Religion Do you believe in Heaven and Hell?

Maciamo said:
First of all, going to this "paralell dimension" implies that we have a soul, which I don't believe in, because (neuro)science can now explain exactly why we alive, how, and how we feel (emotions, senses...) and think.

Granted, but how about things that science can't explain, things such as the power fo the mind to cure, things like chi energy, and other phenomena of the human body that can't be explained.

@ main topic, I believe there is no need to go to another dimension to experience hell, because hell is present for many people here on earth. Just turn on the news and u will see people being vicously killed, hurt, and what not everyday. To quote shishio makoto in the enlish version of rurouni kenshin, well more or less, "don't you beleive that a world tha'ts being baptized in blood should be called hell?"
 
First of all, rocklee, vampires do exist. Not in the literature text sense, of course.

Moving on, Lina, in your first reply here, you mentioned hell as 'Christian garbage'.

First, hell isnt a christian creation. Hell exists in all cultures, but the hell that we may think of today as the Christian Hell isnt entirely Christian.

Legato, no, Christians did NOT borrow the word from the goddess Hel. The word 'hel' actually is in ancient *and now banned* Hebrew texts. It meant a landfill in the old times.

In many cities of Jewish decent in ancient times, they would have city dumps called hel. The dumps would become so dirty, that the city would set the dumps on fire in an attempt to cleanse the place.

Children would ask the Jewish elders "We know good Jewish people go to heaven with Hosannah, but where do bad people go?" And the elders would fabricate stories of torture to dark souls and defaint Jews. They would tell the children that they would spend their eternities in the landfills of fire, or 'Hel'.

All the semi-inflamatory remarks of beleivers is beyond rude, made by some of you here. If someone chooses to believe in Hell and Heaven as places of the dead, then let them. I dont believe you have any justification in slandering their intelligence, simply because they dont believe they rot away into nothingness like you believe.


Show some tact in your judgments, for Goddess sakes.
 
Ah, who cares, heaven, hell, you cant prove their existence, nor can you disprove them either, so no logical argument can follow.
I'm not religious, at all, and I don't take the view that there is no afterlife for one reason only: anyone saying there is no afterlife because science has not yet proven (or disproven) it's existance looks quite arrogantly on what it can achieve.

my guess (for an afterlife, not heaven or hell, cause that would probly require some guy with a white beard): 50/50.
 
this book[/url], reputed neuropsychologist Antonio Damasio explains how people who had some parts of their brain damaged (tumor, accident...) and subsequently removed, could not feel positive or negative emotions such as joy, anger or fear (in the case of the front lobe) or "feel physical pain" (in the case of the upper lateral lobe), while they could still think and behave perfectly normally otherwise (count, speak, imagine, remember, move, etc as anybody else). That somehow proves that there is no soul.
Sure these nuerological mechanics can be dealt with, but they don't explain a single motivation to create thoughts and ideas or not on a moment by moment basis or the contents of awareness. Why and what does anyone think or feel or react as they do ?
 
Last edited:
@Winter: thanks for the explanation of the origin of the word hell, sonds a lot more plausible than the Viking origin, but I did read it somewhere; reading is never enough....
I did expose my views on the subject a little bit too impartially, I guess I got carried away by the fact that most people on the thread seem to not believe. However the fact that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs can be discussed even if in the end it's a subjective view that would never lead to an agreement. Anyway I appreciate your wisdom Winter, although it's quite surprising to hear such words from someone who posted the lyrics for "Tormentor of Christian Souls", I admire your wise posts all the more...
 
Legato said:
@Winter: thanks for the explanation of the origin of the word hell, sonds a lot more plausible than the Viking origin, but I did read it somewhere; reading is never enough....
Actually, you were right regarding "hel". But it was not only Old Norse, its origins are even older. Here is a quote from an etymological dictionary:

"O.E. hel, helle "nether world, abode of the dead, infernal regions," from P.Gmc. *khaljo (cf. O.Fris. helle, O.N. hel, Ger. H?lle, Goth. halja "hell") "the underworld," lit. "concealed place," from PIE *kel- "to cover, conceal, save." The Eng. word may be in part from O.N. Hel (from P.Gmc. *khalija "one who covers up or hides something"), in Norse mythology Loki's daughter, who rules over the evil dead in Niflheim, the lowest of all worlds (nifl "mist"), a death aspect of the three-fold goddess."
P.Gmc. = Proto Germanic
O.E. = Old English
PIE = Proto Indo-European


Elizabeth said:
Sure these nuerological mechanics can be dealt with, but they don't explain a single motivation to create thoughts and ideas or not on a moment by moment basis or the contents of awareness. Why and what does anyone think or feel or react as they do ?
A lot of this is already explained, but we are still in the beginnings of neuro-psychological science. Until we understand all the coherences will take a while. But we don't need any metaphysical/supernatural concepts to explain intelligence & character. Just because we don't have a scientific explanation yet for some particular phenomenon does not mean that no explanation exists.

