There may be realms of knowledge and reality that will be forever inaccessible to us , things in principal we can never even grasp. Try teaching calculus to an amoeba. A lot of scientists frown upon philosophy because they feel the discipline has undermined their quest for objective knowledge about the world and it has.
I find it interesting that scientists can deduce that life has no meaning and then spend the rest of their lives trying to explain "meaningless" life. The very act of being consciously aware gives rise to the concept of "meaning" because conscious awareness is the act of comparing what is known against what is not known. Yes it is subjective but subjective doesn't equate to meaningless...(but of course that's my subjective/meaningless opinion)🙃
Saying that speculations about the gods has some value but it doesn't lead to any truths doesn't mean life has no meaning. But what is meant is life has no inherent meaning. You must place meaning into your life for it to have meaning beyond "find food" "find mate".
The human nervous system is capable of experiencing deeper, more abstract levels of creation. Intellectual musings about God and "cosmic" phenomena is a vain, empty pursuit when lacking actually experiencing them. The Vedic tradition offers systematic techniques for purifying and developing the human nervous system so we can gain more advanced states of consciousness that reveal more abstract levels of creation and ultimately that infinite field of pure consciousness, beyond time and space, which is the source of material creation. The Vedic tradition records these experiences and offers a mature, complete description of the absolute nature of that ultimate reality.
If you know that subject of knowledge, if you recognize yourself, you will understand all religions. Because exactly in their differences lays deeper wisdom or deeper insights into "God", the Life!
Algorithms and because you're a free thinker. The socialist NWO wants everybody to think, feel, speak, believe the same thing. The religion is nihilistic science based on atomism.
Many scientists say meta physics is a total waste. Once I have seen atkins talking in this way. We can never prove the existence Or non existence of God using metaphysics.it is not possible. Most of the scientists don't like talking about things like consciousness. Some people say consciousness is an illusion. When we ask questions like origin of universe these are questions connected to brain. It is frustrating we cannot know some things.
It is baffling to realize that they don't know the answers but somehow they are trying to make us entertained by giving pseudo explanations. If you are really eager and dying for having the answer to know if GOD exists or not, then there is a very simple way; death. This is a very simple thing to evaluate. I am not implying that someone needs to die for that particular question, but death is inevitable. You are going to know sooner or later, so have patience and do what's best for you, your family, relatives, and others in a plausible way.
This is a two edged sword... It's maybe rushing things to give a metaphysical explanation for what we does not know BUT the same error is to force a materialistic explanation to avoid a metaphysical one (example multiverses to avoid talking of fine-tuning).
The problem is there is not another feasible alternative. There is materialism or some form of solipsism. The multiverse came about because science realized a principle in nature that there is not one of thing. The Big Bang being a natural event means that there would be multiple Big Bangs and multiple universes each with their own history and laws of physics.
@@kos-mos1127 and now that this idea was buried along string theory which other kind of silly idea will materialism propose ? It's not that since there is no visible alternative (to intelligent design) then silly ideas that are good for superhero movies have to be proposed .
How do we test the assumption that the mind and conscious being is created by the brain We probe the brain and observe the effect. Like hacking into a wireless self driving car. Then concluding the computer controls the car and driver. Of course it does, your hacking into a system.
@@con.troller4183 Nuclear Physict Openhymar when saw the blast of Atom Bomb which was made by his adivice and technical knowledge said Gita's wisdom text . Do you have any evidence about thor.
@@chayanbosu3293 "Do you have any evidence about thor." Yes!!! THUNDER!!! Show me where The Gita or any religious text or any reference to any god, appears as a data point or as a factor in any peer reviewed scientific paper. The sideline opinions of scientists are not science.
@@chayanbosu3293 So, _something exists... THEREFORE god!!!? Supernatural claims are all BS. Never in history has a single supernatural claim, been reliably verified, tested or replicated. Your religion and all other religions are based on BS claims about magical events.
To all the people who put themselves under so much pressure and think they can find the answers in this realm. Forget it. Wait until you can leave this realm and you will know everything.
"Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest" [Ecclesiastees 9:10 KJV]. When you leave this realm you will not know everything... you will know nothing!
You don't need metaphysics, these 20 evidence are sufficient: Keep this advise in mind while reading: "Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it". (Don't claim they have been debunked, the Zeitgeist never mentioned these evidence) 20 IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE that proved Christianity God is likely FAKE, don't miss the last paragraph that explains them all: 1)Jesus similarities with Buddha: both had royal bloodline, mother name Maya to Mary, miracle pregnancy to virgin pregnancy, birth during a journey home to from home, prophesized after birth, Gautama left the palace at age 29 and became Buddha at 35 while Jesus started his missionary at about 27-29 and crucified at around 33-36, tales of walking on water, had a disciple who betrayed them, Buddha had a big meal while Jesus had a last supper before dying. 500 arahants witnessed compilation of Buddha's teachings and over 500 witnesses to Jesus's resurrection, there will be a future Buddha and Jesus will return in the future, etc. Surely they can't be ALL coincidental. 2)Many of the Bible's mythologies was copied from older pagans, Greek, Egyptian or Hinduism religions(note the names too) E.g. Adam & Eve story similar to Atman and Jeewa, a pair of birds in Hinduism, big flood and survivor Noah/3 sons same as Manu/3 daughters although cause of flood is different, Moses and Krishna shared similar life story. Even the names of Abraham and wife/sister Sarah close to Brahma and Saraswathi beside having similar story. Regardless of which religion copied which, it proved this god is NOT the only true god or all mighty as it doesn't makes sense to create or allow more copies or religions. 3) A creator god claimed to be all mighty and only true god should be the oldest and only religion but all other paganism, really, Hinduism and Chinese religions existed before these Abrahamic religions. 4) Why should an all mighty and all knowing God allowed their people to branch off and kill their parent religion Judaism or Zoroatruism ? "Free will" as an excuse is not acceptable as earlier they claimed their God killed all people with a big flood because they sinned. 5) The way they collect titlings during Sunday mass is so tricky. They know people will be shy not to pay or tend to pay more when others could be watching. This is why they don't just use a stationed money box like all other Asian religions where people can donate anytime. Catholics and Islam later made it even bigger by suggesting donation of a certain percentage of their income. 6) The Bible condemned non-followers, clearly mentioned in Mark's words 16:16. Why should a Creator God created people not to believe him or allowed Satan to influence them and then condemn them? 7) Most major festivals and holidays related to Christianity are not original but stolen from the pagans, including Christmas, Easter, Thanksgiving, Good Friday, All Souls, Halloween and even New Year Day. 8) Incidents, eg: (a) Covid-19 highest fatalities rate countries are all highly Christians populated countries, 800K Americans alone !! (b)The Air Asia plane crash of 2019 killed 41 church members, 2 missionaries and their few month old baby. (c) spree killings happened inside a church (d) a priest killed by lightning etc 9) Why would God created people to have sufferings or unpleasant feelings? The excuse that God "test" people don't makes sense, isn't it copied from the Karma concept? 10) Why isn't wisdom, mindfulness and meditation or topics like 5 Hindrances or 5 Aggregates taught by Buddha not adopted by them? Isn't it to keep their followers stay ignorant? 11) The Bible copied very much from older religions like Hinduism and Judaism which both have the theory of karma and rebirth but dropped since Christianity, why? 12) If there is a loving God, why are there Christian babies born with disease or innocent children being abused or died young ? 13) Why would the Bible need to be changed so many times or rewritten by so many authors if there is nothing wrong with the original? Is it because new discoveries debunked them so they need to cover up the plot holes? 14) It don't makes sense to claim that only their believers will go to heaven and others don't since they claimed their God created all people. A good religion should be non-sectarian, secular and treat all people equally. 15) Using fear like "end of the world" every 2 years or claiming that Jesus will return but never did. Why should God keep Jesus's return date a mystery? 16) The use of love or fear like hell, sins, confession, heaven or judgement day are all clearly tricks to fool gullible people, especially the kids by using Santa Claus. 17)If their God is all-mighty, why need missionaries to convert others ? 18) The ongoing child sex abuses committed by the pastors/priests that I read so often. Is it because their people knew their God don't exist due to evidence in no.1 and 2 above? 19) The Bible is full of lust(Solomon's part), incest, evil and violence. Their God killed countless people when Satan only killed a few. 20) The Bible condemned LGBT and even dogs. Is it because they know dogs are man's best friend and keeping people lonely is a way to keep them dependant on religion? Only 1 reason can conclusively tie up all 20 points above and explain for it, this God and Bible was a man-made FRAUD to con or control people. Please share these evidence to prevent others from being victimised as I see many elderly Christians suffered from depression.
