's future good-will to earthlings.

[creation]

If being alive

Life is hard.

Life is extremely easy, and simple. But, then again, I do look at and see things very differently than most.

The saying; "Life is hard", is one that so called "leaders" express so that the "followers", the public, would believe that this is actually true. They want the public, the peasants, to believe this is true so that they will not complain about all the money, through taxes, they have give to these so called "leaders", politicians or kings.

If Life really is "hard", then explain how just living, and being, is hard. This should be easy if it is actually true.

conscious

So is being conscious.

Do you believe being conscious is hard also? If yes, then why?

If you are saying something else, then what is that?

and

And what? Please explain.

The word 'and' is to indicate that 'being alive' as well as being 'conscious' are together in the context of the sentence.

aware

Aware of what?

Of 'Life' or 'Existence', Itself.

Who is aware?

There are two who are aware;
There is the human being or personal self, the little 'i', which is only aware of some things, some of the times. And then,

There is the Being or True Self, the big 'I', which is Aware of ALL things, ALL of the time.

This big 'I' is the One that the word 'Spirit, Allah, God, Enlightenment' refers to.

is

Is or are?

Definitely an 'is', from the way I wrote, and meant.

You asking this could mean that you are not quite sure what I am actually meaning. So, if this is the case, then just ask far more specific clarifying questions, then I can provide you with far more clarity and far more specific answers.

not

No need to be negative about it.

This is true, there is no need to be negative about 'it' (whatever 'it' refers to), and what is also true is I was NOT being negative about any thing here. I was just expressing my views, from how I see things.

Were you assuming I was being negative?

heaven

Just an ideal.

And this is EXACTLY what I was saying, and meaning.

And, just like EVERY other ideal, which has come to fruition, so to will the ideal 'Heaven' also come to fruition, relatively very soon I might add. That is; if human beings do not wipe themselves out through wars and pollution first.

to

A preposition.

Okay.

you

It's not about me.

But it is about 'you', because it was 'you' who made the statement: "If this is Heaven, we live in a tough universe!" with the exclamation mark.

This is obviously what 'you' see, think and/or believe is true. This is not about 'me' because I certainly do not see Heaven and the Universe this way that 'you' do.

then

What does this relate to?

The word 'then' relates to the 'if' part of my sentence.

Where is the context?

In the first part of my sentence.

so

Again, where is the context for this word?

In the first part, and the second part, of my sentence, which are separated by commas.

be

In a bonnet?

No.

it.

What is it?

Whatever you believe is true.

To you, whatever you believe is true, has to be 'it' (or 'be true'). Obviously you would not believe some thing to be true and not be true at the same time. So, whatever you believe is true, MUST BE TRUE, correct?

You will either understand what I am trying to tell you with the above context-free absurdities, or not. It will be interesting to see.

I think you wanted to annoy me, like the way you perceive I annoy you, and others? You have a belief that I ask clarifying questions out of context, so you are doing the same to me. But, I ask the clarifying questions in regards to the actual words used, which are NOT out of context to me. I understand what the context is already. I just ask the clarifying questions so that if the poster is truly OPEN and Honest, then they will understand what I am trying to tell them. Most of the time this goes completely unnoticed.

As I have continually said; If anyone wants to claim absolutely ANY thing, then I suggest they have at least some thing to back up and support their claims BEFORE they make the claim.

I can, and will, back up and support EVERY not just EVERY claim but also EVERY word I say and use, that is; if and when I am challenged and/or questioned about them.

I wonder when you, and others, will start to understand what I have been saying, in the context I mean it?

I have explained enough times now the BEST way to gain an understanding of what is thee actual Truth of things.

[Sy Borg]

Life is hard.

Life

Death.

is

Is.

extremely

Easy

easy

Peasy.

[Sy Borg]

I guess it's hard for humans, having lived here for so long, to recognize where Paradise - though not of the biblical kind - is actually located compared to the actual real hell, no matter how grand it appears, which we're surrounded by and protected from. You'd think humans would be smart enough to return the favor...if for no other reason than to save themselves. It would behoove us (love that word) to sacrifice to planet Earth rather than the gods to insure it's future good-will to earthlings.

