What's the bottommost turtle?
Could a human being design a computer virus that could generate a viral community within which a self-conscious virus could evolve as part of a civilization of such entities? If so, it seems unlikely the designing human could feel much correlative empathy with each such viral member. God, I don't believe, is like that. Because God would be of a qualitative difference. There is a fundamental logical difference between The Holism and a Subholism that merely sponsors sub-sub holisms.
So consider how The Holism may retain connecting empathy and feedback reconciliation with each subholism. How might a boggled submind conceptualize such a situation?
Well, think about fractals, indiscernibly similar iterations, and subroutines. Think about what appears before us as a trinity: Immeasurable aspects or qualities of
Consciousness, measurable aspects of math-based and conserved translations of
Sub-stance, and absorption of present forms into recordations of past
In-form-ation.
Consider: Does the past continue also to exist, qualitatively, as a Trinity, or does it pass only into accumulations of "dead" and recorded information? May the past "return eternally," to qualitative experience? Or may it only be stored within the memory-potential of the Trinitarian Godhead of Consciousness-Substance-Information?
The "physical" mechanics seem beyond mortal comprehension or control. But, the metaphysics may be potentially inspiring, even where empirically bizarre. That is, for moral/spiritual/inspirational/communicative/metaphorical purposes, one may conceptualize a fluxing, trinitarian Godhead that functions qualitatively beyond math, but that can signify only within systems of math-based conservation. In that case, the Godhead could not be proved by mortal maths, but math-based mortal measurements could not unfold without it. As to limits on the qualitative potential for such a Source to feedback to us, what mortal could say? IOW, one may conceptualize how ought may unfold from is, metaphysically but not physically.
If that seems bizarre, consider how obvious it is that our unfolding experiences consist entirely of a flux of Consciousness, Substance, and Information. Is God a mathematician? Is Nature merely a web of math? Is all that unfolds to our qualitative and quantitative experience an appreciation of the flux of God functioning in respect of a web of math? Is God the ultimate Simulator?
*********************
I agree that apocalyptic "solutions are best avoided. My faith is
that life is essentially good. That wisdom is also reflected in
Genesis, btw. Hope you don't begrudge that.
You somehow "divined" snark and fear? Interesting, yet an ironical leap
of faith (based on my divine intuition of your agenda-ridden angst).
Lucky for me that I have above average competence for most situations.
You?
So your faith is that altruism and empathy are built into the human
condition. Is that In common with all atheists or just your sect? Does
the human condition include AIs? Are altruism and empathy built or
programmed into all Cyborgs? Among those built into, would it trouble
your built in pride to respect its Source as God? When you communicate
with like minded believers, do they share your preference that its
Source be referred to as the Source instead of as God? I can respect
that preference.
Well, does a-theism give you happiness, comfort, and purpose? Is
life basically good or dreary? If dreary, would the "good" thing be to
set off a globe-destroying bomb/apocalypse to put people out of their
misery?
By an atheist's moral code, "should" we help or hinder apocalyptics? And forego having children?
I take it, then, that you rely (for resolving moral concerns) instead on
innate intuition? So do I. My intuition is that the Godhead abides. I
mean no disrespect to those who believe their intuition is otherwise.
I grok that. I am rather fond of the Church of the Cosmic Big Sky. I
am also fond of some preachers that conveyed wisdom to help me and my
wife raise our daughters. Sometimes it can be worthwhile to search for a
fit. I am not especially tied to any organized doctrine. The value is
in the humble feedback.
Why are you Atheist? What is an Atheist? Is it a theist? Is it a
doubter (agnostic)? Is it a knower? Do you know what you know? What
is this "knowledge"?
If you can provide the empirical proof that
there is no Godhead, do it. As to the "evidence," it can be interpreted
both ways. I can argue the evidence for a Godhead against the evidence
for no Godhead. The evidence abides, but it is not conclusive.
Because, for a mortal, how could it be?
So, apart from choosing a
dramatic stance (or preference in faith?), why are you in your faith an
a-theist? How is an agnostic different in principle from a believer?
