Home | Community | Message Board

HighDesertSpores.com
Please support our sponsors.


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: Left Coast Kratom Kratom Powder For Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   North Spore Bulk Substrate, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Swami's Annual Summation on Belief
    #2808753 - 06/19/04 02:36 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Gathering up all that I have learned in the past year, I offer this synopsis:

1. Belief connotes things not seen or evidenced else belief would not be required.

2. Belief is a good thing, even though it may be in something non-existent.

3. When "choosing" a belief system, it is best to borrow a pre-existing system without questioning where the earlier system came from.

4. Most people "choose" a system that is based on their prevailing culture rather than on any form of rationality.

5. Plasticity is extremely important. When reality fails to conform to the system, just add an exception clause.

6. Real-world "results" from following any system are not required (even though it is a "good" thing).

7. If one's belief system is challenged, it is normal (and expected) to be become angry and sometimes violent, even if the beliefs include non-violence.

8. It is most important to believe that ones' unfounded and unsubstantiated beliefs are more inportant and more valid (though they cannot be validated) than anothers'.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 30,876
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2808798 - 06/19/04 03:07 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

belief is just attitude with an index
attitude is plasticity


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineTwirling
Barred Spiral
Male

Registered: 02/03/03
Posts: 2,468
Last seen: 6 months, 14 days
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2808877 - 06/19/04 03:35 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I like to break beliefs to two basic types, theoretical, and dogmatic.



Theoretical beliefs are simply used to make hypotheses on the nature of things. It?s entirely necessary to develop theories on life, or else no new ideas are made, and therefore no progress. Science is the action of taking those theories and testing them out in certain conditions. Nothing can be proved as absolute, but only what is observable in given situations, so theories have to remain open to the possibility of not being 100% true (which is where laws and proofs allow for ideas to be based off of observable theories). When a person is open minded enough to not depend on theoretical beliefs, it?s much easier to test the ideas, or contemplate them without having to prove they?re right. A good scientist is able to recognize that being wrong is sometimes just as important as being right (or that disproving their ideas is just as important as getting the results they were looking for).

Dogmatic beliefs most often have a strong emotional attachment, since it conveys the idea of dependance on a belief for security. It often needs to be constantly reinforced and protected. Somehow people seem to be more convinced of these types of beliefs than of things which are observable.


Beliefs are a necessary component of human thinking. It?s how they?re approached which is important.


--------------------
The very nature of experience is ineffable; it transcends cognitive thought and intellectualized analysis. To be without experience is to be without an emotional knowledge of what the experience translates into. The desire for the understanding of what life is made of is the motivation that drives us all. Without it, in fear of the experiences what life can hold is among the greatest contradictions; to live in fear of death while not being alive.



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2808888 - 06/19/04 03:40 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Swami has not learned much has he :bitch:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 30,876
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Twirling]
    #2808933 - 06/19/04 04:19 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

if attitude is basic in every moment of consciousness, so then is belief.

attitude is basic since we move from one premise (assumption) to the next & unless we are keeping still, we are excercising the plasticity of life through expressions of attitude.

like postures, or poses - attitudes of body, also attitudes of mind - little filters seeking certain kinds of information and reassurance.

of course there is the very appealing pose or series of postures that the cynic can take - including poses claiming denial of any personal belief - but it is still a pose or a belief that the pose will be effective in some way.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: redgreenvines]
    #2808957 - 06/19/04 04:40 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2808967 - 06/19/04 04:46 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Swami has not learned much has he

What part did I get wrong?


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: redgreenvines]
    #2808975 - 06/19/04 04:51 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

of course there is the very appealing pose or series of postures that the cynic can take - including poses claiming denial of any personal belief - but it is still a pose or a belief that the pose will be effective in some way.

Nice double-speak and reference to non-existent content. It is hard to have any sort of discussion when you read (or assume) that which was not written. It is frequently more appealing to respond to one's erroneous image of the poster than the words that ACTUALLY appear.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2808992 - 06/19/04 05:04 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

No, you have been talking about the same stuff for years it has not changed, you stated you learned this during the course of this year.  Your idea's remind me of a stagnate swamp only good for breading mosquito's that take people's blood. :nutkick:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809024 - 06/19/04 05:25 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

No, you have been talking about the same stuff for years it has not changed
So inconsistency is a positive trait?

you stated you learned this during the course of this year
Learning is a good thing. It is a sign of growth.

