God in the Forest

God is the anthropomorphization of nature.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I might print that out on a t-shirt someday. With your avatar next to it, as an acknowledgement to the quote's author.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'd be honored, thank you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Gee wes,

I saw that earlier this morning but I was too hurried to make a comment. That is really insightful of you and I really wish I had come up with such a description myself, but alas, there can be only one. wesmorris, nerd overlord.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I was initially struck by the profundity, but I am now in awe as I come to terms with the implications of the statement. Well done!

Do permit me to quote you on my blog.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Thank you much southstar, and of course you may quote me to wits end.

It came to me so simply while reading this post from Dino's recent thread:

It was the description of god provided above that made me realize what I'd been scratching at since my arrival here at sci. All those omnis. What is omnipresent but nature? What is human about nature??? - Humans are. So we relate to nature in the way we have throughout our history - by assigning it properties of ourselves.

Why isn't god then, omnihung? Hehe. Sorry. Kind of takes away from the profundity and all. Pardon.

 

Sorry man... I'm not trying to frustrate you and I'll describe why I am
switching gears here with analogy. If I recall correctly, you are a computer
science fellow and if I am incorrect then what I am about to say is going
to make no sense whatsoever

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

. I think when the conversation started
we ended up in the context of COM and no matter how you hard you try,
COM is COM is COM and we are bound to it's limitations. I want to try looking
at a different implementation (maybe .NET?)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

Cool, now can you accept that you're not in the least bit attracted to sciforums?

 

I'm not a computer science guy, but I follow you. (Industrial Engineer by education, fix computers and do networking stuff as side biz)

I follow you but I'm greedy about feedback regarding my logic.

Of course not. I think I know where you're going and refer you back to where my attraction for sciforums is maintained... right smack dab in the middle of the taoist trap (like anything I might be attracted to). There is only one way out of the trap (two technically I suppose). You'll freak me straight out if you can devise another.

The two ways are as follows:

Faith

Rejection (which could be construed as faith, but I'll give it its own category for the sake of argument).

 

My statement had zero reference to your thinking. Only mine.

Redo it with some variation.

Why is growing old and death equating to misery?

Emotion is inescable... it's how we're wired. That doesn't contradict my
claim that I work hard to understand it and avoid letting it influence
my thinking.

 

No, and heres why.

If logic came before discrimination, we would have no choice but to be logical. As sometimes people are not logical, or some people are never logical, we obviously do have a choice as to whether to be logical or not.

If we have a choice we must have used discrimination to make that choice, therefore discrimination comes before logic, therefore it is deeper and more inherent.

 

theres a path to your right and a path on fire to you left, and no other routes to take, you logically would not choose the path with the fire would you.
so you assumption is that people would walk into the fire even though theres a perfectly clear path to there right.
you use logic to discriminate, betwen the two.

 

Cool... you greedy spastard! lol.

Leaning back into COM land there again. Just as a side-thought, another
escape for the Taost Trap might be denial... but that's neither here nor
there.

Back to the goodies, the answer to the question I asked was a simple 'no'.
There is an inability to accept something and now I am going to ask how
does this differ from something else that you would be able to accept?

Thanya.

 

-Unles your an adrenaline junkie who wants to jump through the fire.
-A yogi who want to walk across hot coals to prove his control over mind.
-A suicidal person who wants to end themselves
-A pyrophile who like to play with fire.


None of these people are logical, but they all choose to be not logical. What is the power by which they choose to be not logical - IT IS NOT LOGIC.

They use the ability of discimination to choose to be logical and follow the right path or illogical and follow the left.

 

Humans are the anthropomorphization of god.

 

you are not serious are you, what a f**king idiot.
lunatics are not govened by logic, but normal people are.
and dont make yourself look more idiotic by asking me to define normality, it obvious.
but then again perhaps not to some, present company included, if you can make posts such as this.

 

Denial is faith.

My perception of my mind as directly experience by me differentiates between something I might accept and something I might reject. The difference is basically whether or not it fits into my conceptual geometry. The concepts in my mind are inter-related in such a way that some things fit and other things don't, somewhat like lock and key.

 

As I explained in the other thread, this is not correct. God is hypothetical and not known (or hypothesized) to be human.

 

No one is governed by logic, you fucking twat.

Logic is a function of the mind you contemptuous little cunt. Not the fucking master of it. its like mathematics, we use it as a language to describe what the fuck is going on in the bastard universe.

If you cant even grasp that fuck off back to fucking school.


Apparently 80% of the worlds fucking population believe in god. its not fucking logical to believe that. Fucking right it isnt. So you see cunt face - ITS NORMAL TO BE ILLOGICAL. So roll that up and shove it up you fucking ass.

BTW. Fuck you and fuck everything you stand for.

PS. Its cooool to swear

 

Or Denial of the model.

What about situations where there is very little conceptual geometry? Can babies accept that when they feel very sad, they're happy?

 

That makes no sense to me. All concepts are part of the inter-relationship that is mind. They aren't all active at one time. Within each is some emotional content (it's partially the emotions that support the existing geometry).

As far as I can tell, no.

 

Normal people are not logical.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Logic heads are abnormal wierdos. Crainiacs devoid of human feeling.

Normal people act from love, fear, hate, anger, jealosy, sympathy, pity etc etc but very very rarely from logic.

If you believe normal people are logical you have your head stuffed to far up your intellectualised scientific logical ass to realise, experience or appreciate what the real 'normal' world is like. :m: