We are all half banana!

Well, "universal consciousness" probably fits better, but doesn't convey the "could be anything" aspect nearly as well. Plus I tend to at least try to tip the cap to ancient people who may have had a strange way of dealing with the unknowable component of reality but at least their way didn't involve just pretending it wasn't there.
It couldn't be anything.

I also still do not get what the problem is. Are you angry people say we one day will figure out everything, or?
 
I have complete confidence that one day I shall take a final breath.
The word "confidence" is a good one. When I say that I'm okay with science not having all the answers YET and that humans will one day figure out what we don't know now, I get accused of "having faith, which means you are so religious, so stop being a hypocrite."

Humans have come a long way since the days in the trees and on the savannah. We've figured out a lot of things, and there is no reason not to have CONFIDENCE in our ability to continue being able to figure things out.
 
I actually don't feel any need to believe in reasons for unknown things. It doesn't concern me that we don't have the answers to everything, and I don't need made up excuses / ideas to compensate for trying to explain such unknowns.
 
It couldn't be anything.

I also still do not get what the problem is. Are you angry people say we one day will figure out everything, or?

I'm not angry, I'm amused.

The thing that is amusing is that the science faithful wander around happily contented that "we one day will figure out everything" while the people actually doing the science accept that they have pretty well proven that they aren't going to.

That's why I talk about science as religion so much. The parallels are striking.

Over here we have the priest in the back room of the church who is well aware of the challenges of faith, who then steps out in front of a congregation of people that view him as the binding agent that gets them through their own challenges.

Over there we have the scientist who is face to face with the experimentally derived limitations of science, who is counted on by the science faithful to "work it all out someday" and put it in a thirty second pop science video for them.

It's hysterical.

By the way "it couldn't be anything" implies that you have some knowledge of the limitations placed on "that which must exist outside of reality in order for reality to function as it does." Please share your source of this knowledge.
 
I actually don't feel any need to believe in reasons for unknown things. It doesn't concern me that we don't have the answers to everything, and I don't need made up excuses / ideas to compensate for trying to explain such unknowns.

"It is unknown" is a made up idea. It just happens to be the one you are most comfortable with.
 
That's just chemistry and it doesn't last.
Oh ye of little faith! Chemistry will last as long as this universe. Now tell me that itsnt enough.

Just to clarify. Jogging and the related effort does indeed brings a release of some chemicals into our body which brings us temporary happiness. But what I was rather talking about was the selftranscedence aspect. That requires perpetual improvement and not just performing some exercise on the regular basis.

Also I think we dont realise much that while chemicals influence our consciousness its also through our consciousness that we influnce the chemical processes. Mind above matter style...
I have complete confidence that one day I shall take a final breath.

And I have some faith that you will survive that ;)
 
"It is unknown" is a made up idea. It just happens to be the one you are most comfortable with.

Not really. You have to have an idea / hypothesis to determine whether you think the possibility is unknown. Its a rational conclusion.
 
Not really. You have to have an idea / hypothesis to determine whether you think the possibility is unknown. Its a rational conclusion.

Let me rephrase.

Extremely comfortable with.
 
I don't really take 'comfort' in such ideas. It absolutely doesn't bother me at all that we cannot conclude the reasons behind certain things such as the origin of life / universe.

And that doesn't give me any reason to believe that lord Brahma and Vishnu created the world from a magical lotus flower.
 
I don't really take 'comfort' in such ideas. It absolutely doesn't bother me at all that we cannot conclude the reasons behind certain things such as the origin of life / universe.

And that doesn't give me any reason to believe that lord Brahma and Vishnu created the world from a magical lotus flower.

But it clearly gives you reason to believe that they didn't. Your unknown is trimmed to your comfort. Convenient how that works out.
 
No my unknown is trimmed by logic.
 
It is illogical to make a conclusion without sufficient supporting evidence.
 
It is illogical to make a conclusion without sufficient supporting evidence.

Agreed. So feel free to provide your supporting evidence that the unknown conforms to your expectations.
 
The idea of unknown is a current logical predicament based on not having sufficient evidence to claim to actually know what the cause of something is.
 
The idea of unknown is a current logical predicament based on not having sufficient evidence to claim to actually know what the cause of something is.

Where is your evidence that the unknown is limited to cause?
 
That does not require evidence. It is a temporary current conclusion that is in place until such evidence to provide an actual conclusion is found.
 
That does not require evidence. It is a temporary current conclusion that is in place until such evidence to provide an actual conclusion is found.

Other than faith, what informs you that any such evidence is forthcoming?

Alternately, prove the conclusion is in fact temporary.
 
Back
Top Bottom