TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- evolution and the soul
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »


Posted by PETRAN on Dec-04-2008 19:21:

quote:
Originally posted by Multusvocis
Reality is a biogenetic experiment based in linear time to study emotions. It is a consciousness hologram which had a beginning and an end that is rapidly approaching. References to reptilians and snakes go to DNA and the spiraling movement of consciousness above and below - faster and slower frequencies of thought and understanding. The patterns of reality follow sacred geometric codes that repeat in cycles called time. All is myth, math and metaphor, the goal to remember who you are and how you came to be in the experiment. It is all preprogrammed in your DNA codes, like time capsules ready to open along with the grid consciousness that creates endless programs through which your soul virtually experiences, learns and records information.

The name Dilmun comes out of the creational energies of the Middle East, the first insert, an entity called Dilmun in time, by many names, most often represented as a winged bird headed, or reptilian being, playing many roles, in all ancient civilizations and creational myths. Always it is the same entity, same energies, same messages, played out in different programs for the viewers to experience as needed.

Dilmun, in various forms as a creator god, is often portrayed carrying a water bucket. This takes us to vessels, containers, blood, sacred bloodline, water, the flow of the collective unconsciousness, and the return to balance in Aquarius.


Watering the Tree of Life - Creating a Bloodline




Stop drinking Ayahuasca son


Posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY on Dec-04-2008 19:25:

Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
no, this isn't another one of my religious-bashing threads.

i was merely curious: since evolution is irrefutable, and since many theists subscribe to evolution, at what stage did human(monkey)-kind evolve/receive a soul?

is it like completing a level of a computer game and being rewarded with a big gun? "hey now monkey, you've grown opposable thumbs! here, have a soul as recognition of your new place in the world"


How do u define soul?


Posted by Multusvocis on Dec-04-2008 19:33:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
Stop drinking Ayahuasca son


Haha I'll have to try that sometime


Posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY on Dec-04-2008 19:34:

quote:
Originally posted by SuspicionVandit
Aliens experimented with with monkey/alien DNA and created the human race. I'd say we earthlings attained our first souls in their embryonic chambers.

I find it hard to believe in evolution or else there, along with the "clear" link between monkeys and humans, a clear evolutionary link of the bull to the minotaur, or mosquitoes to fairies. Monkeys can't have been the only species to grow into tax accountants and car salesman.

I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express a month ago.


People put too much emphasis on a nice linear progression of change in an animal/plant. Mutation is evolution. There are periods of drastic mutation, and some of very subtle, slow adaptations. You will never find a nice smooth timeline of what a species has changed into. A group of the same type of animals can become exposed to an agent that causes severe change and either kills them or they continue on, whereas the same species in another area remains unchanged. Then a million years go by and you have an entire different race that came from the same species, but they are not genetically the same anymore. Science cannot and will not ever answer all questions as to what anything is in life. The more we learn the more we realize we don't know shit. Religion was invented to answer questions and make u sleep better at night. Damn this weed is good =)


Posted by nefardec on Dec-04-2008 19:39:

quote:
Originally posted by Multusvocis
Reality is a biogenetic experiment based in linear time to study emotions. It is a consciousness hologram which had a beginning and an end that is rapidly approaching. References to reptilians and snakes go to DNA and the spiraling movement of consciousness above and below - faster and slower frequencies of thought and understanding. The patterns of reality follow sacred geometric codes that repeat in cycles called time. All is myth, math and metaphor, the goal to remember who you are and how you came to be in the experiment. It is all preprogrammed in your DNA codes, like time capsules ready to open along with the grid consciousness that creates endless programs through which your soul virtually experiences, learns and records information.

The name Dilmun comes out of the creational energies of the Middle East, the first insert, an entity called Dilmun in time, by many names, most often represented as a winged bird headed, or reptilian being, playing many roles, in all ancient civilizations and creational myths. Always it is the same entity, same energies, same messages, played out in different programs for the viewers to experience as needed.

