Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com APE Liquid Culture For Sale, Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
Reality and Truth
    #2556458 -

re?al?i?ty
n. pl. re?al?i?ties

1. The quality or state of being actual or true.
2. One, such as a person, an entity, or an event, that is actual: ?the weight of history and political realities? (Benno C. Schmidt, Jr.).
3. The totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence.
4. That which exists objectively and in fact: Your observations do not seem to be about reality.

truth
n. pl. truths (trthz, trths)

1. Conformity to fact or actuality.
2. A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
3. Sincerity; integrity.
4. Fidelity to an original or standard.
5.
A. Reality; actuality.
B. often Truth That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence.

It occured to me that many people have developed a warped view of reality and truth; yet they insist there reality and truth, which don't conform to the definitions, is in fact reality and truth. All definitions from dictionary.com

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2556474 -

People are coming from THEIR point of view. Their origin... what else do you expect from them... Is it YOUR reality? I think you are speaking of perceptions.

Many people choose to believe that their perceptions of reality and truth are the exact ones... which all in all... may be a necessary thing.

If they didnt think that what they thought was true... or what was reality... where would they be? Well... i think you must maintain at least some since of self awareness... something which ties "you" to the "reality".

Definitions are only as good as the people who know and write them. What makes a word a word? Because we understand the meaning behind the definition... we give it a recognizable set of characters... some meanings... You got yourself a defininition... But as you know... in the english language... a single word may have many many different connotations.

What say ye to that?


--------------------
What?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2556589 -

So dictionary.com dictates your reality to you :smile:


--------------------
You are the microcosm of the macrocosm.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2556769 -

"It occured to me that many people have developed a warped view of reality and truth; yet they insist there reality and truth, which don't conform to the definitions, is in fact reality and truth. All definitions from dictionary.com"

Let's back up.. first you have to admit that your own view is warped to other people, even though you insist your 'definitions' are correct.. I hate to say but I am begining to realize reality HAS no definitions, and to give it one is a mistake. That is not to say we can not define the basics of geometry, but rather to say we can not put definition to the average breath intakes per lifespan, the number of rain drops during the storm, the way the mind works. Anyways, I'm sure I went off subject.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2557147 -

honestly i laughed out loud when i read this...
you say the words 'dictionary.com' like some people say 'god's word'
ill be the first to say that dictionary definitions arent worth a shit and you need to ask yourself how you came to believe that book by funk and wagnalls is somehow the essence of truth.

i guess people have a psychological need for there to be some big heavy book with reassuringly fine print to tell us whats true and whats what, but its still as delusional a belief now as it ever was, weather your bible was written by hebrew priests or funk and wagnalls.

id write my own dictionary but i think that takes a very distorted kind of mind. Take reality, slice it in to millions of tiny pieces and pin little labels with made up words on them...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: PHARMAKOS]
    #2557157 -

If we didn't have words that were assigned some value that we could all understand, then how could we communicate with each other?


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2557356 -

exactly frog. we devised this system so we could communicate on some level. its a tool, we had to devise a common meaning for words so we could talk. But does that mean that meaning is any more 'true' than any other one? dictionaries are tools for checkin spelling and meaning but they done define life in any real sense

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2557380 -

Well this is all speculation, but it is my belief that long ago before written language , and even before humans evolved , animals in general used motion and psyical apearance to communicate with friend and foe. Imagine a pack of Sabertooth tigers silently gliding through the forest, chasing a Mastadon, moving in perfect harmony to bring a total surprise attack. Imagine the way a mother raise her child, not all communication is verbal...This is how animals began communicating, and now as humans some think verbal communication is the only form of exchange .

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: PHARMAKOS]
    #2557418 -

PHARMAKOS said:
exactly frog. we devised this system so we could communicate on some level. its a tool, we had to devise a common meaning for words so we could talk. But does that mean that meaning is any more 'true' than any other one? dictionaries are tools for checkin spelling and meaning but they done define life in any real sense


Dictionaries have never claimed to define life, but they do claim to define the words we use to explain our own definitions of life.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2557426 -

2Experimental said:
Well this is all speculation, but it is my belief that long ago before written language , and even before humans evolved , animals in general used motion and psyical apearance to communicate with friend and foe. Imagine a pack of Sabertooth tigers silently gliding through the forest, chasing a Mastadon, moving in perfect harmony to bring a total surprise attack. Imagine the way a mother raise her child, not all communication is verbal...This is how animals began communicating, and now as humans some think verbal communication is the only form of exchange .


