What is your opinion on my story?

digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
What is your opinion on my story?

In 2001 I visited China for three weeks to study martial arts.

During my visit to China I had a dream that my grandmother came to me and told me that she had passed away. The dream was basic and simple, it was her hands holding mine and her telling me every thing was ok.

I woke up the next morning and told my roommate who told me to call home.

I didn't call until that evening (because we were 12 hours ahead) and when I got through to the family I was told every thing was OK.

That evening I had the same exact dream. Very simple. Very short.

I went through the same routine but this time when I called my girlfriend broke down and told me that my grandmother had passed.

The dreams then stopped.

When I got home I found out that she had died around 1:00pm which was when I had already been asleep for four or five hours. Also, her last words were my name; she asked where I was.

 

Does this experience make me believe in a creator? No

Do I believe in a heaven? No

Do I expect any one else to believe me? No

Do I believe that some form of me, non-physical, will exist after the body dies? Yes

 

So what do you think?

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10140
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Not much, no offence. I've

Not much, no offence. I've had dreams that came true. Nothing so dramatic, but still.
And most dreams that I can remember don't, or can't.

I suspect the mind subconsciously comes up with all sorts of stuff that your conscious mind isn't dealing with or acknowledging while dreaming. I'd be much more surprised at stories like this if they didn't exclusively refer to the elderly and the sick. People that the storyteller would have naturally been concerned for already.

I won't flat out deny the possibility that there is more to it anymore than I'd flat out deny the possibility of some kind of god. But neither does it move me to believe that there is more to it than a concerned subconscious preparing the conscious for the inevitable.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5064
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
One day

 

at a family luncheon, my mouth full of tomato and buffalo mozzarella, I knew my little brother was in trouble. I could not be consoled and would not continue my repast. It was before mobile phones so there was no way to reach him. I was absolutely sure something bad had happened. Indeed, the dozy bastard had come off his motorcycle, racing at Oran Park at about the time of my performance.

When news of his accident came through from the hospital, all those about me stared in wild surmise. I was clearly supernatural. It was a weird thing but I knew he was racing that day so it could have just been a coincidental anxious panic though it was very specific. Never had it before or since. Today I think it was just a weird coincidence. I worried and the worry fed the worry. Maybe there's some Pandora supersymmetrical link in the particulate soup that we don't understand yet but its an hypothesis unsupported by data. 

If I were you I would wonder about this but what could it be but a coincidence? You must have been pretty close to Gran - you because you dreamed of her and she because she asked for you. This closeness could explain your prior worry - but these are speculations only. I'm always glad to find I care enough about people to have powerful subconscious feelings overflow into my neural workspace. Truth is, such a thing has only happened to me once and humans all around me are dying like flies. 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5064
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Ooer

 

digitalbeachbum wrote:

 

Do I believe that some form of me, non-physical, will exist after the body dies? Yes

 

 

What non-physical part was it you had in mind, Digital? 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:In

digitalbeachbum wrote:

In 2001 I visited China for three weeks to study martial arts.

During my visit to China I had a dream that my grandmother came to me and told me that she had passed away. The dream was basic and simple, it was her hands holding mine and her telling me every thing was ok.

I woke up the next morning and told my roommate who told me to call home.

I didn't call until that evening (because we were 12 hours ahead) and when I got through to the family I was told every thing was OK.

That evening I had the same exact dream. Very simple. Very short.

I went through the same routine but this time when I called my girlfriend broke down and told me that my grandmother had passed.

The dreams then stopped.

When I got home I found out that she had died around 1:00pm which was when I had already been asleep for four or five hours. Also, her last words were my name; she asked where I was.

 

Does this experience make me believe in a creator? No

Do I believe in a heaven? No

Do I expect any one else to believe me? No

Do I believe that some form of me, non-physical, will exist after the body dies? Yes

 

So what do you think?

 

Freaky but does not take into account all the times you didn't dream about loved ones. It doesn't take into account the times you did dream about loved ones and nothing happened. Most dreams in any case, we wake up and never remember.

