Joshs, that was a really great theological and philosophical movement. Kierkegaard was a mystic who arrived at many of the same places I did by taking the same route I did.

My favorite period is the middle of the 20th century, for that is when science entered the equation. Read Pierre Lecomte du Nouy, “Human Destiny”. He’s the scientist who worked out the timing of a dead body through blood coagulation. He roots his philosophy and theology in science.

One day God will be the only useful one you will need. And your life today is not any richer without God. — Joe Mello

Aren't you supposed to be a philosopher? How can you lead to God's blessing all your concerns?

javi, God is the highest mountain I climb, not the rocks along the way.

All my concerns down here don’t go away because I can see the mountain top.

Joshs, do you know the difference between an evangelical conservative Christian and a scholastically trained theologian and philosopher?

It’s quite vast. — Joe Mello

You keep mentioning your credentials and vast mystical experience and in doing so it appears as though being seen as an authority is very important to you. May I ask why that is so important?

praxis, how many times have you told others that God doesn't exist? What are your credentials for doing so? Did you spend five years in a monastery asking God to show up and he didn't? Or did you come up with God not existing sitting on your toilet?

And if you were truly intelligent, you would have determined by now that I'm a lot smarter than some fool asking me a loaded question.

You don't even know what a scholastically trained academic is, do you?

Wow, you took that personally. Sorry.

praxis, how many times have you told others that God doesn't exist? — Joe Mello

I don't think that I've ever told anyone that. I don't think it's provable.

Where is the love, Joe? All your hard work and lengthy training and deep contemplation has produced an abrasive, impatient, unkind, and arrogant persona. Where in this thread is there a kind word or even a respectful word for anyone here. There is no love in you, and there is therefore no value in what you say or in all your cleverness.

unenlightened, you haven't really read through the thread, have you? For if you had, you would probably judge me to be respectful for most of the time.

And, of course, like all forum regulars on every forum on the Internet, you cannot see the disrespect in your faceless "friends".

And where do you think you are? I wrote on this "Philosophy" forum an elegantly simple metaphysical principle that couldn't have been received with more ignorance or ad hominem.

Even you came to this thread and looked at me instead of the principle.

No. Creating a great forum on the Internet is far from a reality. It always becomes home to wannabe know-it-alls.

you would probably judge me to be respectful for most of the time. — Joe Mello

Let's check:

your trust in your thinking is scary. — Joe Mello

Your confidence in yourself must be very popular with everyone but the ladies. — Joe Mello

go be a fool someplace else. — Joe Mello

You simply do not have the philosophical clarity to think profoundly and without personal prejudices in the third degree of abstraction. — Joe Mello

if you're so sure of your thinking you wouldn't get rattled and emotional when it gets upended. — Joe Mello

I asked you to ponder the principle, not hold my hand and skip away with me. — Joe Mello

Don't accuse me of not being clear because you fell into a fog. — Joe Mello

You're free again to walk away from any argument you don't understand in the same pair of shoes you have probably been wearing since you were a teenager.

Bye bye, then. — Joe Mello

Learn to read … and to proofread. — Joe Mello

that's just stupid. — Joe Mello

You are lazy thinkers and lazy human beings. — Joe Mello

a person who is so filled with pride and self-love — Joe Mello

Your posts are riddled with emotion and nonsense.

I feel nothing when I read them, for they are not inspiring or profound, just the thoughts bouncing off the top of your head. — Joe Mello

why don’t you go to the lounge. — Joe Mello

just a superficial jerk. — Joe Mello

you would probably judge me to be respectful for most of the time. — Joe Mello

Left some out:

proofread so your nonsense so it isn’t even more painful to read. — Joe Mello

You’re not posting to me out of intellectual curiosity but out of emotional needs. — Joe Mello

My God, man … see the nonsense you write. As a human being, you are the spokesperson for reality. Get the intellectual marbles out of your mouth. — Joe Mello

And if you were truly intelligent, you would have determined by now that I'm a lot smarter than some fool asking me a loaded question. — Joe Mello

wannabe know-it-alls. — Joe Mello

Creating a great forum on the Internet is far from a reality. It always becomes home to wannabe know-it-alls. — Joe Mello

Welcome, brother.