Your idea's remind me of a stagnate swamp only good for breading mosquito's that take people's blood.
A thinking mind would respond with a coherent counter-point. Apparently, its it not possible for you to point out a flaw in my post so displaying your personal bias with an emotional rant is the absolute best that you have to offer fellow members.

See you next year. Bye, bye now.  :heart:


Edited by Swami (06/19/04 05:32 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 9 years, 11 days
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809034 - 06/19/04 05:33 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Gathering up all that I have learned in the past year, I offer this synopsis:

1. Belief connotes things not seen or evidenced else belief would not be required.


I believe the sun revolves around the earth, even though I can't see it when it is on the other side of the planet.

2. Belief is a good thing, even though it may be in something non-existent.

Implying that it is not a good thing to believe in something that, in your mind, does not exist?

3. When "choosing" a belief system, it is best to borrow a pre-existing system without questioning where the earlier system came from.

I think most people grow up with the belief system they own and don't learn to question it until later in life, if at all. I don't think most people grow up and THEN choose.

4. Most people "choose" a system that is based on their prevailing culture rather than on any form of rationality.

I'd say most belief systems, even if in something "non-existent" are very rational. The Christians believe in the bible. The bible is not irrational. (You guys are going to be so predictable on this one.)

5. Plasticity is extremely important. When reality fails to conform to the system, just add an exception clause.

I think most people try as best they can to be good people. Thank God there IS an exception clause.

6. Real-world "results" from following any system are not required (even though it is a "good" thing).

I don't understand what you mean by this.

7. If one's belief system is challenged, it is normal (and expected) to be become angry and sometimes violent, even if the beliefs include non-violence.

Actually, when someone gets angry, it's usually the person with no beliefs, imo.


8. It is most important to believe that ones' unfounded and unsubstantiated beliefs are more inportant and more valid (though they cannot be validated) than anothers'.

I haven't seen anyone on this forum tell anyone else that his or her beliefs are more important and valid than anyone else's. I usually see, however, those who don't believe in anything calling those who believe in something "fools".


--------------------
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 Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Frog]
    #2809083 - 06/19/04 06:02 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Ah, a poster with some balls! Er, I mean, some ovaries!

I believe the sun revolves around the earth, even though I can't see it when it is on the other side of the planet.
No, but by inference, you can see sunlight reflected from the moon and you may travel and note that the sun also shines on other parts of the world though at different times. This is evidentiary unlike a standard belief system.

Implying that it is not a good thing to believe in something that, in your mind, does not exist?
There is a saying in computerese: GIGO or garbage in = garbage out. By this I mean if one is basing one's actions or decisions on a falsehood (garbage in) then the decision or action will be wrong (garbage out) or will be right for the wrong reasons. Taking a non-religious belief for a moment, I generally crush poker opponents who make decisions based on how their luck or opponent's luck has been going.

I'd say most belief systems, even if in something "non-existent" are very rational. The Christians believe in the bible. The bible is not irrational. (You guys are going to be so predictable on this one.)
There certainly are glaring inconsistencies in the Bible which is indicative of a flawed system. The basic premise that it is the Word of God is supported only by the Bible itself. This is called self-referencing and is not a logical method of validation.

I think most people try as best they can to be good people. Thank God there IS an exception clause.
We miscommunicated on this one.

6. Real-world "results" from following any system are not required (even though it is a "good" thing).
If I do good acts then I will reap a reward. Sometimes yes; sometimes no.

When I pray I will get a positive result. Sometimes yes; sometimes no.

My marriage will be better if we are equally yoked. Nope, divorce cuts across all faith lines equally.

Actually, when someone gets angry, it's usually the person with no beliefs, imo.
See Hawk's earlier response. This is typical. How are you feeling when responding to this post? Loving, irritated or neutral?

I haven't seen anyone on this forum tell anyone else that his or her beliefs are more important and valid than anyone else's.
The words infidel and heathen were coined specifically as derogatory phrases towards non-believers or those of different faiths. This denotes a superior stance, does it not?

I usually see, however, those who don't believe in anything calling those who believe in something "fools".
We are all foolish in some areas and wise in others.

fool: One who is deficient in judgment, sense, or understanding

judgement:

1. The capacity to form an opinion by distinguishing and evaluating.

2. The capacity to assess situations or circumstances and draw sound conclusions; good sense.


Would you call it a foolish act for someone to bury their children in dirt to protect them from evil spirits?