Dilmun, in various forms as a creator god, is often portrayed carrying a water bucket. This takes us to vessels, containers, blood, sacred bloodline, water, the flow of the collective unconsciousness, and the return to balance in Aquarius.

Watering the Tree of Life - Creating a Bloodline



love it. let's not forget Dagon


Posted by Multusvocis on Dec-04-2008 20:03:

quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
love it. let's not forget Dagon



Ah yes the fish God, I forgot about him and had to do a little reading but I saw that his origin goes back to Nibiru which Im fascinated with. But just a little excerpt I found on Dagon for the people.

In the role of Dagon - he was the god of the Philistines mentioned in the Old Testament in connection with the Ark of the Covenant. The Philistines placed the captured Ark in a temple of Dagon in Ashdod, before the statue of Dagon. The next morning they found the statue lying on its face on the temple floor. They set it upright again, but the morning after the statue was again lying face down on the floor, this time with its head and hands broken off. The Hebrews regarded this as a sign of the Ark's power (Samuel 5:1-7).

Dagon was a Semitic god adopted by the Philistines after their invasion of Canaan.

Dagon (or Dagan) was worshipped in Mesopotamia at Ur in 2500 BC. His cult was popular among the Assyrians. He probably began his existence as a god of vegetation and evolved into a storm god.

The Hebrew name Dagon means "Great Fish." The god was variously described as a fish god, an idol with the head and hands of a man and the tail of a fish, and as half-woman and half-fish. The woodcut from Kircher, shown above, adopts the latter representation.

An identification or association was sometimes made between Dagon and the goddess Atargatis (or Atergata), who had the upper body of a woman and the lower body of a fish. Atargatis was worshipped in Carnaim, a town in Bashan. The fishtail on the goddess was said to represent her journey through the Underworld. Atargatis was an ancient Syrian goddess. She belongs to the general pattern of mother goddesses that were worshiped throughout Asia and Greece. In Rome she was called 'Dea Syria.'

Myths and more myths.....Metaphors and more metaphors.......


Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Dec-04-2008 20:29:

quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
love it. let's not forget Dagon


Ia! Ia!


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Dec-04-2008 22:07:

Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY
How do u define soul?


some part of you that exists after you snuff it.


Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Dec-04-2008 22:18:

Re: Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
some part of you that exists after you snuff it.


All of you still exists after you die, you are merely disseminated throughout the environment. In fact, whatever we are made of was present at the very beginning and will be there until the very end.


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Dec-04-2008 22:20:

Re: Re: Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
All of you still exists after you die, you are merely disseminated throughout the environment. In fact, whatever we are made of was present at the very beginning and will be there until the very end.


you know what i meant


Posted by RJT on Dec-05-2008 02:34:

Re: Re: Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
All of you still exists after you die, you are merely disseminated throughout the environment. In fact, whatever we are made of was present at the very beginning and will be there until the very end.


It's funny you post this, because it basically summarizes nicely how I would describe my "spiritual" side. I would definitely describe myself in some sense as a "materialist", or an "atomist", who genuinely believes all that exists is matter and that the only gratification one can expect from an "afterlife" is to return themselves back to the fundamental elements of existence.

It's also why I want to be cremated and have a tree planted in my ashes. Well, that, and the fact that I'm a filthy, stinking hippie at heart.


Posted by Lira on Dec-05-2008 03:12:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by RJT
It's funny you post this, because it basically summarizes nicely how I would describe my "spiritual" side. I would definitely describe myself in some sense as a "materialist", or an "atomist", who genuinely believes all that exists is matter and that the only gratification one can expect from an "afterlife" is to return themselves back to the fundamental elements of existence.

It's kinda funny that, based on a similar set of beliefs, our conclusions seem to be so distant from one another.

I too am a materialist, but I can't even expect to go back to "fundamental elements" because I'm just the activity produced by my body - rather than the body itself - so, when I die and the physical processes produced by my body cease to exist... I can't even claim that anything left behind is mine: this body has never been "me", but something by which I've been produced.

It's also why I want my organs to be donated and the rest of my flesh be fed to narwhals.