I agree. But that was a long time ago. Since then, we have invented language so that we could share ideas with each other. We can't suddenly decide, sua sponte, of our own will, after a word has been created and defined, that it should suddenly mean something else, or that it doesn't mean what EVERYONE knows it to mean.

I'm not saying that the first post is entirely correct, I just object to the posit that the dictionary holds no value.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2557437 -

I find a problem in giving anything concreet meaning, even complex words very specific to certain things, can no doubtedly have different meaning in different context. Why cant you give new meaning to a word already in your mind? That kind of thinking doesen't leaves room for the spontaneous of life, the changing 'database' of all that is. If we are locked down in details, and don't aloow room for change, even basic concepts like language and behavior patterns can not be changes, and we become a prisoner of whatever state of mind we are in.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2557447 -

It's one thing to take a word that already has a known value and take it a step further in trying to explain what you are trying to say.

It's a completely different matter to say that none of the words that are in the dictionary should have any value that has been assigned to them.

I know you didn't say that, but someone did. I'm just saying let's don't throw out the dictionary yet. I use words contained therein every day, hoping that I am understood based thereon.

Explain your thoughts! Explain your life! But don't throw out the dictionary or we won't be able to communicate.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2557462 -

Yes, my example was kind of extreme, I know. I surely do not mean throw out the dictionary, because I for one could not go without spoken language. What I was refering to is the meaning that we as society give to certain words. Like when people hear confederate flag, or see one, 9/10 will think racism. When in reality there are many people who find good meanings behind the flag, nothing of evil nature. Also when people hear the word God, I think the number of things that come to mind are about the same as the earths population. When you get into words like that , where people put feeling behind it, there is no dictionary deffinition... I

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2557473 -

I think we have to continue to use each word with the value assigned to it, regardless that there are people whose racist thoughts or reactions will be invoked as a result.

It still comes down to a bottom line that we can only understand each other if we maintain the value of each word. The dictionary is not racist, or atheist, or whatever.

It's people whose emotions misconstrue the meaning of a word. They're ignorant. We can't defeat them by redefining the given word.

On a side note, I do think that at one time we probably thought in pictures, and we may end up doing so again. I wonder if it will make it easier to communicate?


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2557632 -

Isnt the real question here whether or not there actually is objective truth? Absolute truth, something that can be true eventhough no one believes its true, and is still absolutely true even in the face of a polar opposite belief, thus rendering that belief false in actuallity but perhaps not in the dellusional mind of the believer. You can hold the subjective belief that such absolute truth exists or doesnt, but that does not make it so in objective reality, if objective reality exists. But can the nature of objective reality be such that it does not allow for objective truth? If the absolute truth of reality is there is no ablsolute truth, isnt that a paradox? At this moment we cant know one way or the other. We cant even know if we really know we cant know, or can we? i dont know. Perhaps every paradox is not actually an inconsitancy, but instead it is the point at which our conceptual ability breaks down, yet just because we cannot concieve beyond that point and realize the truth doesnt mean there isnt a consistant truth beyond that point, or MAYBE that is exactly what it means? I dont know.

Sincerely,
That which is, and has no choice but to be

Edited by ZenGecko (04/14/04 05:21 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2558388 -

ZenGecko said:
Isnt the real question here whether or not there actually is objective truth? Absolute truth, something that can be true eventhough no one believes its true, and is still absolutely true even in the face of a polar opposite belief, thus rendering that belief false in actuallity but perhaps not in the dellusional mind of the believer.


What does that mean, ZenGecko? If something is objectively true, like water is wet whether we want to believe it or not? So there are objective truths in the world that even a person with what you would probably call "subjective beliefs", or beliefs in the unprovable or unproven, would still believe, even though he/she holds these subjective beliefs.

Merely because there are objective truths that exist in this world doesn't mean that subjective beliefs are not valid. I once mentioned that when Einstein first postulated his theory on E=MCsq, it was just a theory. Something he thought up in his mind, that was later proven.

Do you really think that all objective truths have been proven at this time? I'll bet a hundred years from now, you'll change that opinion.

What harm is there in theorizing about the unknown world, the world that we can't see? How do subjective beliefs threaten objective truths?

I have never seen anyone here say that because they believe in God, all objective truths are null and void.

You can hold the subjective belief that such absolute truth exists or doesnt, but that does not make it so in objective reality, if objective reality exists. But can the nature of objective reality be such that it does not allow for objective truth? If the absolute truth of reality is there is no ablsolute truth, isnt that a paradox? At this moment we cant know one way or the other. We cant even know if we really know we cant know, or can we? i dont know. Perhaps every paradox is not actually an inconsitancy, but instead it is the point at which our conceptual ability breaks down, yet just because we cannot concieve beyond that point and realize the truth doesnt mean there isnt a consistant truth beyond that point, or MAYBE that is exactly what it means? I dont know.

