A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by dastardly stem »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 2:04 pm
First of all, stem, let me say that I really like you, and I think you are a good egg. I just disagree with you completely on this point. You are telling me that there is part of reality you and others consider unreal and irrational. In doing so you are following a fashionable ideology. Lots of very smart people agree with you. I don’t, but that’s OK. To the contrary, I find it bizarre to downgrade a whole segment of the real world and human experience as silly stuff that no one should take seriously as real.

You place the mind and imagination in an inferior category. If it’s “made up,” to you it is not worthy of consideration. With a standard like that, humanity would have made very little progress. Much that we take for granted as bearing on the most important principles underlying reality was imagined in the human mind before it was demonstrated in other ways. That tells me there is something important going on in the imagination and the human mind, something mysterious even.

Stuff we categorize as religion is not utterly separate from the rest. Religion is a “made up” category. It has its uses, but I don’t accept that the religious is by definition less real and less worthy of consideration in an age of different priorities and new myths/ideologies.
The feelings mutual, Kish. I appreciate your patience with me, as hard as that must be.

The spirit realm is worth of consideration. I'm not saying its not. But there has to be something to consider. When the claim turns up empty what are we consider besides emptiness at this point?
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Kishkumen »

dastardly stem wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 3:28 pm
The spirit realm is worth of consideration. I'm not saying its not. But there has to be something to consider. When the claim turns up empty what are we consider besides emptiness at this point?
I think there is something to consider. It is difficult to quantify, and we may not use the right terms for it, but I think these experiences are meaningful and point to something real. They have been subjected to excessive skepticism, in my opinion, and that requires some correction.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5015
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Philo Sofee »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 9:22 pm
dastardly stem wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 3:28 pm
The spirit realm is worth of consideration. I'm not saying its not. But there has to be something to consider. When the claim turns up empty what are we consider besides emptiness at this point?
I think there is something to consider. It is difficult to quantify, and we may not use the right terms for it, but I think these experiences are meaningful and point to something real. They have been subjected to excessive skepticism, in my opinion, and that requires some correction.
I know I am somewhat sounding like a broken record, but one's actual experiences are never an empty thing, even though I cannot quantify them objectively in any kind of scientific sense, they are real. Qualia does not have to be quantified in order to have reality. One just cannot no matter how hard one tries to quantify the experience of love or hate or beauty, etc. But if qualia cannot be objectively verified to be the same across the board to all, that cannot possibly mean they are unreal. That literally is senseless since we ALL have a notion of what beauty is, but cannot say accurately and objectively for the entire rest of the world to accept that the beauty of a particular mountain to one is a 66% beauty in comparison to some sort of stand of trees or herd of bison roaming the plains. Beauty is not unreal if everyone does not appreciate it as much as others. That is quite ridiculous to assume it has to be quantified in any sort of objective manner.

We all KNOW it cannot be done, and we ALL know we have experienced beauty of some kind, even with others disagreeing with us concerning our own notion of what we may see as beautiful, but to say therefore it isn't actual is truly stepping completely out of bounds. It would make no difference of any sort at all whether it was said it's just all in your minds, or simply a figment of your imagination, real beauty can stun a person, and that experience is absolutely real. It's not seen. It's not entirely explainable in actual words, yet it is fundamentally real and can literally change one's entire life's plan if it is strong enough. The claim is simply not an empty one, it is simply unexpressible. That has nothing to do with it being real however. Words do not have the last word on experiencing reality.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by dastardly stem »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 9:22 pm


I think there is something to consider. It is difficult to quantify, and we may not use the right terms for it, but I think these experiences are meaningful and point to something real. They have been subjected to excessive skepticism, in my opinion, and that requires some correction.
I don't doubt there are experiences (I just look to my own experiences to know that). I have no idea how we just jump to think they point to something real.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Moksha »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 2:04 pm
Much that we take for granted as bearing on the most important principles underlying reality was imagined in the human mind before it was demonstrated in other ways. That tells me there is something important going on in the imagination and the human mind, something mysterious even.
By the hoary hosts of Haggoth, you are breathing new life into Asgard. Remember citizens of Midgard, Asgard neither asks for your obedience nor expects your tithe dollars for helping keep the nine realms safe!
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Kishkumen »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Thu May 26, 2022 3:38 am
I know I am somewhat sounding like a broken record, but one's actual experiences are never an empty thing, even though I cannot quantify them objectively in any kind of scientific sense, they are real. Qualia does not have to be quantified in order to have reality. One just cannot no matter how hard one tries to quantify the experience of love or hate or beauty, etc. But if qualia cannot be objectively verified to be the same across the board to all, that cannot possibly mean they are unreal. That literally is senseless since we ALL have a notion of what beauty is, but cannot say accurately and objectively for the entire rest of the world to accept that the beauty of a particular mountain to one is a 66% beauty in comparison to some sort of stand of trees or herd of bison roaming the plains. Beauty is not unreal if everyone does not appreciate it as much as others. That is quite ridiculous to assume it has to be quantified in any sort of objective manner.

We all KNOW it cannot be done, and we ALL know we have experienced beauty of some kind, even with others disagreeing with us concerning our own notion of what we may see as beautiful, but to say therefore it isn't actual is truly stepping completely out of bounds. It would make no difference of any sort at all whether it was said it's just all in your minds, or simply a figment of your imagination, real beauty can stun a person, and that experience is absolutely real. It's not seen. It's not entirely explainable in actual words, yet it is fundamentally real and can literally change one's entire life's plan if it is strong enough. The claim is simply not an empty one, it is simply unexpressible. That has nothing to do with it being real however. Words do not have the last word on experiencing reality.
So true, Kerry. And this is something we see time and again from mystics in many traditions. Normal discourse cannot express the ineffable experience of the mystic. At a certain point, aporia sets in, and one is left with the experience. Late Platonists called that experience knowledge, and I think that is what has been passed down to us in Christian traditions as a testimony. It is not knowledge that can be demonstrated discursively. It is knowledge that comes from experience of what is perceived to be divine.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Kishkumen »

dastardly stem wrote:
Thu May 26, 2022 3:16 pm
I don't doubt there are experiences (I just look to my own experiences to know that). I have no idea how we just jump to think they point to something real.
They are real. It is not so much that they point to something real. They are real experiences.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Kishkumen »

Moksha wrote:
Thu May 26, 2022 8:36 pm
By the hoary hosts of Haggoth, you are breathing new life into Asgard. Remember citizens of Midgard, Asgard neither asks for your obedience nor expects your tithe dollars for helping keep the nine realms safe!
The one more god you don’t believe in line, huh? Isn’t that about 15 years or so old by now? You need to find some new material.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Kish,

I’m fairly certain you took a stab at defining what God would ‘look like’ for you - if you could link to that post it’d be a nice refresher. If that’s not possible would you mind sharing so we can get up to speed on your nuanced spirituality?

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: A New Smear Article: Interpreter Targets Givens and Hauglid

Post by Kishkumen »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Fri May 27, 2022 3:02 am
Kish,

I’m fairly certain you took a stab at defining what God would ‘look like’ for you - if you could link to that post it’d be a nice refresher. If that’s not possible would you mind sharing so we can get up to speed on your nuanced spirituality?

- Doc
:lol:

Wow. That’s pretty funny, Doc. Thanks for that.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Post Reply