The natural environment has largely been taken for granted. Many seem to believe that it is no longer necessary. For them, perhaps heaven is living in crowded towers of tiny rooms, insulated from the toxicity and heat outside, surrounded by deserts and supported by high tech underground farming. It would be like living on a cruise ship without access to the deck. Not very heavenly.

[creation]

I guess it's hard for humans, having lived here for so long, to recognize where Paradise - though not of the biblical kind - is actually located compared to the actual real hell, no matter how grand it appears, which we're surrounded by and protected from. You'd think humans would be smart enough to return the favor...if for no other reason than to save themselves. It would behoove us (love that word) to sacrifice to planet Earth rather than the gods to insure it's future good-will to earthlings.

Doing just what is right and good, for earth, and ultimately for us, I do not find to be a "sacrifice" at all. But I do hear and understand what you are saying here.

[creation]

Life

Death.

is

Is.

extremely

Easy

easy

Peasy.

Just as easy peasy as living, and being alive, is. One is not harder than the other.

[Steve3007]

viewtopic.php?p=355240#p355240

. Sometimes satire (a.k.a taking the piss) is the most effective means of communication. But what if part of the problem is that the object of the satire doesn't understand satire?

[Steve3007]

I remember standing on a tropic island, enchanted by the sunset. Then it struck me that every single thing that I was internally rhapsodising over would soon kill me - the setting Sun, the sky and sea. Another example - the naming of the planet Venus before we found out what it was like.

I suppose Venus is the ultimate example of how distance, like time, is a great healer. The "Heaven and Hell" section of Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" talks a bit about this view we had of Venus, before we delved beneath its calm-looking upper clouds, and our space probes were dissolved by the acid.

Your general point kind of reminds me of the Monty Python alternative to the hymn "All Things Bright and Beautiful".
http://www.montypython.net/scripts/allthing.php

If there's a philosophical point to the way in which we rhapsodize about the beauty of Nature, despite its dangers, then I guess it's that we accept that you can't have life without death and you can't have heaven without hell. Beauty is in contrast and change. That sunset changed, minute by minute, until it was gone. The eventual heat death of the Universe (if it comes) will be no danger to anything because there'll be nothing left for it to be a danger to. Just a uniform ocean of lukewarm photons. It's the ultimate triumph of blandness, once all the brief candles have gone out. The magnolia coloured emulsion paint of the Cosmos.

[creation]

viewtopic.php?p=355240#p355240

. Sometimes satire (a.k.a taking the piss) is the most effective means of communication. But what if part of the problem is that the object of the satire doesn't understand satire?

Yes, "what if"?

What if the "object" of the satire worked out and understood the satire within about two or three lines anyway?

See, the actual reason WHY most people do not yet fully understand me is because they are so STUCK in their own narrowed and CLOSED IN views and perceptions. These people are also very afraid and scared to have Truly OPEN discussions with me. This is because of their inner most fear that actually what they believe is true may not be true at all, and that someone as slow, stupid, and as simple as me could reveal such a thing, for all to see.

See, people who are not actually sure nor aware of themselves, like many in this forum, do not like to be questioned and challenged on their beliefs, as can be witnessed and evidenced in this forum, because, if what they believe is true is shown to actually be false and/or wrong, then who they actually are becomes even less know, and is shown to be nothing like who they want to be, nor who they believe they are.

Only those who KNOW thy Self, and are able to answer the question, 'Who am 'I'?' are not afraid at all to have Truly OPEN discussions with anyone here.

Also, trying to talk about another, like in a little whispering discussion "behind someone's back", as they say, some might see as being the littlest way to behave. If you cannot or will not discuss with someone some issue you may or may not have, then why? What is it actually that you fear or afraid of exactly?

Also, why is sometimes satire or "taking the piss", to you, the most effective means of communication?

Who do you think it is the most effective means of communication to exactly?