Neither one knows, so both doubt. And believe. One believes in a
meta-basis for moral guidance. The other believes in -- what? What do you believe in concerning morality that is not faith driven?
I like the NAP. I just think it works better when related to the Great
Commandment and the Golden Rule. Not so much when legislated by
knowitall busybody make-a-new-law atheistic-ACLU types. Do you think we
need more laws, lawsuits, and lawyers?
What is your authority to say what is shameful or not? Is this just
your personal authority? Do you have some objective shame-measuring
stick that you defer to? That sounds pretty religious.
I don't think you read what I said. Maybe you read what you wanted to read?
In
any case, I don't think a fine line can be drawn between altruism and
selfishness. But neither do I believe they are one and the same.
Rather, I believe there abides an innate feedback relationship that
fluxes between a perspective of the whole and a perspective for each
part.
Sort of like a Godhead that nurses each perspective.
Neither the Nurse nor the Nursee need be entirely altruistic or selfish,
but connected, caring, empathetic, and intuitive. Good faith (Great
Commandment) and good will (Golden Rule). Spiritual Feedback, not
severance between Pearly Gates and Hell.
When so-called atheists
try to conceptualize a non-God Source of morality, I think they fall
into spiritual incoherence. Just my opinion.
As to historical
facts, my reading of history leads me to find atheists and cultists more
likely to incline towards religious-like rationalizations for
collectivism, dhimmism, elitist legalism, communism, socialism, fascism,
and other varieties of intrusive degradation of human liberty and
responsibility. No thanks.
The reason to look to higher-minded guidance is based in humble
recognition of one's mortal limits. I do not believe in YOLO, but
neither do I much concern myself with Pearly Gates. As to Karma, I do
not claim knowledge.
But I do believe all perspectives of
consciousness are connected under a Trinitarian Godhead that abides
beyond our empirical proof or control, but not beyond our innate and
humble receptivity in intution and empathy. Connection and Empathy:
Good faith and Golden Rule. I see nothing shameful in that.
Too often, the NAP seems to morph into the toenail-regulating,
family-destroying, gov-marrying principle. NAP from the one-way street
view of militant atheists united only by the pleasure principle? No
thanks.
Religion is not morality, but morality in the abstract is derivative
of something beyond empiricism, i.e., spiritual. Religion can provide a
language of metaphors with which to converse about spiritual morality.
Many religionists are not literalists, but they are conversant with the
language of assimilating parables.
That assimilation is how we
aspire to avoid the busybody intrusiveness of toenail-regulating
knowitall ACLU secular-humanists that want to replace the family with
the friendly local gov regulator and bureaucratic redistributer.
If they appreciate "morality inherently," then I would not call them
atheists. Why should a "true atheist" (if there is such a thing), be
concerned about altruism -- except for calculating, temporary, and
selfish purposes?
Even in that case, he would seem merely to be
"self godding" personal pleasure. How do these "true atheists" derive
"ought from is" -- if not by some kind of meta-leap of faith?
YOLO makes little sense to me. Then again, neither does Pearly Gates.
Most Americans are already non-religious. Or religious in name only.
American Catholics? Hello. We already know what happens when most
Americans forsake good spiritual sense, good faith, and good will in
trade for the alt-religion of personal pleasure and security. It's what
we have now: A lot of crap.
There are a lot of very smart secular Jews. Including Einstein. Was
he not a "real" Jew? Many would tsk tsk believers as being
bafflegabbers and science illiterates. Many are political Marxists or
busybody ACLU toenail regulators bent on screwing up America.
I do
not tsk tsk believers in an inviting, loving, purpose driving
Reconciler. I DO take the Bible as containing much metaphorical wisdom.
But I am not a literalist. Nor do I believe Jews are "chosen." Then
again, I do not claim to know.