Regarding hell, I agree for the most part with Maciamo. It's most probably a story to frighten people into adhering to certain laws or rules. Nothing to worry about, life is bad enough.
 
RockLee said:
Say there would be a hell and heaven...and "GOD" excisted...why would he ban some of his creations to hell??Isn't he supposed to be thoughtfull and loving for all his creations???That 'in my honest opninion' disabled the fact that there is no "GOD" either....simply the fact "GOD" is a manmade word is enough to believe it's all made up....if you believe in hell,heaven etc...you should also believe in zombies,vampires..etc.. :souka:
That's the point exactly. Heaven and hell was made up by the early christians, based upon stories from other religions. Likewise, they also made up God.
Interesting to know: Initially, they had planned to invent 12 gods! Yes, that's right! If you look int the bible, you can read about it. Not that pitiful toilet paper what is nowadays passed of as bible and is just an extremely watered down and totally mistranslated version with countless arbitrary changes, but the original bible (written in Ancient Hebrew). You would find that there are twelve different persons where in today's "bible" there is only "God" or "the Lord". There are GD, HSM, JHW etc. Yes, that are the names - Ancient Hebrew didn't use vowels. They are normally transcripted as God, Hashem, Jahwe etc. Later on, they apparently decided to go with just one god (too lazy?) and arbitrarily chose GD out of the twelve for this.
You can take a look at the Jewish Bible, which is a somewhat better translation than the Christian Bible and leaves the different names intact:
Jps Bible
 
Duo said:
Granted, but how about things that science can't explain, things such as the power fo the mind to cure, things like chi energy, and other phenomena of the human body that can't be explained.

Don't be so pretentious ! It's not like we live in the most advanced age the humans will ever know. Even 100 years ago (time when some people living now were born), we could not even dream of going to the moon, cure some diseases that are now benign, such was our scientific ignorance. Even 20 years ago would who would have believed that we would now be using mobile phones with TV and colour cameras so early ? It's just a matter of time. Don't hurry, it took thousands of years since the time people created the first cities and writing system before humans even thought of paving roads or realised that insects didn't sprout out of air. It took yet longer before someone realise the earth was round, and another person thought it was not the center of the universe. Even now, we are still at the dawn of human intellectual capabilities. It's just difficult to realise it when you call it "present" and have a life expectancy of less than only about a hundred year.

And even if it were the most advanced human age to ever be, humans are limited by the current size of their brain. What can you expect a dog to do or think of ? What can you expect a chimpazee to do or think of ? Now what can you expect a human to do or think of ?

Elizabeth said:
Sure these nuerological mechanics can be dealt with, but they don't explain a single motivation to create thoughts and ideas or not on a moment by moment basis or the contents of awareness. Why and what does anyone think or feel or react as they do ?

Have you read the book ? Of course we can explain motivations. That's a basic instinct of survival. Everything we do is ultimately to assure 1) our survival (this includes enjoyment, status, wealth, etc. as they contribute to higher chances of survival or offsprings' survival), and 2) procreation (sex is a major source of motivation in everyday life, even unconsciously, but I am not teaching you anything new, right).

Have you heard of the basic needs scale for humans : food, security, sex, social acceptance, self-realisation (incl. domination and strife for power, wealth or attractiveness).

Lina Inverse said:
You would find that there are twelve different persons where in today's "bible" there is only "God" or "the Lord". There are GD, HSM, JHW etc. Yes, that are the names - Ancient Hebrew didn't use vowels. They are normally transcripted as God, Hashem, Jahwe etc. Later on, they apparently decided to go with just one god (too lazy?) and arbitrarily chose GD out of the twelve for this.