Just because you don't know about it nor do you want people to know about it doesn't mean they won't eventually find it. After all, we are all managers of our life. How do you think the royals of this world get protected and influenced.
We have enough evidence for being led by our mentality. Languages, science, metaphysics, beliefs, God's, all learned stuff, now debating unanswered questions. I think, one cannot think neutral, when your mentality forces the way you think. The other person also studied, but spirituality, cannot let go from the way he thinks and involves his knowledges to the unanswered questions. We see, that each part involves his mentality to the subject. Now there is an entanglement of logics, that has to be understood, and yet no accurate answer. We are talking about locked minds, not able to open and compromise with other logics than their own. They pick and quote their version of lessons they accept, and that's it. We have to learn that what we think is the only solution, is far from the amount of solutions there really are.
@@ReverendDr.Thomas that's universal english, easy to understand for starters. Do you mean intellectual english? for people with God degree? Naah, I prefer to express myself the way unconscious people sense language and are satisfied with it.
@@arletottens6349 We already know everything, the rest is just something like technics! Science can not answer such questions because science is already built through metaphysics! Ask Aristotle! So science can never reach level of metaphysics, science is not full thinking!
@@arletottens6349 All questions about the whole, like for example the question if we are free or determined, something science can principially never answer, but we know that it is both and depends on who you are or as what you recognize yourself! Science can maximal show that this question is not to decide empiricly! It's not a question of knowing, it's a question of beeing! We already know everything, but all what we not know yet is not metaphysical level! With metaphysics the thinking forms its shortened, dimmed, shadowed and instrumental perspectives like sciences to intervene on itself for reason of self transformation and realization! When future life will watch back, we would recognize, that we already knew everything! But the emphasize lays on "We"! The sentence "we already know everything" came from Buddha and is highest wisdom, not easy to understand! You first have to recognize yourself for that! 😉
@@arletottens6349 No, science can not answer such metaphysical questions. Modern physics shows that, because the different reformulations of quantum formalism, from antirealistic to realistic, from determined to indetermined reformulations produce same empirical results. Metaphysical questions you can't decide on empirical way, principially never! Ask all the philosophers for that, like Aristotle who built the scientific perspectives with or through metaphysics! He will explain to you, why science can never reach metaphysical level! Science can principially only recognize determined things, but never the Life, never the Living, never the Self, never the subject of knowledge, and so never freedom, because freedom is never "in abstracto". You can only have or be in freedom, like Kant and nearly all the other philosophers will explain to you! So science can not answer whether everything is determined or not, principially never!! But you can know the answer, if you recognize yourself!
But yet in history we take the writings on Alexander the Great which were written on him 400 years after how isn't that postulation? And how isn't metaphysics supplication and being entreaty? Even for the fact that the ratings of Jesus Christ came about him sooner than the writings of Alexander the Great about Alexander.
@@con.troller4183 trust me you will never have control of the situation cuz only God who is Jesus Christ has control of it especially since she has control over death.
Hopes, beliefs, faith, are not the pathway to truth. Remain skeptical and require credible evidence. Until then, remain open minded that we are incorrect. Don’t let our illusionary Ego dictate our life. Peace.