I believe you're blind in one eye and obstructed in the other. Look
to the larger point. What I am saying is that everyone -- and I mean
everyone -- who chooses -- consciously or subconsciously -- to found
his/her identity primarily under a group is to that extent inclined
towards being a profiler, racist, chauvenist, bigot. I am pointing out
to all who may otherwise be blind and obstructed that the streets go
more than just one way. Wake up.
I am NOT saying that skin color,
intellect, ethnicity, etc., dictate a person's worldview. I am saying
that people often self select for cultural groupings, and often are
indoctrinated from birth to cultural groupings. And those groupings
will tend to be "one-way blind." (Birds of a feather.
https://youtu.be/1O6z-oG18Fc)
When
I say this, I don't just pull the pants down for Jews. I pull them
down for everyone whose vision is blinded. And I try to be open to
understanding that even in my own case.
I don't target knowitall
Jews any more than I target all other kinds of knowitalls. I think
failing to adequately target knowitall Soros, ACLU, Hollywood, etc., has
by default gone far towards screwing up America. In my view, Knowitall
Legalism (ACLU) equals anti-freedom-loving Americanism. I do not target
only Jews, but I do not run from Jews that want to screw up America,
either.
https://youtu.be/nvlTJrNJ5lA. So, yeah, I have a freedom-loving American agenda. That leads me to like Israelis and to loathe Islam.
Patterns organize. That's how groupings form out of otherwise chaos. To deny that is to be silly.
If they don't identify as Jews, then take that up with the pollsters
that tell us 70% voted for Obama. Or do you disbelieve that? Hello?
Why do you suppose atheistic and liberal Jews still want to identify as
Jews? What is the point of that? Is it because they like the "stolen
honor" of presumptive elitism?
I prefer the Jews that are Jews first.
There are many examples of people being educated beyond their
intellects and being smart without having decency or common sense.
Unfortunately, such characteristics often cluster among groups. Not
because the individual members are necessarily stupid or corrupt, but
because something about their mutual attraction (or wolf packing) brings
out some of the worst in them.
Race, religion, and ethnicity do
not prescribe character. But characters often form, solidify, and
identify around races, religions, and ethnicities. To deny that general
characteristics tend to form in such a way is to deny practical
reality. To fail to see that, is to fall easy prey to that. Profiling,
per se, is not the problem. The problem is inadequate factoring while
profiling. Vetting can help resolve some of that.
It is not a mark of group intelligence when 70% of its voters went for Obama.
So why did 70% of Jews vote for Obama instead of for Romney? Are 70% of
Jews anti-semites? Within my old OCS class, there abides at least one
Jew (with more than a few supporters) that fervently believes Trump is
Hitlerian for wanting to vet immigrants from Islamic nations. Seems
like some kind of self hating death wish sickness. I like Israel. I
just wish more American Jews had better sense.
True. But Islam is exponentially rocketed. Are the non- empirical
religions of Global Warming, Gaia, Human Secularism, MultiCulti, and
Feministas patriarchal?
There is at least a factor of ease of cleanliness behind male
circumcision. Apart from culture-driven oppression, what is the purpose
behind either scarring a female or impeding the development of her
sexual expression as an adult? Why strain to be so patient with what is
clearly cultural oppression and primitive savagery?
People of good sense tend to heap disrespect on Clinton and Bush also.
In Obama's case (he of the Nobel Prize), he seems to invite disrespect
like sticky paper invites flies. It's like he craves it, so give it to
him. Maybe more people will think better before ever voting for such a
creep again.
Islam is tailor made for incompetent s for brains parasites.
Neo-cons claim to be wanting to export democracy. Two things: First,
most cultures are not presently amenable of growing representative
democracy. Second, it's not democracy the wannabe masters want to
export. It's NWO, with the freedom and dignity of the masses to be
traded for phony promises by elites to secure them.
When you raise generations of perpetual infants, it's no wonder that
everyone soon enough becomes a whinnyazzvictim. At this point, I'm
almost surprised that it isn't "hate speech" to call whinnyazzvictims
what they are. Now we are engaged in a great civil hissy fit, testing
which whinnyazz is the biggest victim. We are gathered over the ruins
of patriots that never saw this farce of walking diapers coming.