T Clark, now go back and copy the sentences from your "friends" that prompted these responses, which you dishonestly edited to your own benefit and the benefit of your "friends".

You won't.

Look at any thread on this forum and you will find a back and forth of personal attacks. I just did. So why are you just concerned about my thread?


Wait a minute ... you're the idiot who said I was "itching to start a fight" after my very first post because I included the metaphysical principle in it. So, you saw me as your enemy from the very beginning and never for a moment even tried to understand what I was saying, and now you're trying to justify your first impression.

What a mope ...

@Bret Bernhoft

Bret, I forgot to respond to you. You're a rare bird to have understood and appreciated the principle.

Thanks for that.

@Srap Tasmaner

Srap, yesterday you asked me a question about how I discovered the principle. I took the time to answer you. It was a respectful and sincere answer, right?

But what did you do? Nothing. No further communication. Just silence.

And now you come back to my thread to add some cocky quip to entertain your "friends".

Yes, Mr. Moderator, I'm the only asshole around here.

@Hanover

I figured it out. Thanks for your help.

"You keep mentioning your credentials and vast mystical experience and in doing so it appears as though being seen as an authority is very important to you. May I ask why that is so important?"

praxis wrote this, and then feigned surprise when I "took that personally".

I think it would be a good practice around here to be a bit more honest with yourselves, and each other.

I've been on many forums, and this one has gathered the same stinky moss.

you would probably judge me to be respectful for most of the time.
— Joe Mello

Let's check:

your trust in your thinking is scary.
— Joe Mello

Your confidence in yourself must be very popular with everyone but the ladies.
— Joe Mello

go be a fool someplace else.
— Joe Mello

You simply do not have the philosophical clarity to think profoundly and without personal prejudices in the third degree of abstraction.
— Joe Mello

if you're so sure of your thinking you wouldn't get rattled and emotional when it gets upended.
— Joe Mello

I asked you to ponder the principle, not hold my hand and skip away with me.
— Joe Mello

Don't accuse me of not being clear because you fell into a fog.
— Joe Mello

You're free again to walk away from any argument you don't understand in the same pair of shoes you have probably been wearing since you were a teenager.

Bye bye, then.
— Joe Mello

Learn to read … and to proofread.
— Joe Mello

that's just stupid.
— Joe Mello

You are lazy thinkers and lazy human beings.
— Joe Mello

a person who is so filled with pride and self-love
— Joe Mello

Your posts are riddled with emotion and nonsense.

I feel nothing when I read them, for they are not inspiring or profound, just the thoughts bouncing off the top of your head.
— Joe Mello

why don’t you go to the lounge.
— Joe Mello

just a superficial jerk.
— Joe Mello — T Clark

I hope Joe isn’t this rude to God.

"You keep mentioning your credentials and vast mystical experience and in doing so it appears as though being seen as an authority is very important to you. May I ask why that is so important?"

praxis wrote this, and then feigned surprise when I "took it personally".

I think it would be a good practice around here to be a bit more honest with yourselves, and each other. — Joe Mello

You can’t even imagine not taking it personally and honestly answering the question?

@praxis

praxis, it's honestly hard to understand what you write.

If you're stoned on weed, that would be quite disrespectful to anyone taking the time to read what it is you write.

I sold tons of weed and smoked it for years. But 25 years ago I put it down out of respect for myself and everyone around me. I have five grandchildren who have never seen me high because I have never been high since they were born.

And if you're not stoned I stand corrected.

you're the idiot who said I was "itching to start a fight" after my very first post because I included the metaphysical principle in it. So, you saw me as your enemy from the very beginning and never for a moment even tried to understand what I was saying, and now you're trying to justify your first impression.