(Unless I misunderstood you and we actually think alike)

It's also sad to realise how slow my internet connection is... I can't even make ninja edits any more


Posted by RJT on Dec-05-2008 03:17:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by Lira

(Unless I misunderstood you and we actually think alike)


This.

I wasn't near as clear or articulate, but that's basically my belief set as well - which I would think is implied by the notion that a sense of self, or "I", is really only created via the regressive loop of the circumstances that brought each of us into existence.

In that sense "I" don't go back to the fundamental elements, but that which makes up the physical part of what I understand as myself does.


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Dec-05-2008 03:29:

i agree with you two hippies, nicely put. and nice to see you back on the boards occasionally RJT.


Posted by Saka on Dec-05-2008 16:52:

Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
no, this isn't another one of my religious-bashing threads.

i was merely curious: since evolution is irrefutable, and since many theists subscribe to evolution, at what stage did human(monkey)-kind evolve/receive a soul?

is it like completing a level of a computer game and being rewarded with a big gun? "hey now monkey, you've grown opposable thumbs! here, have a soul as recognition of your new place in the world"


If religion isn't in this thread then why are we talking about souls?
Some people here believe some of you survives after you snuff it, but without a religious belief and total dependency on evolution as your beliefs, then where would we evolve to have something of us survive death?
And evolution isn't irrefutable.
That's why it is the 'theory' of evolution.


Posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY on Dec-05-2008 17:01:

Re: Re: Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
All of you still exists after you die, you are merely disseminated throughout the environment. In fact, whatever we are made of was present at the very beginning and will be there until the very end.


thats the definition of energy...it's neither created nor destroyed, but simply changes form.


Posted by Zild on Dec-05-2008 17:17:

Once the nearest star massive enough goes supernova we will all be spread across space to eventually form new planets and stars which will probably lead to new forms of life. We are all star stuff as I like to say.


Posted by PETRAN on Dec-05-2008 18:43:

quote:
Originally posted by Zild
Once the nearest star massive enough goes supernova we will all be spread across space to eventually form new planets and stars which will probably lead to new forms of life. We are all star stuff as I like to say.



Yeah, i understand what you and the other guys said about the "materials surviving" but the question is not about the destiny of my bodily molecules after death, the question is about the survival of consciousness and/or awareness. To which i clearly think that if there is no brain, there is no consciousness/awareness.


BUT (lol)

I get these crazy sci-fi ideas at times though and i'd like to share them with fellow TA thinkers. Most people associate the "soul" with some form of spiritual being that exists seperate from the body, a kind of "ghost in the shell". They also associate it with ghosts and other paranormal phenomena. IMO, there is no need for a "ghost-soul in a bodily shell" or other crazy spiritual/ethereal stuff in order for cosnciousness to survive after death. Just think that the mind/experience derives from complex neural computations. Synaptic transmissions/neuronal firings (action potentials) work much like computers-they either fire or not fire, 1 or 0 (of course the firings in intermmediate neurons can be continuous and graded rather than absolute but this is not really a problem). This is how your consciounsess and experience is (somehow!) produced. As a result, the brain can be said to be a "Turing Machine" of some sorts, a computer. According to Turing (the pioneer of computational theory) if given enough resources, any Turing machine can "run" (simulate) any other Turing Machine.


So, if God is somehow a computer (yeah i don't take drugs), or the universe has some sort of a computational nature embedded within it and this nature has large (infinite would be better i guess!) computational resources, it would literally re-simulate all the brain-states that you had as a human. I mean something, somewhere, somehow for some bloody reason could "re-simulate" you. This is strangely enough what Christianity describes (and maybe other religions as well? I don't know). Many (christian) people hold the false belief (i believe lol) that when you die your soul survives and it either goes to heaven or hell. As far as i'm concerned this is false. Your soul survives in a neutral/abstract state until the day of the apocalypse (i think) in which "your body is resurrected and you will be judged" by god. The afterlife occurs after the supossed "judgement", and it is granted to only those who are moral at heart.