I sincerely doubt that, The word God is of Germanic origin, iincidentally an Aryan or Indo-European language, while Hebrew is a semitic language. That means that the two language groups developed independently. What is more, Christianity was introduced to Germanic countries via Latin ones, and God in Latin is Deus (incl variants Deo, Dio, Dieu) from Greek Theo. So I really don't see why the word God or Gott, which was used long before the introduction of Christianity in Germanic mytholody, should appear in the Hebrew Bible, when both civilization had no contact at all at the time.

As for "God" being chosen, that depends on which Christian sect you are talking about. Aren't there Jehovah's witnesses, for whom Jehova (or Jahwe) means God. So, if they hadn't known about these 12 "original gods" (funny 12, like in the Greco-Roman and Chinese zodiac), how could they have come up with it (esp. that Jehova's witness are not that old a sect) ? Very dubious.

@back to meaning of hell

I think quite a few people have problems understanding basic psychological or neurological concepts.

- "Fear" is above all the fear of death or death of beloved ones. How could somebody who is already death suffer from fear ? Nothing can happen to them, and nothing they do can have an effect on those who are alive. Are they afraid of suffering ?

- "Suffering" can be either physical of psychological, but in either case it is felt in the brain (different areas, though). As I said before, physical pain can easily be erradicated, either by 1) destroying the part of the brain in question (which will happen slowly the more people are subject to it, and progressively grow insensitive), 2) taking potent painkiller like morphine, 3) stimulating the part of the brain in question with electric diods that will neutralised the signal coming from the nerves, and completely suppress the feeling of pain.

Psychological pain is more complex as it can be an attack on self-esteem (i.e. believe that we are good enough to survive in a competitive world), loss of something or someone that had an sentimental significance to us (i.e. made our life more comfortable), or fear itself (see above). When somebody is already dead, they don't have to care about their survival, and therefore not about their abilities (attractiveness, sociability, intelligence, knowledge, know-how, physical power...) or self-esteem (which is the same thing). They do not care about losing someone, as people dying would also be in hell and thus be reunited, or if the beloved ones stay alive or go to heaven, well, good for them. Material possessions ? Who cares ? That's very shallow even for people alive to care too much about them (a bit of Buddhism is necessary for those who think otherwise), but in hell, what purpose could it serve ? Pride, wealth, power ? What for ? They don't need it for their survival anymore. Wealth or power are meaningless when one doesn't need to eat to survive or have sex as they can't procreate.

If people in hell long for pleasures (sex, alcohol, drugs...) and can have it, without fear of dying, then it becomes heaven. If people i heaven are denied any form of enjoyment for eternity, then it becomes hell. But it may just depend on one's personality. To understand what is considered "good" or "bad", and equals with "heaven" or "hell", let's analyze the different behaviours. Sex, drunkenness, drugs, etc, are all associated with sin and hell, because they can all cause death or ruin one's health. Virtuous activities are usually such things as learning, have a healthy lifestyle (do sports, eat balanced, sleep enough but not too much, etc.), and even work. Why ? Because they all contribute to living longer. But after death, in heaven or hell, why should one care ? It doesn't matter anymore ! What's more, most of the worst crimes or sins on earth become meaningless. Murder doesn't exist, as people are already dead (btw, does that mean people in hell cannot be decapitated, burnt to the bones or crushed by a huge rock, as they are immortal ? Cool ! less stress, no paranoia !). No need to worry about illegality, corruption, swindle, fraud, theft or whatever. Possessions and money don't matter in heaven and hell. People being already dead, they don't need to eat, don't need to care about their safety or make life plans. Time is not an issue anymore, and neither is age. So even hell must be such a relaxing place (compared to here) !
 
Lina Inverse said:
Interesting to know: Initially, they had planned to invent 12 gods! Yes, that's right! If you look int the bible, you can read about it. [...] You would find that there are twelve different persons where in today's "bible" there is only "God" or "the Lord". There are GD, HSM, JHW etc. Yes, that are the names - Ancient Hebrew didn't use vowels.
In addition to what Maciamo said, I wonder what makes you so sure that it were 12 names for 12 different entities & not just 12 labels for one & the same? I know from Old English religious texts that they used many different names for the one Christian god, maybe dozens. Even today there is not only one name people go by. They call the Christian god "Almighty", "Lord", "Creator", "Supreme Being", whatever...
Why should the old Hebrews haven't been able to do the same?
 
Man, some good posts!

I still think Hell is my grade school class on Monday mornings.

:p

I though the popularization of heaven and hell long had much do with zoroastrianism. (Sp?) Anyone care to speculate?
 