Sincerely,
That which is, and has no choice but to be



--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2558431 -

"Well this is all speculation, but it is my belief that long ago before written language , and even before humans evolved , animals in general used motion and psyical apearance to communicate with friend and foe. Imagine a pack of Sabertooth tigers silently gliding through the forest, chasing a Mastadon, moving in perfect harmony to bring a total surprise attack. Imagine the way a mother raise her child, not all communication is verbal...This is how animals began communicating, and now as humans some think verbal communication is the only form of exchange . "

very interesting concept, and yes humans probably did once rely on non verbal communication. Totally unrelated though i think... maybe a new thread?

peace


Frog: um... please slow down a bit with your read and response... somewhere along the line me and you ended up on totally different wavelengths here... I never said the dictionary has no value, nor that it should be thrown out, nor is that what this thread is about.

Shroomhermits thread (the one your posting on) is about truth and reality. He begins the thread by saying he cant believe some people actually use different definitions of reality than the ones in dictionary.com, then added that those people were i dunno what was it 'warped and delusional'?

i think its funny, and also misquided to turn to any single website or book as the source of final truth on ANY subject. If understanding reality was as esasy as looking it up on dick.com than thatd be great.

Then id look up 'women' 'god' and 'money' and id be set for life.
But the sad truth is that the dictionary, the entire language in fact, is no more than a tool to be used when it is convienient and ignored when it gets in the way.

Ever read 'lewis carroll?" that guy threw out his didctionary a long time ago, and also wrote some fuckin awesome books. he uses words like chortle and gallumph, which convey his meaning much better than anything in the dictionary. And the true purpose of language is simply to convey meaning, not put any real form or label on life...

Life is entirely beyond words man

:sun: :tongue2: :spliff:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: PHARMAKOS]
    #2559157 -

"And the true purpose of language is simply to convey meaning, not put any real form or label on life"

This is the point I was trying to make to Frog. Even if humans misconstrue meanings , it isn't their 'fault' or lack of understanding, it simply is the interpretation they give to a word which is JUST a valid as the dictionary definition from their standpoint....When a child hears Ho HO HO on christmas, they do not think about prostitutes, they think about santa claus, ... To say one word has one meaning is very farfetched, and ZenGecko went into alot of detail about whether this could be possible in an 'objective truth' existence.

"Totally unrelated though i think... "
Well, not totally unrelated, but kind of a long shot point maker. I am just trying to convey there is no truth in language(dictionary) except the truth we as individuals give it. As soon as someone interprets a word differently than you, the truth is gone, and it is now subjective whose definition of the word is correct.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2559158 -

love = reality

as that is all there is. :wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: PHARMAKOS]
    #2559338 -

Well, if I messed up, I apologize. I thought someone was saying basically that one shouldn't go to the dictionary for the meaning of words.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2560662 -

I think you missed my point. Im not saying subjective truth is invalid, indeed it may be the only truth. Nor am i saying that objective truth does or does not exist. I was simply pointing out that the existance of objective truth is open to debate, and the resolution of that debate would have profound implications. Also if objective truth does exist, then one implication of that MIGHT be that subjective truth really isnt truth at all, and is in fact invalid, unless it happens to agree with the objective truth. If the objective truth is water is wet, yet some crazy person says NO! ITS VERY VERY DRY!!! then wouldnt that make the crazy person just flat out wrong? or can subjective truth and objective truth live togheter even if they are at odds with each other? but if there is objective truth and the subjective truth doesnt agree with it, wouldnt it be more accurate to just call it an opinion rather then a truth?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2560781 -



Light + Love = Truth & REALity.... then we evolve more rapid realize the truth that we are all one and then we become multidimentional with Gaia. blah blah blah...

Chad

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2561739 -

ZenGecko said:
I think you missed my point. Im not saying subjective truth is invalid, indeed it may be the only truth. Nor am i saying that objective truth does or does not exist. I was simply pointing out that the existance of objective truth is open to debate, and the resolution of that debate would have profound implications. Also if objective truth does exist, then one implication of that MIGHT be that subjective truth really isnt truth at all, and is in fact invalid, unless it happens to agree with the objective truth. If the objective truth is water is wet, yet some crazy person says NO! ITS VERY VERY DRY!!! then wouldnt that make the crazy person just flat out wrong? or can subjective truth and objective truth live togheter even if they are at odds with each other? but if there is objective truth and the subjective truth doesnt agree with it, wouldnt it be more accurate to just call it an opinion rather then a truth?