So this resurrection could actually be a computational resurrection (simulation). I don't really know what morality and/or emotion in general have to do with all these, but maybe it would make sense if you were simulated (for whatever bloody reason)to be actually good. So this god-computer, having all the brain states and their outcomes (minds) of all people (and/or living beings in general) stored in its memory, could compute the positive and negative impacts of one's behaviour on the experiences of others. In simple words, it could compute the number and degree of "good" or "bad" experiences that you have caused (with your behaviour to other human beings or living beings in general-and maybe to yourself) and produces a decision about your "goodness/badness". If your goodness (measured by the experiences of the beings that you have encountered in your life) exceeds a certian criterion then you would be be simulated again (there would be some sort of complex criterions for all these). If the experiences you are associated with are more painful than joyful, then you will not be simulated and hence stay inexistent (hell?). Why all these? Who really knows lol. And its just some crazy idea of mine anyway. I think a physicist (and a priest i think lol) named J. Tipler (or something) described some similar ideas but i haven't red any of his work yet. I think that he is much more specific about similar ideas i described and it is related to the "anthropic cosmological principle", but this is another (complex) story.

These are just some crazy sci-fi ideas i get when i listen to Aphex Twin's Selected Ambient Works and Come to Daddy whilst watching Narwhals mating in the cold oceans, i don't embrace them myself. I also don't do drugs and kids don't forget to stay away from illegal substances


Posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY on Dec-05-2008 18:46:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
Yeah, i understand what you and the other guys said about the "materials surviving" but the question is not about the destiny of my bodily molecules after death, the question is about the survival of consciousness and/or awareness. To which i clearly think that if there is no brain, there is no consciousness/awareness.


BUT (lol)

I get these crazy sci-fi ideas at times though and i'd like to share them with fellow TA thinkers. Most people associate the "soul" with some form of spiritual being that exists seperate from the body, a kind of "ghost in the shell". They also associate it with ghosts and other paranormal phenomena. IMO, there is no need for a "ghost-soul in a bodily shell" or other crazy spiritual/ethereal stuff in order for cosnciousness to survive after death. Just think that brain dynamics is based on complex neuronal computations. Synaptic transmissions/neuronal firings (action potentials) work much like computers-they either fire or not fire, 1 or 0 (of course the firings in intermmediate neurons can be continuous and graded rather than absolute but this is not really a problem). This is how your consciounsess and experience is (somehow!) produced. As a result, the brain can be said to be a "Turing Machine" of some sorts, a computer. According to Turing (the pioneer of computational theory) if given enough resources, any Turing machine can "run" (simulate) any other Turing Machine.


So, if God is somehow a computer (yeah i don't take drugs), or the universe has some sort of a computational nature embedded within it and this nature has large (infinite would be better i guess!) computational resources, it would literally re-simulate all the brain-states that you had as a human. I mean something, somewhere, somehow for some bloody reason could "re-simulate" you. This is strangely enough what Christianity describes (and maybe other religions as well? I don't know). Many (christian) people hold the false belief that when you die your soul survives and it either goes to heaven or hell. As far as i'm concerned this is false. Your soul survives in a neutral/abstract state until the day of the apocalypse (i think) in which "your body is resurrected and you will be judged" by god. The afterlife occurs after the supossed "judgement", and it is granted to only those who are moral at heart.



So this resurrection could actually be a computational resurrection (simulation). I don't really know what morality and/or emotion in general have to do with all these, but maybe it would make sense if you were simulated (for whatever bloody reason)to be actually good. So this god-computer, having all the brain states and their outcomes (minds) of all people (and/or living beings in general) stored in its memory, could compute the positive and negative impacts of one's behaviour on the experiences of others. In simple words, it could compute the number and degree of "good" or "bad" experiences that you have caused (with your behaviour to other human beings or living beings in general-and maybe to yourself) and produces a decision about your "goodness/badness". If your goodness (measured by the experiences of the beings that you have encountered in your life) exceeds a certian criterion then you would be be simulated again (there would be some sort of complex criterions for all these). If the experiences you are associated with are more painful than joyful, then you will not be simulated and hence stay inexistent (hell?). Why all these? Who really knows lol. And its just some crazy idea of mine anyway. I think a physicist (and a priest i think lol) named J. Tipler (or something) described some similar ideas but i haven't red any of his work yet. I think that he is much more specific about similar ideas i described and it is related to the "anthropic cosmological principle", but this is another (complex) story.