Maciamo said:
It took yet longer before someone realise the earth was round, and another person thought it was not the center of the universe.

I thought that it was known way before Columbus's time that the earth was round. Didn't the ancient Greeks calculate the circumference of the earth to an amazingly accurate 24,000 miles (38,400 km)? In fact, didn't Columbus refuse to use this calculation when making his plans for his journey, because the more recent number suggested that it was closer to 13,000 miles (20,800 km)?
 
Have you read the book ? Of course we can explain motivations. That's a basic instinct of survival. Everything we do is ultimately to assure 1) our survival (this includes enjoyment, status, wealth, etc. as they contribute to higher chances of survival or offsprings' survival), and 2) procreation (sex is a major source of motivation in everyday life, even unconsciously, but I am not teaching you anything new, right).

Have you heard of the basic needs scale for humans : food, security, sex, social acceptance, self-realisation (incl. domination and strife for power, wealth or attractiveness).
I was actually thinking on a much more micro level. If you take the position that mental states are entirely and soley determined by physical processes of the nervous system, all thoughts, ideas feelings, sense of self, of the external world etc either arise "spontaneously" (free will, self-determinism) from a specific part of the brain or are unconsciously activated as part of a series of electrochemical reactions. I don't know that the idea of a soul or spirit force is the logical counterpart to this, but that is one function it has served, to 'motivate' these physical mechanisms and set them into motion as an explanation for why people, at least some of the time, feel a sense of control over their most incidental thoughts and behaviors.
 
Maybe a long, long time ago, someone was bored and decided to create, like, a kind of RPG game (the first in history, lol), and the story was based in some 'divine' places, 'heaven' or 'hell', which the players would go according to their performance. Then this person called some people to play with him. Unfortunally, some pople took the concepts of the game seriously and started to say it was 'true', mixing with that thing named religion. And then it was spread among people in the world. Lol, that?s my theory for Heaven and Hell. :D
 
I've been working InHel for quite some time...off and on...and I have not seen any of these demons and fire and brimstone...although I have seen a few processors go up in smoke, both on the hardware and in-between the ears of a few of the full timers (known to us contractors as Blue Badgers)
I agree that there is little of harmony InHel, since there is never any adequate documentation on what the job at hand requires. Mostly outdated equipment being forced to implement prototype implementations, or outdated software being forced to implement prototype equipment.
Ghosts in the machine do exist, however. We use Ghost everyday...especially when the machine crashes badly. I am of the belief that artificial intelligence already exist...anybody that can expect to get the work done with outdated equipment and software is not relying upon natural intelligence...it must be artificial...

So, Frank....since I've already been InHel, what's next? :D
 
I blieve this Heaven and Hell thing is a sort of control factor in life. More times then most your in hell with a small chance at heaven every now and then. You know just to keep the heart moving. But you yourself determine how bad your hell will be and how many pieces of heaven fall in your lap. Its not that i don't believe whats been set down for ages, because someone where along the line it's gotten tossed around or some parts are missing. I just came to my conclusion based on my surroundings. my opinion at the least. :sorry: :bluush: :p
 
Maciamo said:
Don't be so pretentious !

I'm sorry but I don't think my comment was pretentious at all, I wonder why you got that impression :?

:eek:kashii:

Maciamo said:
It's not like we live in the most advanced age the humans will ever know. Even 100 years ago (time when some people living now were born), we could not even dream of going to the moon, cure some diseases that are now benign, such was our scientific ignorance. Even 20 years ago would who would have believed that we would now be using mobile phones with TV and colour cameras so early ? It's just a matter of time. Don't hurry, it took thousands of years since the time people created the first cities and writing system before humans even thought of paving roads or realised that insects didn't sprout out of air. It took yet longer before someone realise the earth was round, and another person thought it was not the center of the universe. Even now, we are still at the dawn of human intellectual capabilities. It's just difficult to realise it when you call it "present" and have a life expectancy of less than only about a hundred year.

So what ? There could be things out there that our senses can not detect; how can you be 100% sure that humans have all possible senses to sense everything possible in the world? How would you know that eyesight exits if you were a blind person on a island all alone with no other contact to let you know that there is such a sight. If there is no possible way for you to sense the existance of a soul, or inner energy or whatever, how can you refute the possibility of its existance? It's this that I'm talking about. So please before calling me pretentious don't assume things or double chek with me on the meaning of my words.

