tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post8378696780513457883..comments2023-07-21T03:05:37.043-07:00Comments on Godless Gross: Mind, Body, Spirit MoronsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger254125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-40989059453186850182013-06-18T06:23:51.040-07:002013-06-18T06:23:51.040-07:00“I am sure that you would like us to forget about ...“I am sure that you would like us to forget about all the bizarre claims that Swedenborg made, but the fact remains that he claimed to have spoken to a variety of spirits of dead people and spirits from other planets. I know that you want to pretend that these claims are not indicative of a serious mental disorder, but your attempts to sweep the matter under the carpet are not going to work.” (Long John Silver6:02 PM)<br /><br />I've never attempted to “sweep the matter under the carpet” Long John. I doubt if there ever was a saner, more rational person than Swedenborg (that's an opinion from having read his work widely and having gotten a grasp on his system of scientific, philosophical and theological thought). Far smarter people than me have come to a similar conclusion – one was mentioned earlier in this blog thread – namely Helen Keller. RalphH 18/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-41994515720947429242013-06-18T06:20:22.087-07:002013-06-18T06:20:22.087-07:00Long John, I don't deal in “ghosts”, I talk ab...Long John, I don't deal in “ghosts”, I talk about spirits. If you'd said 'Aristotle's spirit I would have responded differently.<br />And no, it's not about "Don't call us, we'll call you". The general rule is that spirits (of the 'departed') are no more consciously aware of us than we are of them. Good spirits (of heaven or heaven bound) have no desire to reconnect with their earth life. They are aware of having moved on to a better 'place'/aspect or dimension of life and are content. <br /><br />Evil spirits (guess where they 'reside') would love to reconnect because they can control and enslave people using their willing bodied to carry out their evil ends. When people (like the witch of Endor in the Saul story or using a ouija board in a séance) try to contact the spirit world, the odds are that if the contact works it will be with an evil spirit masquerading as the spirit being invited (if it were a good spirit being sought – as was the case with Samuel in the Saul story).<br /><br />The reason God contacts people is that otherwise (since the fall of mankind and the advent of evil) they couldn't and wouldn't know about Him. Evil cannot see/understand good (it's like looking from darkness into a brilliant light) but Good can see/understand evil (because the light dispels the darkness. <br /><br />Contact is made by means of angels (which is another word for a messenger) to people in the right frame of mind (by dream or vision) to receive such a visitation. Christians believe that a more immediate contact was made in the person of Jesus Christ (who is claimed to have been God incarnate/God in the flesh).RalphH 18/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-28176767156991695342013-06-17T18:02:22.354-07:002013-06-17T18:02:22.354-07:00You know perfectly well what I meant by "Aris...You know perfectly well what I meant by "Aristotle's ghost" Ralph. At least try to discuss the matter honestly. I am sure that you would like us to forget about all the bizarre claims that Swedenborg made, but the fact remains that he claimed to have spoken to a variety of spirits of dead people and spirits from other planets. I know that you want to pretend that these claims are not indicative of a serious mental disorder, but your attempts to sweep the matter under the carpet are not going to work.<br /><br />You suggest that the key distinction is between "self-sought and self initiated spirit contact and "God initiated and gifted contact". So the key message from God on the topic is - "Don't call us, we'll call you"? I wasn't discussing any conversations that Swedenborg may have (allegedly) had with God anyway, so I'm not sure how your claims are relevant. I haven't noticed any mentions of Swedenborg talking directly to God - although I think he did claim to have had a few conversations with some of the disciples. How was his conversation with Aristotle "God initiated"? Do we assume that God asked Aristotle to go and have a chat with him?Long John Silvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-47863918399286723622013-06-17T16:38:15.120-07:002013-06-17T16:38:15.120-07:00You know perfectly well what the reference to &quo...You know perfectly well what the reference to "Aristotle's ghost" was about - a link was provided earlier to Swedenborg's discussions with Aristotle.<br />So the key difference is between "self-sought and self initiated" contact and "God initiated and gifted contact"? Extraordinary. This is the first time I have ever seen a religious teaching based on the premise of "Don't call us, we'll call you".<br /><br />Out of curiosity, do you have some method for telling the difference between those who have received a divine revelation and those who are just hallucinating as a result of mental illness or drugs?Long John Silvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-73469722750646163612013-06-17T06:55:35.463-07:002013-06-17T06:55:35.463-07:00“OK, how is Swedenborg (allegedly) talking to Merc...“OK, how is Swedenborg (allegedly) talking to Mercurian spirits & Aristotle's ghost different to contacting the spirit world from the "natural physical world"?” (Long John Silver2:45 AM)<br /><br />Let's forget about “Aristotle's ghost” whatever that is Long John. I already explained the difference between spiritualism (spirit contact through self-sought and self initiated natural, 'scientific' means) and revelation (God initiated and gifted contact to chosen individuals for the purpose of education in spiritual matters).<br />RalphH 17/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-7742413937765623112013-06-16T19:16:21.924-07:002013-06-16T19:16:21.924-07:00"OK Stranger, I was wrong. I didn't know ..."OK Stranger, I was wrong. I didn't know the meaning of the word. I'd only heard it in connection with science fiction stories and assumed. So what"<br /><br />Well for a start it shows you are only too willing to assume things and are not willing to educate yourself on subjects you know nothing about.<br /><br />"I don't see any reason for your arrogant, disparaging outburst. "<br /><br />Yes we know you see nothing wrong in making things up, some of us do see somethign wrong in that.<br /><br />" What about your amazing straw-man ideas about God (e.g your next post)?"<br /><br />They aren't a straw-man, your insistence that God doesn't kill people is though.Strangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17489942433860007521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-91710060401568799102013-06-16T19:13:24.962-07:002013-06-16T19:13:24.962-07:00"Maybe you could explain how you “w(ere)n'..."Maybe you could explain how you “w(ere)n't talking about God” when your statement began 'God knows the future …. ergo ….'."<br /><br />I was talking about people not having free will.<br /><br />"Now we come to your wrong assumptions Stranger. God is Almighty. Ergo (thanks for introducing that word) He cannot be Creator and destroyer (there's nothing almighty about destruction"<br /><br />How the hell did you come to that stupid conclusion. Almighty does not mean not being able to destroy. <br />" "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." There's also examples of him destroying objects and killing people and animals. He also created the Devil who he knew would turn evil.<br /><br />"Ergo, the statements in revelation where God is said to order or do killing are obviously not to be taken literally but to be understood in a different context."<br /><br />Ergo you have to change the word of God to suit your even more childish view of him.<br /><br />"I already explained that. Despite your inability or unwillingness to understand, there is no deterministic connection between the two."<br /><br />Ralph you are still incapable of, or unwilling to, understand that you can't do anything that God doesn't already know you will do, ergo you have no free will.Strangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17489942433860007521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-82829459768519127792013-06-16T05:06:25.779-07:002013-06-16T05:06:25.779-07:00“I wasn't talking about God, and it's you ...“I wasn't talking about God, and it's you with the confused idea.” (Stranger11:54 PM)<br /><br />Maybe you could explain how you “w(ere)n't talking about God” when your statement began 'God knows the future …. ergo ….'.<br /><br />“You either have to pretend that killing babies is a good thing because God ordered it (or did it himself) or that the Israelites had the wrong idea about God, even though he appeared to them and told them to do nasty things.”<br /><br />Now we come to your wrong assumptions Stranger. God is Almighty. Ergo (thanks for introducing that word) He cannot be Creator and destroyer (there's nothing almighty about destruction – why would one create, from good will and purpose, something of use and beauty and then do a complete flip and destroy it). <br /><br />He cannot be Love and hate. The two are diametrically opposed and cannot exist together in an unchangeable, eternal being (which Almighty implies). <br /><br />Ergo, the statements in revelation where God is said to order or do killing are obviously not to be taken literally but to be understood in a different context.<br /><br />“Ralph you are still incapable of, or unwilling to, understand that you can't do anything that God doesn't already know you will do, ergo you have no free will.”<br /><br />I already explained that. Despite your inability or unwillingness to understand, there is no deterministic connection between the two.RalphH 16/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-32291325353768400702013-06-16T05:03:48.154-07:002013-06-16T05:03:48.154-07:00“Do you even know what the term cyborg means? You&...“Do you even know what the term cyborg means? You've just told everyone with a cochlear implant they aren't spiritual.<br />Were you born amazingly dumb or did you have to work at it?” (Stranger11:58 PM)<br /><br />OK Stranger, I was wrong. I didn't know the meaning of the word. I'd only heard it in connection with science fiction stories and assumed. So what? I don't see any reason for your arrogant, disparaging outburst. Have you never made a mistake? What about your amazing straw-man ideas about God (e.g your next post)? RalphH 16/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-28218644631618789842013-06-16T02:45:32.007-07:002013-06-16T02:45:32.007-07:00"Long John, spiritualism is when people attem..."Long John, spiritualism is when people attempt to contact the spirit world from below/i.e. the natural physical world we live in."<br />OK, how is Swedenborg (allegedly) talking to Mercurian spirits & Aristotle's ghost different to contacting the spirit world from the "natural physical world"?Long John Silvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-30859613257513189812013-06-16T00:30:45.856-07:002013-06-16T00:30:45.856-07:00Robin,