@@ReverendDr.Thomas When you share an idea you do not lessen it. All of it is still yours although all of it has been given away. The extension of God's Mind to yours is how He created you. You are an idea in the Mind of God. Nothing lost, nothing sacrificed, only love extended, wholly kept and wholly given. To realize - not believe this - you merely extend your love here. By their fruits you shall know them and they shall know themselves.
We are not in idea, we are concrete. In idea is not made of anything nor doe it have any content. It is just a process in the brain. Of course in idea is not subject to empirical reason.
@@ts8206 I'm sharing ideas, not attempting to prove anything. The idea of Love, which many call God, can be shared and known to be true by its effects. The results of sharing are experienced in the mind and give rise to conviction. For the one who experiences actual love, there is nothing to prove, only to share and extend.
@@ReverendDr.Thomas Yes indeed. Beliefs are merely what we accept in the mind as true. This is our big problem. When we accepted the illusion of separation from God as true (the fall), we lost sight of what truth is. We fell asleep. We’re dreaming a nightmare of separation from love. Yet In the same instant the separation seemed to occur, God gave His answer, the Holy Spirit, the Voice for God, and He placed it in every separated mind to ensure our awakening to objective truth. The Holy Spirit teaches us how to purify our perception through forgiveness. Cleanse your mind of deep seated, subconscious guilt (stemming from the separation) and you will release the inner light. That’s enlightenment. It’s not a change but a recognition. This is my framework of understanding. I offer it only to give context to the ideas I share. I have little use for belief unless it leads to the experience of peace. What forgiveness offers can be verified by everyone who practices it as their own way of thinking.
"They [meta-physicists] are satisfied with explanation by postulate. In other words, they NEED an explanation, they postulate something that will explain, and then they say, 'Well then, that postulate must be right BECAUSE it explains.' There's a wonderful circularity there." My thoughts in a nutshell. You can also apply this to multi-verse "theories" (gross misuse of that term, hypotheses is more accurate), which are untestable and unobservable by nature.
@@wthomas7955 Is that supposed to be some kind of defense of physics? Without a god, we couldn't arrive at the present. Physical properties alone can't explain any experiences.
@@wthomas7955, Yes; for example, unless there is an ultimate cause that can account for everything, we would have to explain an infinite regression of events, which would have prevented the present from ever occurring.
We probably can stay on the illogical field and explain all that exists in the logical field. But staying on the logical field, how do you explain the illogical field. Suppose, I am the experiencer, the experiment tool and the experienced and has a result have an experience that I am part of the others as well. How can I share this experince to others who are not a part of this experiment and hence not experienced?
If I want to prove to man what's been revealed to me, I use science. If I seek to connect with God, I go within the abode of consciousness, becoming a sojourner philosopher, exercising a metaphysical contemplative sense, ever experiencing, an amour with Sophia. Never do i or should I feel the urgency to disclose scientifically this to another man.
Apologies if I am wrong, but that sounds prideful, esoteric. What if disclosing to someone would help them? Perhaps its about the other "man," not our lofty, theoretical philosophies that may not amount to much unless put INTO ACTION (not yelling). Maybe to "connect with God" I go not into Self or solitude but the local soup kitchen to help my fellow man?
The fact is how isn't life and experiment in the testing through consciousness? Which then would be the metaphysics. Cuz you can't say morality comes only from the physical.
@@arletottens6349 MOR'ALS, n. plu. The practice of the duties of life; as a man of correct morals. 1. Conduct; behavior; course of life, in regard to good and evil. Some, as corrupt in their morals as vice could make them, have been solicitous to have their children virtuously and piously educated. What can laws do without morals?
@@arletottens6349 MORAL'ITY, n. The doctrine or system of moral duties, or the duties of men in their social character; ethics. The system of morality to be gathered from the writings of ancient sages, falls very short of that delivered in the gospel. 1. The practice of the moral duties; virtue. We often admire the politeness of men whose morality we question. 2. The quality of an action which renders it good; the conformity of an act to the divine law, or to the principles of rectitude. This conformity implies that the act must be performed by a free agent, and from a motive of obedience to the divine will. This is the strict theological and scriptural sense of morality. But we often apply the word to actions which accord with justice and human laws, without reference to the motives form which they proceed.