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809124 - 06/19/04 06:24 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

All you did was take my argument out of context.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809140 - 06/19/04 06:30 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

How is a personal attack any form of argument? Three posts from you so far in this thread with zero content. Are you trying to impress the readers with your vacuousness?


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809155 - 06/19/04 06:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

You claim these are things you learned this year. I am merely stating that you have been saying these things much longer then a year. So how have you learned? My post count is my own business and my emotion is as well.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Onlinewrestler_az
PsiLLy BiLLy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/11/02
Posts: 13,301
Loc: day dreams of a mad man
Last seen: 1 minute, 55 seconds
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809167 - 06/19/04 06:39 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)


Quote:

All you did was take my argument out of context.






Your idea's remind me of a stagnate swamp only good for breading mosquito's that take people's blood.....how was this supposed to be taken?


--------------------
how's your WOW?





  Edited by yageman (04/20/06 4:20 PM) 


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: wrestler_az]
    #2809177 - 06/19/04 06:43 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I was not attacking him only his idea's so by using logic this would not be a personal attack.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Onlinewrestler_az
PsiLLy BiLLy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/11/02
Posts: 13,301
Loc: day dreams of a mad man
Last seen: 1 minute, 55 seconds
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809199 - 06/19/04 06:53 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

why do you feel the need to attack his ideas?


--------------------
how's your WOW?





  Edited by yageman (04/20/06 4:20 PM) 


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: wrestler_az]
    #2809214 - 06/19/04 06:58 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Because this forum is called spirituality and philosophy, not debunking spirituality using philosophy.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Onlinewrestler_az
PsiLLy BiLLy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/11/02
Posts: 13,301
Loc: day dreams of a mad man
Last seen: 1 minute, 55 seconds
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809220 - 06/19/04 07:04 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

its implied....


--------------------
how's your WOW?





  Edited by yageman (04/20/06 4:20 PM) 


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: wrestler_az]
    #2809244 - 06/19/04 07:12 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

If you think so. The subjective nature of this reality is implied as well. I gave my reasons and I stand by them. I have no more nits that need picking, but fire away.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: wrestler_az]
    #2809258 - 06/19/04 07:17 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Webster:

phi?los?o?phy    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (f-ls-f)
n. pl. phi?los?o?phies

1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.

2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

3. A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.

4. The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.


Hawk apparently wants philosophy without the pesky critical analysis or inquiry or logical reasoning.  :rolleyes:


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Edited by Swami (06/19/04 07:26 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809259 - 06/19/04 07:18 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Or just more subjective philosophy.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Onlinewrestler_az
PsiLLy BiLLy
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/11/02
Posts: 13,301
Loc: day dreams of a mad man
Last seen: 1 minute, 55 seconds
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809264 - 06/19/04 07:20 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

im not here to "nit-pick"....everyones got their beliefs, and ideas...yours are just as valid as swamis from where i stand, but how you argue them and your reasoning behind them i dont understand....


--------------------
how's your WOW?





  Edited by yageman (04/20/06 4:20 PM) 


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 30,876
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809309 - 06/19/04 07:38 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

so you are not agree-ing, or you are hiding the part that you proudly believe you can argue yourself out of any position. (a great ability)

The meaning of the very short logical leap I used, is that any expression of attitude involves belief (however momentary) in some premise. The next display of attitude can be denial, making the believer disappear and therefore free from persecution. I am assuming that all expressions have at least some attitude - so this is not personal (honest).

I note that quite a bit of persecuting of beliefs goes on. or is that "purse a cute-ing" (i.e. just for fun & profit).

OR

is the missingness of content the fact that I was not using a numeric iteration.
or at least following the established numerology of the first post in this thread?
(that might be getting personal, and I admit I did not harden my point with numbers.)

Quote:

Swami said:
of course there is the very appealing pose or series of postures that the cynic can take - including poses claiming denial of any personal belief - but it is still a pose or a belief that the pose will be effective in some way.

Nice double-speak and reference to non-existent content. It is hard to have any sort of discussion when you read (or assume) that which was not written. It is frequently more appealing to respond to one's erroneous image of the poster than the words that ACTUALLY appear.




Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: wrestler_az]
    #2809311 - 06/19/04 07:39 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

You can not debate subjective philosophy using objective methodology, the later will win out every time. Subjective philosophy's very nature is how it is interpreted to the individual and how he experiences it. The Greeks knew this and worked around it, and created different schools, Metaphysics, Epistemology etc. What is beautiful , what is love, these things were debated but using different methods then they would for say the answer to two plus two. Swami discredits everything spiritual using objective logic. Even if that method does not apply.


Edited by hawk (06/19/04 07:50 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809331 - 06/19/04 07:52 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

This thread is not about me, the ancient Greeks or how you disagree with Webster's very clear definition of philosophy.

It is about the nature and usage of belief systems.

Apparently your personal distaste for the thread-starter and ignorance of common terms is all you have for us today. Come on back when you have some meat to add to the broth.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809343 - 06/19/04 07:58 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

You are the one who seems to need to go back to school.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: redgreenvines]
    #2809349 - 06/19/04 07:59 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

If you respond directly to the topic at hand, I may respond to your boringly common dodge of "let's analyse the poster".

I note that quite a bit of persecuting of beliefs goes on
Persecuting is a strong word meaning what to you? It sounds to me like an emotional response to a valid question.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809358 - 06/19/04 08:02 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I guess those rules apply to you as well. You seem to want the last word go ahead.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/14/04
Posts: 10,679
Loc: On the Border
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809365 - 06/19/04 08:04 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

"When "choosing" a belief system, it is best to borrow a pre-existing system without questioning where the earlier system came from."

Wrong. You should always know the whys and wherefores of your belief system.

"Real-world "results" from following any system are not required (even though it is a "good" thing)."

Wrong. If you don't get real world results soon your belief is garbage. Getting "cool thoughts" to think about don't count as results.

"If one's belief system is challenged, it is normal (and expected) to be become angry and sometimes violent, even if the beliefs include non-violence."

If your philosophy has holes in it then revise it. I got one to add to your list...9. Generalize whenever possible in order to criticise the most people in the fewest words.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblehawk
Stranger
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 275
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809402 - 06/19/04 08:22 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

This thread is not about me, the ancient Greeks or how you disagree with Webster's very clear definition of philosophy.
It is about the nature and usage of belief systems.
Quote:

 




It is titled Swami's Annual Summation on Belief
so it has to involve you.  Did you forget your own post title?
:badcomputer:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #2809411 - 06/19/04 08:25 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Wrong. You should always know the whys and wherefores of your belief system.
Then why is are so many unable to explain how they came to such a conclusion? For example: millions believe in reincarnation because their culture does and millions believe in one life with a reward in heaven because their culture does. The why seems to be - "Because I was indoctrinated," even though the believer thinks there is more to it than that.

Wrong. If you don't get real world results soon your belief is garbage. Getting "cool thoughts" to think about don't count as results.
Karma is (despite John Lennon) is not instant and any causality is not apparent. Praying works about as often as not praying; yet the beleiver will quickly use the escape clause of "God does not always grant our wishes," when prayer fails. Discarding the belief is generally NOT an option.

If your philosophy has holes in it then revise it.
Thousands of personal attacks on these boards after I make a salient and unarguable point tell me otherwise.

I got one to add to your list...9. Generalize whenever possible in order to criticise the most people in the fewest words.
*Scribbles furiously in notepad.* Good one. That is a major time-saver.  :cool:


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/14/04
Posts: 10,679
Loc: On the Border
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809431 - 06/19/04 08:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Get caught messing around with your neighbor's wife and you will observe the karmic process. Then, tell me about causality. If you treat others like shit they will return the favor. Karma is indeed instant. I am gratified you found my suggestion useful. Personally I think attacking philosophical beliefs is a good thing. It helps me to shore up the edges and plug the holes. Actually when I came to this forum I was going to attack other peoples beliefs because I thought it would be populated by many butterfly heads. You beat me to it, though.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinedeff
mysticlove
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/01/04
Posts: 9,216
Loc: clarity Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 14 minutes
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #2809506 - 06/19/04 09:15 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Karma is not the idea of revenge. By retalliating against someone who "messes around with your wife", you are being just as morally unrighteous in your actions, or accumulation of karma. You do not own your wife, and if she agreed to "mess around" with some guy, you have no justification to show anger towards him. If anything, and even this isn't justified, but you should be mad at her for going against our society's bond of marriage and fucking another guy. This is not to say I believe fully in the karma 'system', but your example of it is pretty far off.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #2809718 - 06/19/04 10:42 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Get caught messing around with your neighbor's wife and you will observe the karmic process.
Aha! It is not the sin that is the problem, but the getting caught. I will always go over right after he leaves for work. That cuts down the odds significantly.