What a mope ... — Joe Mello

Joe, I was thinking the same thing after I saw your first post. But that’s not because I thought you deliberately wanted to start a fight. On the contrary, I think you are passionate about your ideas and wanted to share them, and were hoping to avoid conflict. But you clearly do not suffer fools gladly and that is implicit in your op. Given the diverse group on this site, it was predictable that that approach was going to guarantee conflict , even if it wasnt what you wanted. Many others on here also have strong points of view, so conflict was inevitable. How might you have worded your op so as not to have unintentionally courted opposition? It would not likely be your style , but some on here have a talent for reaching out in their op’s in a non-judgmental way to elicit a wide array of viewpoints on a given topic.
I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with asserting a strong position and defending it against opposing views. Passionate debate can be quite stimulating. But it can also lead to wounded pride and a need to lash out, and then it crosses over from enjoyable sport to unpleasant insult. I think a number of participants here who seem to be your enemies could easily become friends. Just try reaching out to them instead of following your instinct to circle the wagons. You may surprised how quickly their tone will change in response to your overtures.

@Joshs

Joshs, I am actually quite a veteran of forums such as this. Sam Harris has two forums, Project Reason & Sam Harris, that I spent many years on. So, I am coming from a position of kinda knowing who's who pretty quickly. And there are posters here who truly just want to derail my posts or try to get a rise out of me, all because I'm not the "theist" they can push around with the same talking points they have compiled for years.

You and some others are not such persons and I have not treated you so.

And it's really only you and some others that I am hoping for good conversations with.

I may be wrong, but I truly believe that a vast many of forum regulars on any forum are only there to write their thoughts and then read them back to themselves.

Thanks for your help. I will try more. But keep your eye on what I often come up against.

:up: I'd like to see some development of philosophical ideas between members here. I'm no philosopher and am here out of a late interest in philosophy and what I might have missed. I apologise if I came off as rude when you arrived here. I often feel the need to prod people to see what they think.

@Tom Storm

Sounds good, Tom. Anytime you have an idea you want to hash out or see something going on here, just chime in.

It is said that the best apology is changed behavior. You seem to know that.

What are we doing here, Joe?

First off, if there's an us, folks already hanging around this corner of the internet, and a you, the newcomer -- assuming for a moment that's a reasonable way to sort the participants in this thread, which I'm not sure about at all, but it's come up repeatedly in your view of the thread -- then I'm going to remind you that you came to us.

Now, why did you do that? You had something to share with us.

Did you come for an exchange of ideas? That's plainly "no". You may not agree with me about that, but I don't know how else to look at what's happened here. You came to inform us.

Did you expect your ideas to be tested? Maybe you assumed they'd be rejected or challenged, as you seem to be used to that, and if you've been hanging around with people into Sam Harris, before coming to us, then evidence suggests you have been seeking out people you expect to disagree with you.

But then what? You offer no intellectual defense of your views -- which is odd, and I'll come back to that -- but instead distinguish between yourself, who has had particular, special experiences, and been divinely singled out for the reception of special revelation, and, on the other hand, everyone else who lacks that special experience and did not receive such revelation.

I don't have much to say about your experience. I don't know what it would make sense for me to say about it. But then what are we to talk about?

So I'm still puzzled about why you're here, and what you expected. I have had no such experience. I think it's interesting that you have, but I don't know how we're to talk about it. In particular, I don't know how we're supposed to talk philosophy about it. I can look at Rothko's paintings or read Herbert's poems and try to open myself to some inkling of their religious experience. I don't think they intend me to analyze their work as I might some argument in philosophy.

But then there's also the matter of what you came to share with us. And oddly enough, what you had to tell us has an oddly analytical ring to it. It's not the sort of thing you expect to hear from a mystic. And apparently, rather than passing right by science, it's supposed to be open to scientific scrutiny. After all, you complain that scientists -- or, not enough anyway -- don't seem to understand this principle and incorporate it into their work, and you hold out the possibility that it could be refuted by some scientific discovery, only it hasn't been.