Maciamo said:
And even if it were the most advanced human age to ever be, humans are limited by the current size of their brain. What can you expect a dog to do or think of ? What can you expect a chimpazee to do or think of ? Now what can you expect a human to do or think of ?

Right, exactly, so how can u say that there is no such thing as inner spirit our soul with such conviction when you yourself realize the limitations of your small brain?

Maciamo said:
Everything we do is ultimately to assure 1) our survival (this includes enjoyment, status, wealth, etc. as they contribute to higher chances of survival or offsprings' survival), and 2) procreation (sex is a major source of motivation in everyday life, even unconsciously, but I am not teaching you anything new, right).

If that is so, how do you explain the irrationality on Human behaviour ; people givin their lives for a cause, a moral, or a sentimental attachment? That goes against the insticts of self-preservation and the will to live.

Have you heard of the basic needs scale for humans : food, security, sex, social acceptance, self-realisation (incl. domination and strife for power, wealth or attractiveness).

I'm sure many people here have heard of Maslow's hiearchy of needs. It's a a common high school theme. :cool:





Maciamo said:
@back to meaning of hell

I think quite a few people have problems understanding basic psychological or neurological concepts.

- "Fear" is above all the fear of death or death of beloved ones. How could somebody who is already death suffer from fear ? Nothing can happen to them, and nothing they do can have an effect on those who are alive. Are they afraid of suffering ?

- "Suffering" can be either physical of psychological, but in either case it is felt in the brain (different areas, though). As I said before, physical pain can easily be erradicated, either by 1) destroying the part of the brain in question (which will happen slowly the more people are subject to it, and progressively grow insensitive), 2) taking potent painkiller like morphine, 3) stimulating the part of the brain in question with electric diods that will neutralised the signal coming from the nerves, and completely suppress the feeling of pain.

Psychological pain is more complex as it can be an attack on self-esteem (i.e. believe that we are good enough to survive in a competitive world), loss of something or someone that had an sentimental significance to us (i.e. made our life more comfortable), or fear itself (see above). When somebody is already dead, they don't have to care about their survival, and therefore not about their abilities (attractiveness, sociability, intelligence, knowledge, know-how, physical power...) or self-esteem (which is the same thing). They do not care about losing someone, as people dying would also be in hell and thus be reunited, or if the beloved ones stay alive or go to heaven, well, good for them. Material possessions ? Who cares ? That's very shallow even for people alive to care too much about them (a bit of Buddhism is necessary for those who think otherwise), but in hell, what purpose could it serve ? Pride, wealth, power ? What for ? They don't need it for their survival anymore. Wealth or power are meaningless when one doesn't need to eat to survive or have sex as they can't procreate.

If people in hell long for pleasures (sex, alcohol, drugs...) and can have it, without fear of dying, then it becomes heaven. If people i heaven are denied any form of enjoyment for eternity, then it becomes hell. But it may just depend on one's personality. To understand what is considered "good" or "bad", and equals with "heaven" or "hell", let's analyze the different behaviours. Sex, drunkenness, drugs, etc, are all associated with sin and hell, because they can all cause death or ruin one's health. Virtuous activities are usually such things as learning, have a healthy lifestyle (do sports, eat balanced, sleep enough but not too much, etc.), and even work. Why ? Because they all contribute to living longer. But after death, in heaven or hell, why should one care ? It doesn't matter anymore ! What's more, most of the worst crimes or sins on earth become meaningless. Murder doesn't exist, as people are already dead (btw, does that mean people in hell cannot be decapitated, burnt to the bones or crushed by a huge rock, as they are immortal ? Cool ! less stress, no paranoia !). No need to worry about illegality, corruption, swindle, fraud, theft or whatever. Possessions and money don't matter in heaven and hell. People being already dead, they don't need to eat, don't need to care about their safety or make life plans. Time is not an issue anymore, and neither is age. So even hell must be such a relaxing place (compared to here) !

When people thing of hell, they usually envision the images in Dante's the Divine Comedy. Pushing a rock up a hill for that keeps on tubmling down for all of eternity doesn't sound very relaxing. I think that you have buit your own personalised image of heaven and hell, so don't expect people to be on your same plain of thought because maybe they might just have different ideas about what heaven and hell are.