If you treat others like shit they will return the favor.
Treating people nice may or may not bring a favorable response. A neighbor let a down & out stranger into their home and the guy stayed there for a few days then murdered them both. Guess they burnt his toast or something...

Actually when I came to this forum I was going to attack other peoples beliefs because I thought it would be populated by many butterfly heads. You beat me to it, though.
*Swami whips out notebook and writes down "butterfly heads"* Keep 'em coming.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: hawk]
    #2809730 - 06/19/04 10:47 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

is titled Swami's Annual Summation on Belief so it has to involve you.

Uh huh. Regardless of title, virtually all of the thread-starters are offering their own opinion. Were you really unaware of this self-evident fact? Does some entity take you over when you write so that the thoughts expressed are not your own?


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisiblePhencyclidine
Molecule

Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 2,915
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809915 - 06/20/04 12:17 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
3. When "choosing" a belief system, it is best to borrow a pre-existing system without questioning where the earlier system came from.




This presupposed that one accepts the axiom that a believe system can pre-exist. This would not be compatible with belief systems that cannot consider it axiomatic that belief systems can or have pre-existed.

Also, why is this best?

Quote:

4. Most people "choose" a system that is based on their prevailing culture rather than on any form of rationality.




What would comprise a rational belief system?

Quote:

5. Plasticity is extremely important. When reality fails to conform to the system, just add an exception clause.




This presupposes that one can actually between actual reality and the 'reality' that one infers or deduces via one's axioms.

For example, I adhere to the philosophy of science and I conclude that everything that I saw under the influence of hallucinogens which is not consistent with my scientific knowledge of the world was simply a hallucination or delusion. This could be an incorrect conclusion if it is later found that my experiences did have an explanation not currently known to me or if the axioms of science are invalid. On the other hand, the conclusion could be correct.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Phencyclidine]
    #2809966 - 06/20/04 12:34 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Awww shit! A post that I cannot make a one-liner response to. Thanksalot. I will need to get stoned and get back to you on this.  :stoned:


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisiblePhencyclidine
Molecule

Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 2,915
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2809982 - 06/20/04 12:40 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Swami, I wouldn't dishonour your critical thinking with a "you're stupid."  When I saw the post, I asked myself, "Do I dare take on Swami?" :wink:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/14/04
Posts: 10,679
Loc: On the Border
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: deff]
    #2809994 - 06/20/04 12:43 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Karma ain't got nothing to do with revenge. It means when you send it out it always comes back. My example was a humerous simplification. Piss poor human beings establish negative emotional bank accounts with so many people that eventually the poor life they lead comes to haunt them. Another example is that if you don't maintain your car it breaks down frequently and becomes unreliable. You don't need reincarnation to have karma. It is the law of the jungle.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Phencyclidine]
    #2810013 - 06/20/04 12:48 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

*Swami bows humbly to a worthy adversary*

I only bark, but do not bite. I think most would be shocked to find that I do not argue in "real-life". Only had one fight with my last girlfriend of many years and only when she was incredibly stressed out. And no, I did not dominate or intimidate her (hard to do against a PhD in family counseling anyhow - bet that surprises Markos, heh! heh!), but treated her as an equal.

Will tackle your post when I am not in a silly mood. Wait, that could be a good long while.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Frog]
    #2810034 - 06/20/04 12:56 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

I believe the sun revolves around the earth, even though I can't see it when it is on the other side of the planet.



Still skeptical about the whole Galileo thing?


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


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 9 years, 11 days
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2810191 - 06/20/04 02:18 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Swami said:Ah, a poster with some balls! Er, I mean, some ovaries!

And they're armed and dangerous...  :grin:

No, but by inference, you can see sunlight reflected from the moon and you may travel and note that the sun also shines on other parts of the world though at different times. This is evidentiary unlike a standard belief system.

Actually, I made a mistake.  The earth revolves around the sun.  Swami, I can't believe you let me get away with that one.  :grin:

But still, the point is that we don't always have scientific explanations for everything.  There have been times in history where people believed things that were later proven or disproven, such as why it rained or why there were comets or streaks of smoke in the sky.  Usually these things were attributed to angry or benevolent gods, or "signs". 