@@arletottens6349 sounds and looks like to me morality is given to the physical. Then the physical can show their morality. Which then is discernment look this all goes in circles right around the word of God I'm sick and tired of hearing people even tell me all the Bibles just circular reasoning well it looks like no matter what as we reason are reasoning circles around the word of God no matter what.
Totally am with this guy it is largely an entertaining waste of time though it can help with the lived experience but as far as truth is concerned it goes nowhere.
If there is a God, then God either had a plan or he didn't. If he didn't have a plan, then he is reckless. If he had a plan, then all things are going according to plan or they are not. If all things are going according to plan, then he is malevolent. If all things are not going according to plan, then he is incompetent. Q.E.D.
@@jonathanroark7114 By "God", I mean the Creator of all things, including humans. I don't expect anything from an alleged Being that doesn't show up to the scene of his crime. I am not "drawing a circle around something that is boundless", I am critiquing the alleged Creator. The law of excluded middle applies in this case. The Creator either had a plan or the Creator did not have a plan, there is no middle ground, and so on.
@@jonathanroark7114 How is it incoherent? I am simply using language to critique the Creator of all things. Are you suggesting there are certain words I cannot use when critiquing the "Almighty"?
@@jonathanroark7114 Philosophy is the rational investigation into the truth and principles of being, knowledge and conduct. If we define the Creator as "unlimited" and "boundless", what else is there to talk about concerning this alleged Creator? What would be not bad philosophy?
@@jonathanroark7114 Again, why even talk about this alleged being? This completely abstract God is of no value. The vast majority of believers believe in the God of Abraham, and they need to be countered since they are indeed anthropomorphizing God. "I am a jealous God" and so on. You are stating for the sake of argument that God is unlimited and boundless. OK, and?
This is as simple as wanting to hang on a chain. One cannot assume that the union between each link is the only thing that guarantees that we hang on that chain. It is imperative that we anchor it to reality.
@@con.troller4183 Well for one, it does a pretty good job of delegitimizing the various earth-bound earth-focused Gods and religions we've managed to come up with on what is really just this small seemingly insignificant planet adrift in a vast and most likely endless and forever expanding sea of existence.
Reason isnt in fundamental phisch. Searching true in Science is necessary than reason as experiente imagination. Hegel search true used contradition. Thedefore You comments about Hegel is Wrong. Please see book Western Philosophy by Russell. Excellent charter pm Hegel.
If then, the universe proves to be the result of a single property, squeezed, squashed and extruded into the higgs-field by clever electromagnetic forces, so that the four universal field forces are readily explained, who will apologise to Almighty God who told us all this and also told us how to behave to prevent the terrible things that are happening on the planet right now...even sent His Son to strengthen and reinforce our own indestructible electromagnetic spirit, way before our level of advancement.
While metaphysics tries to cloak itself by using the word physics within it, it is not a science and has nothing to do with science. It is much more closely related to ancient theories called natural philosophy before humans knew anything. Therefore it can come to any conclusions its adherents want it to. Some people will justify anything to get around facts that they don't like and true scientific methodologies they don't understand. Real science is hard. Fairytales are easy because they don't have to justify anything. They say whatever they like and most people are stupid enough to believe one or another. Mental work is not only as hard as physical work, it's often too hard for many people. Mind building is like body building. You don't start out in life to be the strongest physical body in the world you have to work at it. Same for science, engineering, and of course mathematics.
Why do you instantly classify metaphysics as unjustified fairy tales? What about Consciousness, morality, complex space (mathematics). None of them are material, yet obviously present and true.