This is what happens when everything is "normal," when everyone is
"married" to everyone, when gov redistribution is "charity," when "free"
trade trumps assimilated borders, when ACLU lawgivers replace God, and
when infants are licensed to run the world before they're qualified to
leave the crib. Mass stupidity and corruption. "Stronger together."
Gag!
Too many people think they have to buy into a culture just because
they happen to share a skin color with prevailing practitioners. As if
skin color were a causal agent.
They default to a lowest common
denominator because they don't have decent exemplars in their lives.
Race baiters are the opposite of moral exemplars.
Too many people
complain about racism, but then they choose to adopt culural behaviors
for no better reason than because they share a skin color. Or a tattoo. Or a dress style.
They
don't know what they are, want to be, or should be. So they follow the
first strutting thug. Or jerkofff. Our leaders have become fake,
hollow, chestless, soft, undisciplined, corrupt, lying, treasonous, and
stupid. In the ghettos, in Congress, in media, in academia, in
Hollywood, in music, in banks, in corporations, in charitable
foundations, in churches.
What has happened to leadership
everywhere is ugly, infantalized, incompetent, amoral, stupid, and
faithless. It's just more noticeable in the hoods.
We need a miracle, and we need to function as if we have the sense to receive it.
Over time, I have considered myself a believer, agnostic, atheist,
believer. Never a literalist. Always a metaphorist. Since I have
changed, I cannot say what "I" always have been or will be.
I
tried to make sense out of atheism and thought I had. Worked hard at
it. But the pieces never could fit. I looked for empirical
consistency, coherence, and completeness. I could not find it, and I
think it cannot be found by logic based in math or empiricism.
Yet
I seem to sense that a trinitarian Source of consistency, coherence,
and completeness abides. That gives me peace. I hope you find a system
that satisfies you intellectually and that works for you.
If you're confident in your atheism, why broach the topic? I can
think of two main reasons. One, you want to explore the idea. In that
case, choose appropriate forums. Second, you want to evangelize because
you think society would do better to substitute reams of legalese for
simple guidelines of good will.
Problems: One, most people are
not interested in questioning their foundational belief systems.
Second, most Americans don't want to be ruled under an intrusive system
of legalese "gifted" by supposed elite and "better" thinkers.
I
care little what a person's literal beliefs are, provided they support
his social and political participation in good faith and good will. (So
long as I sense good faith and good will in a person, I consider him to
be religious or spiritual, whether or not he prefers different terms.
Of course, I tend not to dwell on that with him.)
That said, some
creeds do not support good faith or good will among humanity, outside
their tribes. Islam tends to be in that vein. Those are creeds that I
abhor.
But atheists? As to them, I only abhor the militants and
legalistas. Indeed, many of my friends, in person or in books, avow to
be atheists. So long as I sense human good faith and good will in them,
I care little about that.
What was Benjamin Franklin as a young man and later as a patriot?
I don't find reasonable doubters to be scary per se. Not in the least.
But I do find dramatic militant law roaches to be obnoxious.
You're chasing rainbows when you ask for empirical evidence of that
which is innately spiritual. If you have not developed a sense of
spiritual balance beyond the empirical based senses, that is a personal
problem. Not a resume enhancer for being elected.
The problem
most people have with doubters is only with the dramatic militants. The
ones that think they should prescribe manmade regulations in lieu of
spiritual good faith and good will. The ones that want to regulate all
speech and enterprise, right down to the toenails. To save Gaia.
Those
are the nose-in-air knowitalls that most people abhor. As to religious
faith, the other side of the coin of belief is doubt. No mortal
empirically "knows."
There is nothing innately supremacist about any created perspective
of the Conscious Godhead. Every perspective is a work in progress.
That
said, in a long view of recorded history, the coming together of
conditions to birth a representative republic comprised of states
federated under a system of checks and balances designed to secure the
freedom and dignity of ordinary citizens was a spiritual rarity. A gift
from above. That ought not be underappreciated or undervalued. That
ought to be a beacon. As well as a workshop for learning from others.