A belief is just a belief.  It doesn't necessarily have to be true.  Some beliefs are innocuous, like someone believing in God and living according to the standards laid out in the bible. 

Some are dangerous, like the beliefs of the Muslims that recently beheaded that American on Friday. 

There is a saying in computerese: GIGO or garbage in = garbage out. By this I mean if one is basing one's actions or decisions on a falsehood (garbage in) then the decision or action will be wrong (garbage out) or will be right for the wrong reasons. Taking a non-religious belief for a moment, I generally crush poker opponents who make decisions based on how their luck or opponent's luck has been going.

But who is to prove that what goes in is garbage?  I've been told that I believe in fairy stories.  I guess that would also mean that what I believe is based on garbage going in, right? 

So taking me as an example...I believe that God is taking care of me based on things that have happened in my life.  Consequently, I have a sense of security that I don't have to worry.  Worry is unnecessary and can make someone sick.  So then maybe having a belief that God is taking care of me isn't so bad. 

There certainly are glaring inconsistencies in the Bible which is indicative of a flawed system. The basic premise that it is the Word of God is supported only by the Bible itself. This is called self-referencing and is not a logical method of validation.

Yes, there are flaws in the bible.  And yes, the bible could be a tautology.  Belief in God is an act of faith.  But I'm talking about the basic tenets of the bible, such as "love thy neighbor", etc.  What's wrong with that?  If someone looks at the bible rationally, and doesn't distort the message taught therein, it's not such a bad way to live one's life. 

We miscommunicated on this one.

6. Real-world "results" from following any system are not required (even though it is a "good" thing).
If I do good acts then I will reap a reward. Sometimes yes; sometimes no.


Well, we can't always see the big picture.  I was reminded of a story in that book I was reading, that you said you had also read, "Journey of a Peaceful Warrior" or something like that, by Dan Millman. 

I probably will not get the story exactly right, but you'll get the idea.  He tells an old story about an old farmer who has a son and one day their only horse runs away.  The townspeople all cry "what a terrible thing".  The farmer says, "Good or bad?  Who's to say?"

About a week later, the horse comes back, bringing with it about 5 or 6 wild horses. The townspeople all cry "what a wonderful thing."  The farmer says, "Good or bad?  Who's to say?"

About a week later, the son breaks his leg while he is breaking the wild horses.  es. The townspeople all cry "what a terrible thing."  The farmer says, "Good or bad?  Who's to say?"

About a week later, the king's men come marching through the town, drafting all the eligible young men to fight in a war.  Because the son had just recently broken his leg, he was not taken.

But in general, if we do good, we will reap what appears to be rewards.  And if we do bad, we will reap what appears to be just desserts.  But we don?t know if those rewards are really rewards, or if the desserts are truly desserts.  Sometimes we find out much later that the bad we reaped as a result of doing something good was actually a good thing.

My marriage will be better if we are equally yoked. Nope, divorce cuts across all faith lines equally.

I agree with two people being equally yoked, but not just in religious beliefs or nonbeliefs.  Socio-economics, parts of the country, education, etc.  The more two people have in common, the mjore likely they will not end in divorce, but I could be wrong.  Maybe Markos will come in and set me straight.

See Hawk's earlier response. This is typical. How are you feeling when responding to this post? Loving, irritated or neutral?

I used to have hurt feelings when people appeared to attack me.  I had to learn through it.  I?m not being attacked.  These are just your opinions and beliefs and whatever.  You DO tend to generalize a bit.  So, I?ll just have to take these opportunities to set you straight.  :grin:


The words infidel and heathen were coined specifically as derogatory phrases towards non-believers or those of different faiths. This denotes a superior stance, does it not?


I have not seen Christians on this forum call nonbelievers or those of different faiths any names.  I may have missed  it.  I personally don?t know why people criticize each other for their beliefs.  Might be out of fear. 

We are all foolish in some areas and wise in others.

fool: One who is deficient in judgment, sense, or understanding

judgement:

1. The capacity to form an opinion by distinguishing and evaluating.

2. The capacity to assess situations or circumstances and draw sound conclusions; good sense.

Would you call it a foolish act for someone to bury their children in dirt to protect them from evil spirits?