I usually do enjoy very much your opinions and posts, as they are very informative, well formulated backed and based with real knowledge, but I do however, sometimes feel that you are a little too forceful in putting down other people's ideas and thoughts or in assuming that yours are better or more correct than those of others.
 
Duo said:
I'm sorry but I don't think my comment was pretentious at all, I wonder why you got that impression :?

Because you insinuated that if we (humans} haven't been able to prove or refute something now, it cannot be done in the future. We are still very primitive people, with very limited knowledge now here in 2004 ! if you think of the exponational rate at which human understanding and knowledge has been growing in the last few thousands (and esp. hundreds) years. Look at the curve going up, and think we are toward the bottom. People who can't understand that shouldn't try themselves at philosophy or try to explain religion with science.

So what ? There could be things out there that our senses can not detect; how can you be 100% sure that humans have all possible senses to sense everything possible in the world? How would you know that eyesight exits if you were a blind person on a island all alone with no other contact to let you know that there is such a sight. If there is no possible way for you to sense the existance of a soul, or inner energy or whatever, how can you refute the possibility of its existance? It's this that I'm talking about. So please before calling me pretentious don't assume things or double chek with me on the meaning of my words.

You seem to agree perfectly with me. There are zillions of things we can't see but that our mind can make up or understand thank to logic and scientific thinking. We can't sense (I will use this term for the 5 senses) atoms, but they are there. Now their existence has been proven by microscopes, but we have actually been able to know that before inventing the first microscope (the mind id more powerful than senses).
Same for hundreds of things discovered or understood by science. That brings us back to your first question : why are you so pretentious ? Because you either don't understand the potential of science, logic and philosophical reasoning (all stronger than the senses), or you assume we poor humans of the 21st century know everything because we have invented mobile phones and been to space.

Right, exactly, so how can u say that there is no such thing as inner spirit our soul with such conviction when you yourself realize the limitations of your small brain?

Because that goes against 1) logical thinking, 2) against what science has already demonstrated. It is just not necessary for us to work. You could also speculate that a computer or a washing machine has a soul, but you probably know it's not true because you have a better understanding of how it works, as it is much simpler. I have studied quite a lot about neuropsychology by myself and my understanding of the human mind is probably as good as my understanding of how a computer works. Anyway, I think I can now understand pretty well the basics of how and why life beings are alive and how they have evolved from inert matter to a cell, then to sexual beings, then to progressively intelligent beings, and why it would be completely unreasonable for humans to have a soul while other living creatures (including plants and bacterias) wouldn't. This is based on logic.

Now if you think even the most basic cell has a soul, how could you believe in hell and heaven (when they can't even think or feel) and what does "soul" mean to you (certainly not the ability to think, feel or remember, which cells or plants so not have).


When people thing of hell, they usually envision the images in Dante's the Divine Comedy. Pushing a rock up a hill for that keeps on tubmling down for all of eternity doesn't sound very relaxing. I think that you have buit your own personalised image of heaven and hell, so don't expect people to be on your same plain of thought because maybe they might just have different ideas about what heaven and hell are.

Don't tell me that you have read al the things I wrote and still don't understand that I don't believe in heaven and hell, and the explanation you quoted is a temptative demonstration of the absurdity of the concept itself, because it would be completely illogical !

I usually do enjoy very much your opinions and posts, as they are very informative, well formulated backed and based with real knowledge, but I do however, sometimes feel that you are a little too forceful in putting down other people's ideas and thoughts or in assuming that yours are better or more correct than those of others.

Sorry, I have difficulties seeing the intellectual limits of the average people, and usually expect people to at least understand logic if they lack knowledge, but I now realise (again) that it was a mistake to have such expectations.
 
I don't believe in the idea of heaven and hell either...

But what is heaven exactly?? Especially "heaven" is not the same when viewing it from the perspectives of different religions. E.g. in Islam, men are given virgins, in Chistianity, it is eternal life with "God" in Paradise...

According to the existentialist philospher Jean-Paul Satre in his work No Exit, life is hell, meaning that hell is created by the people (in life).
And in his work, when the characters are given the chance to almost leave "hell," they don't....because according to them "hell is other people."

I won't give out the whole summary of Satre's No Exit, as I am sure most of you have read it (or heard about it), but if not, I am sure you can google for a summary....and I'd recommend this classic work.
 