Okay, let's see if I get it right this time.

Well, first, I need to know what types of subjective truths you are talking about. Are you talking about, for example, when someone says "Synchronicity exists", that that is a subjective truth that has no objectively-based counterpart, and therefore cannot exist?


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2561826 -

ZenGecko:
"I was simply pointing out that the existance of objective truth is open to debate, and the resolution of that debate would have profound implications"

How would the resolution of that debate ever have profound implications if the resolution could not be came to in the first place because of subjective realities?


Frog:
"Are you talking about, for example, when someone says "Synchronicity exists", that that is a subjective truth that has no objectively-based counterpart, and therefore cannot exist? "

I really wish people considered personal experience as 'objective' .. I do at least, if the experience happens in a clear minded state.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2561855 -

Well, to give skeptics their due, if I have a personal experience that is not able to be measured in any scientific format, I can see why they would consider it subjective, not objective.

However, that is why I posted, I think on another thread, that there are other people with whom I work that have witnessed my subjective experiences. Still, though, that's not objective. No scientific measurement available to give it credence.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2562285 -

WE ARE DREAMING! NOTHING IS REAL! AHHHHH! *slaps self* sorry i do that sometime =^_^=


--------------------
~~~~~*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*~~~~~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2562297 -

Quote:
that there are other people with whom I work that have witnessed my subjective experiences. Still, though, that's not objective.



That will be dismissed (ala' city-wide UFO sightings) by skeptics as a "mass hallucination".
A very scientific explanation mind you.  :rolleyes:


--------------------
I am what Willis was talkin' bout.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Jellric]
    #2562398 -

Ok let me put it more simply. All im saying is that we cant at the moment, and likely ever agree that there is objective truth, others would argue that there is only objective truth, and subjective truth is an illusion. Im not saying that either do or do not exist, im just saying that if we could some how know, really know for sure that it would help settle alot of questions.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: ZenGecko]
    #2564391 -

Objective truth: The Eiffel tower is X feet high and was built in Paris in 18XX, whatever.


Subjective truth:

Visitor #1: I proposed to my fiance there and she accepted. That was the most beautiful night of my life. Whenever I see that magnificent tower I can feel her love.

Visitor #2: My wife died in the 9/11 WTC bombing. Whenever I see that hideous spire, I think how the cowardly French refused to aid us in our time of need.

Are the subjective truths "real"? Only to the subject. This does not deny the experience, only the conclusion (100th time I have said this). The tower is neither ugly nor beautiful, but the experiencer may feel very strongly one way or another. This is called projection. Is there a scientific test for magnificence? No. The problem occurs when the subject tries to convince others of his limited and erroneous conclusion.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Swami]
    #2564707 -

Quote:
Objective truth: The Eiffel tower is X feet high and was built in Paris in 18XX, whatever.



Because of erosion, material elasticity, and ground settling, the Eiffel tower will register different heights when measured over time. Your "objective truth" is subjective to the time of measurement.

Since the entire world does not use the Roman Calender, different cultures would not concede that the Eiffel tower was built in the 1800's. Your "objective truth" is subjective to the culture dating it.

Everything is subjective. What I anticipate from you:

1. No answer
or
2. Emotionally appealing counterpoint along the lines of "If I hit you in the head..."


--------------------
"Plus one upvote +1..."
--- //
-- :meff:
  /l_l\/
--\-/----

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: SpecialEd]
    #2564892 -

"Because of erosion, material elasticity, and ground settling, the Eiffel tower will register different heights when measured over time. Your "objective truth" is subjective to the time of measurement."

Exactly , this just goes to show that science is not really as objective as its followers would like to admit.....

So what if skeptic theory stands up to the " Scientific book of all that is right and will never change, Volume 101"....that does not mean anything

Quote from, Swami
"Are the subjective truths "real"? Only to the subject."

What about if we made subject plural, now what? I think if experiences are shared by the masses, then subjective becomes objective by reason of number... Do not give me the argument of numbers aregument because it is pointless. I could say the same about how science thinks evolution is objective, when in reality it is not proven, yet the masses accept it as 'real' somehow, but deny thinks like spiritual masses experience as still only subjective. I know there is a fine line in there, but a line exists none the less..............

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: SpecialEd]
    #2565054 -

Because of erosion, material elasticity, and ground settling, the Eiffel tower will register different heights when measured over time.

Hence why I used the variable "X" instead of an exact metric. Changability over time does not negate objective reality. No one claims that matter is static.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2565909 -