Yes, but as I stated above, some people have beliefs that are dangerous.  Most are innocuous.  I believe in God, and the Bible, and the Universe, and karma.  I am not going to bury my children in dirt to protect them from evil spirits.  Some people have off-balanced brains, regardless of their beliefs.  Again, generalizations aren?t very helpful.


--------------------
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 Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Frog]
    #2810268 - 06/20/04 03:02 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I guess that would also mean that what I believe is based on garbage going in, right?
Ah, tender froglet, let us reread my line together, shall we? "...if one is basing one's actions or decisions on a falsehood..." This is a conditional statement and not a comment on you.

You DO tend to generalize a bit.
Huh? You prefer that I name names and really get personal? Please elaborate.

Worry is unnecessary and can make someone sick.
True enough. Do you think there are people who rarely worry without any belief in a deity? The way to drop worry is to drop worry.

But I'm talking about the basic tenets of the bible, such as "love thy neighbor", etc. What's wrong with that?
Nothing, unless you get caught. *Ba doom boom* Seriously then, I must also be a believer.

Yes, but as I stated above, some people have beliefs that are dangerous. Most are innocuous.
I find Bush's interpretation of Christianity to be incredibly dangerous. "God told me to go to War with Iraq," (and bomb and kill civilians while bankrupting America and turning many nations against the USA, while making my buddies and I even more wealthy (see Halliburton wins $8 billion contract)... That is the trouble with believing one is infallible and has right on their side.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Edited by Swami (06/20/04 04:16 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/14/04
Posts: 10,679
Loc: On the Border
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2810948 - 06/20/04 12:40 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

"You DO tend to generalize a bit"

All generalizations are false!


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 9 years, 11 days
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2811308 - 06/20/04 03:48 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Ah, tender froglet, let us reread my line together, shall we? "...if one is basing one's actions or decisions on a falsehood..." This is conditional statement and not a comment on you.

No, I wasn't being tender.  I was sticking to me, but as if I was someone else with my beliefs.  I am taking your statement and applying it to me, based on your generalizations.  Aren't you in essence saying that when someone believes in the bible and all that God stuff, that it's garbage in, and therefore garbage out, such as in my case, since that is what I believe?


Huh? You prefer that I name names and really get personal? Please elaborate.


Well, look at your first post:

Quote:

Gathering up all that I have learned in the past year, I offer this synopsis:

1. Belief connotes things not seen or evidenced else belief would not be required.

2. Belief is a good thing, even though it may be in something non-existent.

3. When "choosing" a belief system, it is best to borrow a pre-existing system without questioning where the earlier system came from.

4. Most people "choose" a system that is based on their prevailing culture rather than on any form of rationality.

5. Plasticity is extremely important. When reality fails to conform to the system, just add an exception clause.

6. Real-world "results" from following any system are not required (even though it is a "good" thing).

7. If one's belief system is challenged, it is normal (and expected) to be become angry and sometimes violent, even if the beliefs include non-violence.

8. It is most important to believe that ones' unfounded and unsubstantiated beliefs are more inportant and more valid (though they cannot be validated) than anothers'.




Those are major generalizations.  There are many people that post on this forum who have explained why they have come to believe the way they believe. You simply find insufficient evidence upon which these people base their beliefs.  But this doesn't mean that great care and research and study and talking to others didn't go into the choices people made. 

There are people who have even admitted that there is no real basis for their beliefs, but they based their choice to believe on what they have studied so far.

See, you can't generalize about every one on this forum.  When you post like that, it's likely to provoke heated responses because you have generalized about one type of individual who believes out of ignorance and extrapolated that to the population of believers in general. 


Do you think there are people who rarely worry without any belief in a deity? The way to drop worry is to drop worry.


I agree, and I learned in one of my last threads that a belief in God or some higher power or deity or whatever is not necessary to find peace. 

My point is that my belief in God and the Universe and all things working together, good or bad, gave me peace of mind.  So in my case, my beliefs serve me well, even if in your opinion my beliefs are not founded in substantive evidence.

But I'm talking about the basic tenets of the bible, such as "love thy neighbor", etc. What's wrong with that?
Nothing, unless you get caught. *Ba doom boom* Seriously then, I must also be a believer.