If that is the definition of induction tha...Robin,<br /><br />If that is the definition of induction that we are going with, then what the hell is Malcolm talking about when he says that science lost its way when it stopped using induction?boofnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-12925053999253077962013-06-15T23:58:31.812-07:002013-06-15T23:58:31.812-07:00"There is nothing spiritual about a cyborg. I..."There is nothing spiritual about a cyborg. It's an invention of the human imagination."<br /><br />Do you even know what the term cyborg means? You've just told everyone with a cochlear implant they aren't spiritual.<br />Were you born amazingly dumb or did you have to work at it?<br /><br />Strangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17489942433860007521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-39872215880826626112013-06-15T23:54:17.829-07:002013-06-15T23:54:17.829-07:00"Stranger, you have a confused idea of God. &..."Stranger, you have a confused idea of God. "<br /><br />I wasn't talking about God, and it's you with the confused idea. You either have to pretend that killing babies is a good thing because God ordered it (or did it himself) or that the Israelites had the wrong idea about God, even though he appeared to them and told them to do nasty things.<br /><br />"God's foreknowledge of the future does not effect human free-will because humans themselves do not have that knowledge so remain in complete freedom."<br /><br />Ralph you are still incapable of, or unwilling to, understand that you can't do anything that God doesn't already know you will do, ergo you have no free will.Strangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17489942433860007521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-90186410005093880072013-06-15T22:34:59.560-07:002013-06-15T22:34:59.560-07:00“God knows the future Ralph, ergo there is no free...“God knows the future Ralph, ergo there is no free will.” (Stranger5:35 PM)<br /><br />Stranger, you have a confused idea of God. God does not have free-will as humans do (to choose between good and evil inclinations and inspiration that they receive from an outside source. God is Will/Love – the being and source of all good so choice is not an option. <br /><br />God's foreknowledge of the future does not effect human free-will because humans themselves do not have that knowledge so remain in complete freedom. RalphH 13/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-55603808520072446442013-06-15T22:32:47.382-07:002013-06-15T22:32:47.382-07:00“*"Christians are warned not to dabble in spi...“*"Christians are warned not to dabble in spiritualism."* (RalphH)<br />Swedenborg's conversations with spirits are given a special exemption?” (Long John Silver4:20 PM)<br /><br />Long John, spiritualism is when people attempt to contact the spirit world from below/i.e. the natural physical world we live in. (King Saul in my citation was an example.) Revelation (God speaking directly in dreams or by an internal dictate is of an entirely different nature. It comes from above/within (not used as spatial terms) and is not actively sought. <br /><br />“*"Difficult though life may be at times, it is far better to be a human being than a robot."* ((RalphH)<br />How about being a cyborg? Best of both worlds.”<br /><br />There is nothing spiritual about a cyborg. It's an invention of the human imagination.RalphH 13/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-79425182510658548302013-06-15T17:35:58.865-07:002013-06-15T17:35:58.865-07:00"Christians are warned not to dabble in spiri..."Christians are warned not to dabble in spiritualism (1Samuel 48:5-14) because it is evil to want to know the future. If one did there could be no free-will and hence no choice between good and evil. "<br /><br />God knows the future Ralph, ergo there is no free will.Strangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17489942433860007521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-40023571725975713072013-06-15T16:20:59.757-07:002013-06-15T16:20:59.757-07:00"There is a mix of exhibitors at the MBS from..."There is a mix of exhibitors at the MBS from the serious and helpful to the frauds and charlatans."<br />Maybe there is a mix of the genuinely deluded and those who are cynically preying on the deluded. I doubt whether there are many there who could be considered as "helpful".<br /><br />"One just needs to use their common-sense and do their best to separate the wheat from the chaff."<br />You will have to forgive my scepticism at the implication that you are capable of sorting wheat from chaff.<br /><br />"There is much psychic nonsense . . ."<br />Ralph, at least make us work for it.<br /><br />"Christians are warned not to dabble in spiritualism."<br />Swedenborg's conversations with spirits are given a special exemption?<br /><br />"Difficult though life may be at times, it is far better to be a human being than a robot."<br />How about being a cyborg? Best of both worlds.Long John Silvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-28860667621004243652013-06-15T14:48:59.583-07:002013-06-15T14:48:59.583-07:00Dick, I went to the MBS festival but I wouldn'...Dick, I went to the MBS festival but I wouldn't have spent more than half an hour there so it must have been on a different day or at a different time from your visit. I couldn't have missed that jumper. <br /><br />It's not really my scene but a friend had a stall there so I went to check it out and then moved on to the HIA Sydney Home Show next door. That's more my scene.<br /><br />I agree with one of Martin C's early comments. There is a mix of exhibitors at the MBS from the serious and helpful to the frauds and charlatans. One just needs to use their common-sense and do their best to separate the wheat from the chaff. There is much to be learned from alternative medicine, herbal lore and there also were some religious ideas represented.<br /><br />I'm always sceptical at the close-minded scepticism of atheists and the 'scientific establishment'. There is much psychic nonsense but on the other hand we really do know very little about the inner life and how it effects the external. <br /><br />Christians are warned not to dabble in spiritualism (1Samuel 48:5-14) because it is evil to want to know the future. If one did there could be no free-will and hence no choice between good and evil. Difficult though life may be at times, it is far better to be a human being than a robot.RalphH 16/06noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-1295718714146726342013-06-14T18:53:31.125-07:002013-06-14T18:53:31.125-07:00Zed wrote: "Step 1 - Go to this webpage.