For example if I and others who are writing and reading this are talking to ourselves here about how you are so easily manipulated, how you are so completely incapable human being that you cannot even back up and support your own strongly held onto beliefs, which you dearly love, so this means that you are a very stupid human being, and that you are also a very weak and very scared person to not even be prepared to just have an OPEN discussion with some one else, which makes us all continually laugh at you, then how would this be a "most effective means of communication" and to who exactly would this be the "most effective means of communication"?

Your open and honest answer would be much appreciated. But we KNOW you are not even capable of doing this.

[creation]

I remember standing on a tropic island, enchanted by the sunset. Then it struck me that every single thing that I was internally rhapsodising over would soon kill me - the setting Sun, the sky and sea. Another example - the naming of the planet Venus before we found out what it was like.

I suppose Venus is the ultimate example of how distance, like time, is a great healer. The "Heaven and Hell" section of Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" talks a bit about this view we had of Venus, before we delved beneath its calm-looking upper clouds, and our space probes were dissolved by the acid.

Your general point kind of reminds me of the Monty Python alternative to the hymn "All Things Bright and Beautiful".
http://www.montypython.net/scripts/allthing.php

If there's a philosophical point to the way in which we rhapsodize about the beauty of Nature, despite its dangers, then I guess it's that we accept that you can't have life without death and you can't have heaven without hell. Beauty is in contrast and change. That sunset changed, minute by minute, until it was gone. The eventual heat death of the Universe (if it comes) will be no danger to anything because there'll be nothing left for it to be a danger to. Just a uniform ocean of lukewarm photons. It's the ultimate triumph of blandness, once all the brief candles have gone out. The magnolia coloured emulsion paint of the Cosmos.

More examples of just how greedy and selfish each human being can be, and how they think about their own self more than any thing else. They actually think that 'they' are somehow important in Life, which is beyond a joke, and they look at Life and danger as though it is in relation to 'them'.

When you stop looking at things as though they revolve around 'you', then what is actually True and Right can be seen much quicker and much clearer.

[Belindi]

Steve wrote:

If there's a philosophical point to the way in which we rhapsodize about the beauty of Nature, despite its dangers, then I guess it's that we accept that you can't have life without death and you can't have heaven without hell. Beauty is in contrast and change. That sunset changed, minute by minute, until it was gone. The eventual heat death of the Universe (if it comes) will be no danger to anything because there'll be nothing left for it to be a danger to. Just a uniform ocean of lukewarm photons. It's the ultimate triumph of blandness, once all the brief candles have gone out. The magnolia coloured emulsion paint of the Cosmos.

Maybe men invent order maybe men discover order. Whichever it is, most men seek order through beauty, goodness, or truth and that justifies the idea of the God that personifies those.

Heaven and Hell are fictions for social control. If there is no actual God then Heaven and Hell, or similar, rewards and punishments can be attributed to Karma , or the pantheon of gods.

[creation]

Steve wrote:

If there's a philosophical point to the way in which we rhapsodize about the beauty of Nature, despite its dangers, then I guess it's that we accept that you can't have life without death and you can't have heaven without hell. Beauty is in contrast and change. That sunset changed, minute by minute, until it was gone. The eventual heat death of the Universe (if it comes) will be no danger to anything because there'll be nothing left for it to be a danger to. Just a uniform ocean of lukewarm photons. It's the ultimate triumph of blandness, once all the brief candles have gone out. The magnolia coloured emulsion paint of the Cosmos.

Maybe men invent order maybe men discover order. Whichever it is, most men seek order through beauty, goodness, or truth and that justifies the idea of the God that personifies those.

Heaven and Hell are fictions for social control. If there is no actual God then Heaven and Hell, or similar, rewards and punishments can be attributed to Karma , or the pantheon of gods.

'Heaven' and 'hell' are just two words that relate to two different ways of living. These two words were not transpired for social control. Social control is just something that adults seek to have.

Lucky there is God. Pity human beings, however, cannot get past their own assumptions and beliefs in order to SEE what 'God' IS, actually.