But
not a gift to be deliberately drowned under a flood of liberty
illiterates and illegal invaders. Or to be defiled by faithless pervs,
dopers, and self-godded people-farming heathen-hedonists. I.e.,
infantilized Progs.
Disqus is a window for viewing the polarization across the land.
Polarization that has been nourished by bad-acting cronycrats. The
representative republic hangs in the balance. A uniparty of
people-farmers and cluelessly useful-idiots is at war with ordinary
people that mainly just want the central apparatus to leave them alone.
The
reason the republic has come to such peril is because ordinary
Americans slept too long. No more. They are educating themselves about
the uniparty and forging alliances to defeat it. I wish we could
return to just partying hardy, but that is about the size of things.
Things will get better once the loaded diaper-draggiing wannabe
diktaters are put snugly back in their progressive cribs.
Basically, I doubt you understand or appreciate what underpins political partisanship. Communist true believers are every bit as capable of unreasoning stridency as the most devout biblethumper. Yeah, basically, I view commies and thumpers both as affronts to spiritual good sense.
Think about what Progs tend to do to substitute for their confused spiritual faith. Who tend to be the most ardent toenail regulators, while calling that "progress"? When you think you're elite and have no respect for the spiritual good faith of others, what do you do? Well, a lot of Progs turn to people farming, drugs, and one-way regulations against their "inferiors." Think about why the blamegaming (using terms of "racist, phobe, bigot," etc.) tends to go one way. Why do you see so few "hate crime" prosecutions on account of black on white crime?
It is impossible to rationalize or conceptualize any kind of worldview without taking some leaps of faith -- either consciously or subconsciously. I recommend David Deutsch (an avowed atheist, btw) and his book, The Beginning of Infinity. Frankly, I find some atheists' disavowal of faith as juvey at best.
If you want to continue to converse, please demonstrate some capacity for thinking above a juvey level. You're basically getting more tiresome than worthwhile.
Basically, I think juvey Progs are a mortal threat to the representative republic. A republic that has been built over the sweat and blood of their betters, on which they now crap. I loathe them.
*********
Scientific Marxism is a religion to commies and proggies, too. They
just call their leap of faith to meta-based morality "higher
mindedness." IOW, they are so indoctrinated in their religion on a
subconscious level that they don't even need to think about it. They
believe it's not a religion if they don't think about it as such. To
them, it's not scientific, not objective, not empirical, but still, not
spiritual. Whatever it is, it does not exist as a measurable
physicality or even as a qualitative signification of God. Maybe it's
just TwilightZoneism?
Whatever it is, its adherents have killed
hundreds of millions in its "holy" name. Since they don't think about
it, it's not "faith." Just their belief system. Lol. Oh, and in their
minds they have higher consciences. Bless their hearts.
**************
We have too many Progs, Muzzies, and Liberty Illiterates. Things may have to get far worse to wake most of them up.
If
good Americans come together and communicate serious good will in
respect of a higher principle (or Principler), we may yet be guided to a
semblance of sanity. That needs to be encouraged, notwithstanding
knowitall self-pleasuring proggies.
The alternative may be a
millenneum of subhumanizing loss of liberty. Of course, party-hardy,
irresponsible parents and defilers of innocence won't give a D.
I
loathe selfish-faithless-defiling-subhumanizing Progs, Socialists,
Commies, and, most of all, Muslims. If we don't get the primitives and
lalala loaded diaper draggers back into their cribs, what is coming may
make the first half of the 20th Century look like a picnic.
The
question: Did the Obama experience grease us for decline, or did it
serve as a needed splash to wake enough people up? And man, are there
ever a lot of sleepwalking s-heads, working overtime to preserve their
"accomplishments" and to prepare the way for the next Bernie. But hey,
they're "scientifically" moral and have a principled "conscience,"
doncha know?
Once decent people have had enough, social pressure should take care
of the rest. Put the Progs back in their cribs and bring back shame.