These are just some crazy sci-fi ideas i get when i listen to Aphex Twin's Selected Ambient Works and Come to Daddy whilst watching Narwhals mating in the cold oceans, i don't embrace them myself. I also don't do drugs and kids don't forget to stay away from illegal substances


Imagine how creative you would become if you did do drugs. You're missing out on life


Posted by PETRAN on Dec-05-2008 19:07:

quote:
Originally posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY
Imagine how creative you would become if you did do drugs. You're missing out on life



I would lose it completely then I would literally be identical to ******** (if im not already with this post )


Posted by Arbiter on Dec-05-2008 20:40:

Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by Saka
And evolution isn't irrefutable.
That's why it is the 'theory' of evolution.


oh ffs


Posted by MrJiveBoJingles on Dec-05-2008 22:37:

A theory has to be potentially "refutable" in order to be scientific. Once you make predictions about contingent events, which is what science does, you open up the possibility that your theory could be refuted if things turn out differently than you expect.

But there's a big gap between "potentially refutable" and "refuted by the evidence we currently possess." Evolution is potentially refutable, but it is not refuted.


Posted by PETRAN on Dec-06-2008 00:45:

quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
A theory has to be potentially "refutable" in order to be scientific. Once you make predictions about contingent events, which is what science does, you open up the possibility that your theory could be refuted if things turn out differently than you expect.

But there's a big gap between "potentially refutable" and "refuted by the evidence we currently possess." Evolution is potentially refutable, but it is not refuted.





Yeah, true. I wholeheartedly embrace evolution, although i can't understand why some people use this theory in order to falsify the existence of a supreme being of some sorts wtf. I can understand that some Evolutionary concepts come in direct contradiction to some strictly religious ones, but religions are made by people themselves not a supreme being. Evolution can falsify some religious concepts not the existence of a supreme being of some sorts.Religion is not equal to god in the same way that UFOs are not equal to aliens (although many people implicitly assume though they are still "unidentified")and ******** is not equal to insanity...oh wait...


Posted by DJ Shibby on Dec-06-2008 02:55:

quote:
Originally posted by Zild
It's OK. Those plants didn't have a free will.


Funny you say that since our "free will" only exists because we are being farmed by the plants for soil and carbon dioxide.

They've got 3.5 billion years of evolution on us and we actually don't realize yet that they're the masters of this planet.


Posted by nefardec on Dec-06-2008 04:02:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: evolution and the soul

quote:
Originally posted by RJT
It's funny you post this, because it basically summarizes nicely how I would describe my "spiritual" side. I would definitely describe myself in some sense as a "materialist", or an "atomist", who genuinely believes all that exists is matter and that the only gratification one can expect from an "afterlife" is to return themselves back to the fundamental elements of existence.

It's also why I want to be cremated and have a tree planted in my ashes. Well, that, and the fact that I'm a filthy, stinking hippie at heart.



I basically feel the same way, except I don't feel that the 'atom' is anything but a perceived phemonenon.


I believe there is no difference between the 'spirit' and 'matter'. This quote from Inayat Khan summarizes:

quote:
What is spirit and what is matter? The difference between spirit and matter is like the difference between water and ice: frozen water is ice and melted ice is water. It is spirit in its denseness which we call matter; it is matter in its fineness which may be called spirit. Once a materialist said to me, 'I do not believe in any spirit or soul or hereafter. I believe in eternal matter.' I said to him, 'Your belief is not very different from mine, only that which you call eternal matter I call spirit; it is a difference in terms. There is nothing to dispute about because we both believe in eternity; and so long as we meet in eternity, what difference does it make, if the one calls it matter, and the other calls it spirit? It is one life from beginning to end.'


Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.