>I could say the same about how science thinks evolution is objective, when in reality it is not proven
-Evolution has been proven in a labratory setting. Evolution is fact, not theory. Evolution by Natural Selection what is theory. I assume that Natural Selection is the driving force of evolution in nature... but so far it's only theory.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2566136 -

"Evolution has been proven in a labratory setting. Evolution is fact, not theory."

Wtf? Nah I do not think it has been proven in a lab that humans evolved from apes. I think it is highly possible by looking at the evidence, but the truth is, science does not know the origin of mankind for sure.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2566145 -

think of a tree.


--------------------
What?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Zero7a1]
    #2566158 -

"think of a tree"


I can not see the allusion you are refering too by saying this. Can you please clarify what your statment meant and how it had bearings on either side of the debate?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Swami]
    #2566183 -

Quote:
Hence why I used the variable "X" instead of an exact metric. Changability over time does not negate objective reality. No one claims that matter is static.



Let's pay attention to the language we've all come to agree on. Using variables for objective quantities...

Objective is to static
as
Subjective is to dynamic

Variable is to dynamic
as
Constant is to static

There fore

Variable is to subjective
as
Constant is to objective


As said right after my post, things aren't as concrete as they seem.


--------------------
"Plus one upvote +1..."
--- //
-- :meff:
  /l_l\/
--\-/----

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2566190 -

evolution has been proved in a labratory setting. try it yourself. cath a couple dozen fruit flys and put em in a jar with food. In a few weeks the species in your jar will be distinct from any other species of fruit fly.

ah... wont bother getting into the evolution debate deeper than that right now...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: PHARMAKOS]
    #2566192 -

After one glass of champagne, just ONE, mind you, I have absolutely no f'ing clue what you guys are talking about.  :grin:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2566194 -

That's why you need to drink four or five.


--------------------
"Plus one upvote +1..."
--- //
-- :meff:
  /l_l\/
--\-/----

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: Frog]
    #2566514 -

Have one more glass. I am on my way over.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: TheShroomHermit]
    #2566747 -

i think reality is a trap for the mind. if your strong enough to escape it then reality becomes a game. i've also come to understand that truth is almost always temporary. the sun relvolves around the earth, the earth is flat, my penis is huge....if everyone believes these thing does it make them true.

there is a tree falling in the woods and no one is around. when it hits the ground does it make a sound?

my answer. no, i personally never saw the tree or even knew about the forest. so, to me the forest never existed.


--------------------
where i walk, i walk alone. when i fight, i fight alone. i am no one and i am nothing. yet all is that i am.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2569074 -

There is a large body of evidence to suggest man decended from apes, but I never claimed that it had been proven. I claimed that evolution has been proven in a labratory setting (using organisms that have a short life cycle) We did not observe the evolution of humans... it happened before there was scientific method or even recorded history, for that matter.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Reality and Truth [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2569995 -

well i made that statement before i comprehended the rest of what you said. But i think a tree is a good representation for ancestry and evolution.

The genetic similliarities between a chimp and a human is very great... the genetic similliarity is like 98% i believe... but that is still nothing close or something to even jump over.

To say we descended from a chimp would be wrong, because we are much more evolved... If i may not speak to soon... You couldnt really have the chimp where it is now... and have humans where they are now... and still have humans come from chimps...

but think of it as a branch in the ancestry of our two diverse species.

Evolution or should i say adaptation? has been proven in a lab setting. Its called fruit flies.


--------------------
What?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com APE Liquid Culture For Sale, Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* objective and subjective states of mind Grav 2,384 5 03/18/03 11:21 AM
by Cherk
* Reality is your best friend
( 1 2 all )		 SkorpivoMusterion 5,770 35 10/06/10 02:47 PM
by trentinxd
* Truth?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )		 Anonymous 17,403 205 10/21/02 02:08 PM
by Anonymous
* ? "Illusion of Reality"
( 1 2 all )		 Sclorch 3,276 22 05/11/02 01:39 PM
by Catalysis
* Are morals subjective?
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 6,221 35 04/24/03 05:58 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* can you prove the existence of absolute, objective morality?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 Anonymous 22,475 157 12/21/04 06:31 AM
by deafpanda
* your mind COULD be creating reality
( 1 2 3 all )		 Moonshoe 7,345 47 07/17/04 03:04 AM
by Source
* Reality Test
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 3,511 34 02/16/02 05:19 PM
by ArCh_TemPlaR

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
4,523 topic views. 3 members, 0 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.041 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.