By legislating so much tolerance of Prog and Muslim insanity, we are
tolerating ourselves to death.
For goodness sake, our society is
sacrificing the innocence of its children on a pyre of Prog lunacy,
depredation, and perversion. The non-aggression principle is generally a
good thing. But Islam is not non-aggressive. And the non-aggression
principle becomes ridiculous if carried to the point of sacrificing our
children.
Must we wring our hands and tie ourselves in knots while Progs and Muslims fundamentally destroy our republic?
ThisShasToStop.
***************
If Buddhism is a religion, then so is Communism. A religious
difference between Communism and Islam: No sacred book advocates a
death penalty for wayward Communists. If Communism is a religion, it is
a religion one can engage in the free practice of. At least, in
theory.
That is not the case with Islam. There is no freedom to
become an apostate to Islam and still live. That is what makes Islam a
criminal cult. If the *Mafia does not have a free exercise right under
the First Amendment, why should avowed Muslims? If bawdyhouses can be
shut down, why not Mosques?
ThisShasToStop.
*****************
*The
Mafia had religious, blood like, initiation oaths. If that is not
enough to make it a religion, they could add a belief that to die while
engaged in crime would be a direct ticket to CrimeHalla. Should such a
Mafia then have a right to recruit new soldiers openly, maybe even at
job fairs at schools or convention centers? Of course not. So read the
Koran and compare with Mafia codes. Is there a distinction that makes a
difference (other than that Islam is far more horrific than Cosa
Nostra)?
For civilization to require tolerance for such a death cult is for civilization to have a death wish.
ThisShasToStop.
Islam is not a "free exercise religion" for purposes of the First Amendment. We need Scotus and DC to extract upstuck heads.
ThisShasToStop.
Wonder if Proggie tolerance, promotion, appeasement, and catering to
Islam had anything to do with it? Hollywood repackaging. Making the
cops and whities and working Americans out to be the bad guys. Tying
hands so no one can dare correct a RunAmuck in public. Wonder if that
had anything to do with it?
This Nutbag Prog S Has To Stop.
A conserver of liberty prefers an informed electorate, because they are boss.
An
elitist (whether commie, fascist, islamic, progic, or educatedfool)
believes he is ruler or should rule, so it is only important that the
people be instructed in what they should believe.
This is what
makes proggies so smart in their own eyes. And so qualified to enact
one-way rules to regulate everyone else down to the toenails. This is
why they are loathsome subhumanoids. Rotten, rotten rotten.
The Russians cheated if they told the truth about Obama/Hillary in
order to expose their lies. Against a regime based on elitist lies, to
tell the truth is considered a low blow. Wrap your head in that, and
don't let it happen again! S/
Prog Skulls: Impenetrable by truth, common sense, basic decency, or respect for ordinary producing Americans.
So ObamaProgs set the Middle East ablaze and then they're surprised that
Russians celebrate their departure? Truly, Progs have perfected some
kind of special s for brains. What can one do but laugh? No one can
fix them.
But for 100 years of mass indoctrination and child mind-abuse, what thinking person could listen to NWO agents for people-farming and adopt their propaganda as a decent basis for centralizing governance? Ugh!
Why should we tolerate, much less celebrate, the subhumanizing antics of Muslims, Marxists, and Morons -- ugh, ugh, ugh!
Soon, persons perv'd by FedEd will be suing to claim equal rights to receive clearances for top secret assignments. Nuttery! To be encouraged by now-serving perv'd Generals.
A society that tolerates and encourages perversion will soon celebrate and require perversion. We often become what we tolerate. Without vision beyond sex organs and drug addictions, a people and a republic perish.
Patterns form out of chaos, but not all such formations are benign to decent civilization. It is willfully stupid disavowal of moral responsibility to consign all blame to God ("God don't make no mistakes"?), without apprehending that the Godhead functions in a feedback relationship (responds to our prayers and wishes and signifying acts) with us. How else could we and our societies share participatory responsibility?