• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!


Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • I don't think it was your interpretation of it, but the way I tried explaining it that left me unsatisfied. But lets break it down like this, there are two types of doubt. Basically I guess the easiest way for me to describe it simply would be, inductive and deductive. If you understand from there, I will try and explain further, I don't want to throw too much at you. :D
    I never said that psychology is based off of something not physical going on in the brain, just that it essentially emulates the physical realm and the perceptional one.
    No, psychology is not solely based on physical evidence. It is strongly influenced by the influx of neurology and neuropsychology but these very things are physical mentality. Literal membranes that are observed for specific reaction to input and output, maybe you've heard of Carl Jung, he has a great piece about this in his books, "Memories, Dreams, and Reflections.
    That is a fair point, however, as I have said, I count my experiences as my evidence. Perhaps it is all physcology, but the things I have sensed with my 5 senses have convinced me that there is at least a relative likelyhood that there is more to it. The absence of actual objectively observable data in a lab in this regard is a bit of a paradox to me. I have concluded though that for best results that I work on the assumption of theism, but to doubt the specific claims of supernatural encounters in general. I guess it could be like a 24/7 intellectual decompression chamber as some call them o.0 Also the mystical stuff is useful, for those who do not have degrees in such fields.
    I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong, because by all means you have you have a right to your opinion, but factually speaking empirical evidence is something that can only be categorized into the physical evidence, and psychologically speaking evidence is based off more than what is perceived as the physical realm. Take some time to think about it, I'm simply trying to offer you a perspective that is very rare to come by, and even harder to put into words. Its not about evidence, per se, but doubt.
    Sorry I meant to say, usually the type of doubt (the type of doubt that assumes something is lacking more than it seems) arises after being exposed to an aspect for a considerable amount of time. And when the type of doubt that expounds upon there being more potential arises from there not being enough experience to verify whether there actually could possibly be more to it. Though I feel we would be better off making a thread about this, which I will make if you are interested.
    Usually doubt that type of doubt arises after being exposed to an aspect for a considerable amount of time. Usually the doubt of potential arises from not being experienced enough to make a proper judgement.
    Well if you are doubting of something there has to be more, even if there is more of being less. And viable consequences include a stronger certainty in one's verification of their belief. Its definitely abstract, and requires more than five minutes of thought.
    His point is, you essentially have to believe that there is something more to doubt it. Sorry for snooping by the way ;)
    And who said it was more than psychology? Some think it is, some don't. I think that it's probably a bit of both. But as I was saying orignally, I've had these experiences and am convinced because of them that there is something else out there, SO FAR undiscovered by science.
    No, it's still true. Do you have to stop being an atheist to enjoy a movie with supernatural characters? The suspension of disbelief is more about not actively thinking "this isn't going to happen/this isn't real" for 15 minutes, you don't have to literally become a "believer" for the 15 minutes, you just have to stop thinking about it for 15 minutes and do the ritual.
    Well obviously if you do not suspend your disbelief for even 15 minutes, nothing is going to happen. if you take the atheist LHP position that it's all just psychology, by definition you have to trick your mind into it.

    Ask this member if you want to know what I mean, she is a "strong atheist" on Dawkin's scale from his book The God Delusion, yet is a practicing Left Hand Path magician who regularly interacts with different spirits. http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/members/infinitum-35462.html
    I should tell you that the experience doesn't require belief. Lots of atheists in the LHP talk to daemons and see stuff as part of things like Chaos Magick. You don't have to believe to experience it, but you have to suspend your disbelief for at least the duration of the working/ritual. However my experiences have convinced me that these were more than just products of my mind.
    why do flowers smell nice to us humans?idk and i wana know your making me feel dumb every time you ask this question
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…