*yawn*


I find Bush's interpretation of Christianity to be incredibly dangerous. "God told me to go to War with Iraq," (and bomb and kill civilians while bankrupting America and turning many nations against the USA, while making my buddies and I even more wealthy (see Halliburton wins $8 billion contract)... That is the trouble with believing one is infallible and has right on their side.


Yes, that would be dangerous.  But again, everything happens for a reason.  Maybe Bush's actions are what we needed to get WWIII going so that 2012 can be implemented.  :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 Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Frog]
    #2811345 - 06/20/04 04:22 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Aren't you in essence saying that when someone believes in the bible and all that God stuff, that it's garbage in, and therefore garbage out, such as in my case, since that is what I believe?

My statement is simple and needs no great interpretation. Erroneous input = erroneous output. Ta da! If you choose to drive over the mountains in winter based on a false clear weather report then you may get stranded in a blizzard.

If I did not generalize, I would have written a 20,000 page report, so a few short-cuts were taken.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 30,876
if you can drown in logic - why take a boat? [Re: Swami]
    #2811402 - 06/20/04 05:16 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

G-I-G-O
linear processing works like that(, I write software for a living.)
multiple linear processing approaches life. (if you can synchronize the threads)
massively parallel linear processing does even better for stuff that is moving on a known trajectory. (again assumptions will now be made to get interactive thread synchronization)

then we get to how do you manage if you don't have time to type into a blog and ask some swami for the truth, and when what is happenning is more complex than a single massively parallel task description.

so.
some additional assumptions will be applied from experience or memory or legend.

this can be dangerous unless you know how to use assumptions like stepping stones to traverse the unknown, and then continue again on terra firma.

the fact of the matter is that for terra firma, and linear processing things are easy to lock down, but if you have to cross the water you may need a boat.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 9 years, 11 days
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Swami]
    #2811463 - 06/20/04 05:52 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
Aren't you in essence saying that when someone believes in the bible and all that God stuff, that it's garbage in, and therefore garbage out, such as in my case, since that is what I believe?

My statement is simple and needs no great interpretation. Erroneous input = erroneous output. Ta da! If you choose to drive over the mountains in winter based on a false clear weather report then you may get stranded in a blizzard.

If I did not generalize, I would have written a 20,000 page report, so a few short-cuts were taken.




Okay, then be more specific in this way:

What is the erroneous input, and what is the consequential erroneous output?


--------------------
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 Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/14/04
Posts: 10,679
Loc: On the Border
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief *DELETED* [Re: Frog]
    #2812253 - 06/20/04 11:47 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Post deleted by Huehuecoyotl


Edited by Huehuecoyotl (06/20/04 11:48 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineFrog
Warrior
Female User Gallery

Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 9 years, 11 days
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #2812294 - 06/20/04 11:55 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Yeah, but it was me who said it.  And imo, everything happens for a reason, mystical or not.  :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 Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHuehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/14/04
Posts: 10,679
Loc: On the Border
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Frog]
    #2812370 - 06/21/04 12:12 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Very sorry for the mistake. I'm trying to keep up with an install Debian Linux on another box while making the post. I thought I saw Swami's name on it and thought I saw a major error on his part considering his position. Anyway the post has been corrected.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Swami's Annual Summation on Belief [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #2812574 - 06/21/04 01:10 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

If I ever made such a mistake, then in true Samurai fashion, I would have to end my life.


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



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Left Coast Kratom Kratom Powder For Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   North Spore Bulk Substrate, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Swami
( 1 2 3 all )
Anonymous 2,888 48 07/10/02 03:12 AM
by MAIA
* Summation of What I have Learned
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 3,241 58 12/14/04 12:07 PM
by Sclorch
* Persecution and Belief Swami 1,967 14 07/21/02 08:29 AM
by RebelSteve33
* Co-creating the Swami Persona
( 1 2 all )
Swami 2,366 25 03/27/05 04:02 AM
by uriahchase
* Personal belief systems
( 1 2 all )
Frog 2,841 34 12/20/03 07:40 PM
by Frog
* Guess Swami's Sign
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 5,023 43 03/07/02 01:04 AM
by saturnalone
* Swami/Shroomism relations
( 1 2 3 4 all )
LearyfanS 5,858 68 03/20/02 09:32 PM
by Swami
* Affirmations: Summation
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 3,213 54 12/03/04 07:29 PM
by Moonshoe

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,656 topic views. 1 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2022 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.051 seconds spending 0.012 seconds on 19 queries.