htt...Zed wrote: "Step 1 - Go to this webpage.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pain&action=edit "<br /><br />I am a little busy with:<br /><br />http://fixstuff.com.zz/index.php?ojbect=tide&action=gobackRobinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015911138886238144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-38440506502146514622013-06-14T18:48:38.862-07:002013-06-14T18:48:38.862-07:00You would get a lot more bored before you finished...You would get a lot more bored before you finished.<br /><br />I would say it was more of a case of Chinese whispers - I found a couple books in Google search where the author mentions old civilizations who believed that pain was evil spirits entering the body through wounds and then, in the same paragraph, mention Aristotle's theory.<br /><br />I think that, at some stage, someone has simply misread this and attributed the evil spirit belief to Aristotle and subsequent authors have copied the error.<br /><br />In this case I can't blame the Wikipedia effect since there are some perfectly respectable authors who have repeated this.<br /><br />But I am pretty sure that Aristotle didn't say it.Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015911138886238144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-1286293167595809142013-06-14T03:25:20.163-07:002013-06-14T03:25:20.163-07:00Got bored with the search. I'm wondering wheth...Got bored with the search. I'm wondering whether "spirit" is being mis-translated?Long John Silvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-46311138709207809262013-06-14T02:56:11.291-07:002013-06-14T02:56:11.291-07:00The above sounds a little more like it.
I am pret...The above sounds a little more like it.<br /><br />I am pretty sure that the search for a primary document where Aristotle attributes pain, or anything, to evil spirits would be a wild goose chase.<br /><br />It seems a very un-Aristotle thing to say.Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015911138886238144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-25834409371635600352013-06-14T01:40:26.952-07:002013-06-14T01:40:26.952-07:00"Where did I say that Dawkins had not given a..."Where did I say that Dawkins had not given anything original to science?"<br /><br />‘Here is one for *Dawkins*, a rather meagre publishing record on the academic side and *nothing* that would seem to qualify as an *original* discovery.’Strangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17489942433860007521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-26915397278644678052013-06-14T00:12:12.763-07:002013-06-14T00:12:12.763-07:00Robin: ... why, if EP was an original scientific d...Robin: ... why, if EP was an original scientific discovery that influenced a generation of ethologists then why was Dawkins under the impression in 2004, 26 years after he had first introduced the concept, that it had never been the subject of research and still only speculation.<br /><br />I don’t know why. As far as I’m concerned, EP has been a useful tool for ethologists from the day the book was published in 1982. And Phil Hunter (‘Extended Phenotype Redux’, Nature), among others, would agree with me.<br /><br />In the closing paragraphs of the 2004 paper from which you drew your quote RD outlines his ‘pipedream’ for EP. It’s very ambitious. EP certainly hasn’t lived up to that ideal and probably never will. Perhaps RD’s comments were an expression of his about this rather than disappointment that nothing had been achieved, because that is plainly not true.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15975119.post-42428536840076574632013-06-13T21:51:06.438-07:002013-06-13T21:51:06.438-07:00Still looking. this interested me (the idea that t...Still looking. this interested me (the idea that the heart does something other than pump blood is another link between Ralph & Mal):<br />"For Aristotle the brain had no direct function in sensory processes for the<br />heart was the center of all sensory perception. Aristotle believed the brains function was to produce cool secretions which cooled the hot air and blood arising from the heart. Pain was an increase in one of the 5 senses, especially touch. Pain was caused by excess of vital heat. Like touch, pain arose in the end organs of the flesh and was conveyed by blood to the heart. Aristotle's subsequent successors cast serious doubts on their masters views. However anatomical evidence that the brain was part<br />of the nervous system was not demonstrated until 50 to 75 years later by Herophilus (335 - 280 BC) and Erasistratus (310 - 250 BC). "<br /><br />http://indianapainsociety.org/fileuploads/Articles/History%20of%20pain.pdfLong John Silvernoreply@blogger.com