Maciamo said:
Because you insinuated that if we (humans} haven't been able to prove or refute something now, it cannot be done in the future. We are still very primitive people, with very limited knowledge now here in 2004 ! if you think of the exponational rate at which human understanding and knowledge has been growing in the last few thousands (and esp. hundreds) years. Look at the curve going up, and think we are toward the bottom. People who can't understand that shouldn't try themselves at philosophy or try to explain religion with science. .

So what, that was just a thought, I gave examples of things that science is not able to explain as a way of showing our limitiation of understaing reality; I hardly feel that I was presemtous at all. Between the two of us I think you are the presemtous one seeing as I agree with some of your notions, while you totally refuse to consider any other than your own.


Maciamo said:
You seem to agree perfectly with me. There are zillions of things we can't see but that our mind can make up or understand thank to logic and scientific thinking. We can't sense (I will use this term for the 5 senses) atoms, but they are there. Now their existence has been proven by microscopes, but we have actually been able to know that before inventing the first microscope (the mind id more powerful than senses).

Yes, sience has made some great achievments in discovering the things that make up our physical world. However, the knowledge that led us to atom was based on the material( the visible, touchable,) things that we can sense with are natural given senses. People looke at rocks, gold, wood, etc and wondered what would be there when these things would be broken or divided or whatever. That's how we came to the atom. By examing the things around us tha we could detect with our senses our mind and knowledge grew into powerful tools. Whereas I do agree that the mind and logic are the best tools at our disposal, I don't think they can aid is in things that are beyond our realm. I am not talkin about the soul, now heaven or hell, or whatever, I have nothing in particular in mind, but I don't allow myself the luxury of assuming that we humans have the potential to discover what is impossible for us to arrive at. Some native American tribes beleive that there are beings made just of pure energy that roam the earthly plain and that humans really look like lumious fiber eggs, when one really "sees" whatever that means. I am not saying this is true or false, but it's this type of things I am talking about that is beyond even our logical aproach. How can you go about figuring out something which you don't even know that exist ? How can you inquire about it even hypothetically when you no basis or foundation on where to start? Gallileo found that earth was round and that it revolves around the sun becasue he had a basis to start with, we discovered the electrons because we also have a basis on where to start off.

Maciamo said:
Same for hundreds of things discovered or understood by science. That brings us back to your first question : why are you so pretentious ? Because you either don't understand the potential of science, logic and philosophical reasoning (all stronger than the senses), or you assume we poor humans of the 21st century know everything because we have invented mobile phones and been to space.

I understand the potential of science and logic, but I also understand their limitations. Perhaps you think that nothing is beyond our reach, while that's very admirable of you, I respectufully disagree.
Just a recent exaple, I did a a paper on Qigong, the art and method of harnessing the body's inner energy, chi, not too long ago for my bio class, and in my reaserch I found out that it was almost impossible for our scientif tools to detect or measasure the effect and magnitude of chi energy, which were however noticable on other measuring instruments, natural ones, such as some aquous solutions. The point was that the effects on CHi could only be felt or measured by biological composites or living things, rather than scientific tools.

Maciamo said:
I have studied quite a lot about neuropsychology by myself and my understanding of the human mind is probably as good as my understanding of how a computer works. Anyway, I think I can now understand pretty well the basics of how and why life beings are alive and how they have evolved from inert matter to a cell, then to sexual beings, then to progressively intelligent beings, and why it would be completely unreasonable for humans to have a soul while other living creatures (including plants and bacterias) wouldn't. This is based on logic.

Ah, hmm yes, well mr self made expert, the world is not totally guided by rationality and logic, not everything is logic an rational in our world. If you assume that you can climb the ladder of knowledge to the ultimate truth just by logic and reasoning, im afraid u'll fall off pretty soon. Like everything else, the world is guided by duality, one part rational, explainable, understandable, the other chaotic, confusing, lost in entropy. Btw, I'am also basing my statements in logic.

Maciamo said:
Sorry, I have difficulties seeing the intellectual limits of the average people, and usually expect people to at least understand logic if they lack knowledge, but I now realise (again) that it was a mistake to have such expectations.

Yes, pardon us common folk for being stupid, and having limiations. Jeez, superiorioty complex, maybe you should come down to earth for a little mr great mogul ; if just a little constructive criticism or disagreemnts in a debate have you jumping on the defensive and reaching out immature insults sugurcoated with nice and intricate BS then maybe is not worth it all to discuss issues with you that we won't agree on.
 

This thread has been viewed 15093 times.

Back
Top