All of which would seem to indicate that what you came to share with us is entirely effable, rational, analysable. Again, that seems a bit odd, and it leaves you in the position of defending an idea that doesn't look all that mystical by reference to your personal experience of revelation. They make an odd pair, your life story and the results of your unique experience.

It's a little like going to a math forum and explaining that you have meditated for eleven years and know for a fact that the Continuum Hypothesis is false and offering in support your life story but no mathematics, and then, on top of that, deriding everyone who questions your claim as narrow-minded nobodies who have not been granted the revelation that you have.

So what's the deal? Are we supposed to talk about what you told us or not? And how are we to do that? I won't ask what you expected in coming here, but what did you hope for?

A true skeptic is skeptical of himself, too. — Joe Mello

I am skeptical of myself, very much so. But that doesn't answer the questions I have for you, concerning your "Metaphysical Principle". You seem to have no doubt that your Principle can be readily understood by anyone without any need to explain yourself. Or maybe you do not understand your own Principle, and you are just repeating what someone else told you. Perhaps you are simply lacking in will. Whatever. So much for the discussion you were looking forward to.

MU, I explained the principle step by step showing that I understand it very well. You ignored these steps, Now you’re accusing me of just repeating it from someone else.

And, no, the last thing I expect is you to readily understand such an elegant principle. You have given me no reason to, no matter how many questions you ask and consider on point when they’re not.

To be truly philosophically adept takes talent and an openness that are both extremely rare.

Add to this the basic ego problems that stop a person from honestly expecting to learn anything.

Your questions haven’t been about the principle but about your ideas.

Be honest. You didn’t ponder it at all, but simply rushed into the first thoughts off the top of your head.

Garrett, you couldn’t disturb me even a little bit. I’m not talking about ideas in my head. You are, as your manifesto shows.

Your atheist talking points are all over the Internet, not in the halls of science and reason.

I told you the absolute truth about why there is suffering and evil among us while we live temporarily in this physical reality. And you didn’t understand anything I said.

Your posts are riddled with emotion and nonsense.

I feel nothing when I read them, for they are not inspiring or profound, just the thoughts bouncing off the top of your head.

My posts are only about my experiences and the knowledge derived from them. — Joe Mello

Good, I have no wish to. But, it is specifically idea in your head that you are talking about, nothing more. The absolute truth you told me is going to need support, not merely assertion. My posts are a response to emotion and nonsense. Your feelins were not required, it was a statement. I know your posts are about experience, that's why they're not presented as arguments, they are simply stated. And of the 320 million or so people in this country, you literally share the exact same experiences with 240 million of them. Run of the mill beliefs with no reason for holding them.

Srap, your diatribe displays an incredible lack of imagination.

It’s obvious to me that why I came here isn’t really important when compared to where here is.

Your view of this philosophy forum is more like it’s a treehouse and I’m a new kid from another neighborhood who hasn’t taken the secret vow yet.

I provided you a metaphysical principle and claimed it is extremely important in understanding the evolution we know took place on our planet. And you, a moderator, focused on the single sentence where I said I discovered it. But I also said I spent years learning to understand it. And I also asked your treehouse friends to ponder it and see what they think.

And I ended with that I was looking forward to further discussions.

But now you’re telling me I needed to first earn the right to take your secret vow.

Change the name of the forum. You don’t deserve it.

@Joshs

See, Joshs?

Joe, it seems that you have not come to realize that one persons profound experience and realization, no matter how profound and real it might seem to them, can never be evidence to justify another's belief. If you want to convince others who are given to critical thinking of your standpoint or theory then you need to provide convincing argument of either the logical, phenomenological or empirical variety.

Or else create poetry or some form of art work which so powerfully evokes your realization that it might have a chance to bring about the kind of experience and realization you claim to have enjoyed. So you need to convince by either argument or by becoming a prophet, a revelator.

But you should remember that perhaps there are not many these days who have the ears and eyes or disposition to be moved by revelation, or even to recognize its existence.