@@oveh.8160 Mathematics is a closed system of logic that is coherent within itself. However, while it's the best tool we have so far it is not the universe, it is ultimately not an exact model of the universe and likely never will be. So far it's close enough to be useful. But as an abstraction it can be very misleading. Concepts like randomness and probability don't exist in Superdeterminism which is the rational universe. They are an admission that we cannot distinguish one particle or event from another. What they are at best are educated guesses. We have mathematical models for relativity and quantum mechanics both of which so far appear to be accurate enough to be useful but after more than 100 years of trying their inconsistencies can't be reconciled. So that represents a breakdown. One or both have missing elements. Even when they are eventually reconciled they will still not be a 100 percent accurate model.
Everything you have written is Just a philosophical thought 😁 Science can't exists WITHOUT philosophy as every scientific discovery or evidence needs interpretation. Act of interpretation is a philosophical act as it needs logic. Logic in itself is not scientific tool but philosophical. 😁
@@markfischer3626 What are you talking about? Science doesn't even know how to define or categorize consciousness, let alone explain it. Math is not 'close enough' to describe the universe, it 100% predicts and explains the universe. You should read "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences". It's written by Nobel prize winning physicist Eugene Wigner
How do you know there's been an elephant in your refrigerator? You find his footprints in the jello. Simple logic leads us to an inevitable conclusion: "Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but the one who constructed all things is God." (Hebrews 3:4) The Universe is organized and governed by unbreakable physical laws.
" Simple logic leads us to an inevitable conclusion: "Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but the one who constructed all things is God."" The universe is not a house and god is not a contractor. This is a false equivalent. Existence is a mystery we will probably never solve and god is an untestable excuse for pretending we already know.
You missed a step. To know if there's an elephant in your refrigerator based on footprints, you have to have a real conception of what an elephant is and by what means it leaves footprints.
@@ReverendDr.Thomas Sorry, I make a habit of looking over a channel that draws my interest. Your subs are quite the selection. And I have been shaking my head at the 700 club for as long as i can remember.
@@con.troller4183The Universe is not a house, it's by far more complex than something built with hammer and nails. It is, however, constructed with unbreakable physical laws which display order, therefore design.
i have come to a metaphysical conclusion that God is not a being but a probability. God is the positive most unlikely probability (something) and Satan the negative more likely probability (nothingness), literally. we are here due to the God probability, a one in bazillion “miracle” chance.
I'm a metaphysician. There is lots to parse here but I'll begin with applauding Robert in calling out the guests inconsistent arguments .... . Again lots to argue but I'll just point out two glaring examples. 1. The scientific inquiry often but not always uses deductive reasoning. (Like music, sometimes there are imaginative leaps.) Deductive reasoning is a priori just like mathematics. Mathematics is a metaphysicial language. Hence the guest unknowingly embraces metaphysics. 2. Kant is a great reference. Accordingly, most if not all scientific inquiry starts with basic information and assumptions. For example, the premise 'all events must have a cause' is logically necessary to advance any approach, or theories in scientific inquiry. The statement or premise that all events must have a cause is a metaphysical statement- assumption, yet it takes primacy in the entire thought process of said scientific inquiry. Without the ability to first wonder about what causes what, nothing gets discovered. Metaphysics, cosmology, phenomenology and even existentialism deals with our intrinsic sense of wonder and causation. Without such properties and qualities of human thought and consciousness, human advancement is logically impossible. Not convinced? Ask yourself what purpose is there to ask such questions (about causation, etc.) in the first place....
The host is very fair-minded. He often peers into fine tuning and God. But, he's simply without faith, and will never get closer to truth without that.
No. It cannot. It never could and never will. God is supernatural. God is unfalsifiable. God is untestable. There is no existing objective evidence for god. You cannot generate objective evidence for god. People can't even define god properly.
People have difficulty to define any non quatified component of our experience because they define objective reality in a certain way that there is no place for such things. There is no circular reasoning more obvious than positivism.
Before God is remembered (known again), perception must be purified through forgiveness. Learn to forgive truly and the illusions that obstruct the awareness of love will be undone.
@@con.troller4183 If you've already decided God does not exist then there can be no argument to change your mind. Why ask for one? To convince yourself you're right through argumentation? You could skip the argument altogether by simply loving. The peace and happiness you would inevitably experience might (or might not) raise the question of love's source.