Timing is all it was. There may have been some subconscious thing going on that you were unaware of in regards to her.

I've had sleep paralysis where I dreamed of my dead grandmother standing at the foot of my bed talking to me. I had the same thing happen with my dead adoptive father. I've had that happen with my LIVE mother. You merely are a victim of timing. You might want to look back at events prior when you last saw her, you'll probably find that something triggered the worry because of her age, or seeing someone else that age with problems.

I worry about my mom constantly because of her mobility problems and old people health problems. So even though the eventual will happen to all of us, days and years go by and nothing happens.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I have to be the sole or

I have to be the sole or "soul" detractor here. There is nothing going on here other than mundane human psychology. Humans are material and once the brain dies, that is it. Nothing survives our bodies. We are our bodies. Our thoughts and our personalities are merely the projection of our material processes in motion. Just like running is the result of legs moving faster and faster. It isn't a glamorous explanation, but that is the reality.

Your grandmother did not talk to you. You merely had a dream about her that just so happened to happen at the same time she died. This is selection bias and sample rate error. It doesn't take into account all the people who dream about someone dying and they don't die. It doesn't take into account all your dreams that you don't remember, which is a majority. It doesn't take into account your subconscious worry about an old person. She's old, so anyone is going to worry even if they are not aware of it.

It freaks you out because of the timing, but there is nothing going on here but your brain playing tricks on you. Your reaction is also due to being close to her. If you were not, you most likely wouldn't have had that dream.

You are merely projecting and retrofitting because of the nature of your relationship and the timing of the dream.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
I had something similar,

I had something similar, only different, happen when my grandfather (the minister one) passed away.

I was visiting relatives in a different state and decided I'd call my other grandparents and see if I could come up for a visit.  I got my grandmother on the phone and she told me that granddad had had another heart attack, but that he was doing better and was going to get out of the hospital the next afternoon and I was welcome to come up.  I called the grandparents I was staying with and asked if it was okay with them to take the bus to see them, and they said yes, so I rang up Grayhound and made the reservations.  The next morning, the grandparents I was staying with took me to Philly and I hopped on the bus.

When I get there my grandparents are happy to see me and my grandmother tells me that the doctor had just decided, that morning (!) that my grandfather could get out of the hospital. 

I get my bags put away in the room where I was staying (it was my grandfather's study, where he had all his sermons stashed away, along with his religious books -- let's just say this was my favorite place in the house to stay), then head upstairs to their bedroom, and we start talking about my trip and how lucky I am that the doctor decided that morning (!) to let granddad out of the hospital.

Eventually the conversation turns to granddad's health and he says that he's tired of having heart attacks (he had heart disease from contracting malaria twice, so his heart problems had been going on for decades) and that he's led a great life and is ready to go home and see Jesus.  My grandmother protests, of course, and he just keeps going on about it, talking about how he's done all these things (which were truly amazing, many of which I didn't learn about until my own father passed away about 3 years ago).

Grandmom goes and starts dinner and tells the two of us to get washed up.  I head back downstairs, granddad heads to the bathroom to shave.

A few minutes later I hear grandmom scream, so I run upstairs and head to their bedroom.  It seems that as soon as granddad had finished shaving, he went back to the bedroom to get something, had a heart attack, and died on the floor next to his bed.  Grandmom had called an ambulance, but they lived in the country and it was too late anyway.  I spent the evening helping grandmom call all the relatives.

Once everything settled down, grandmom told me how grateful she was that I came up, and again how lucky I was that I got to see granddad because the doctor had decided, just that morning (!) to let him out of the hospital.  I remind her of the conversation we'd had the night before, except she said that it never happened.  Everyone else I spoke to insisted that the doctor had decided, just that morning, that he was well enough to leave the hospital.  No one, none of my relatives, could understand why I had decided to make that trip.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Not much, no

Vastet wrote:
Not much, no offence. I've had dreams that came true. Nothing so dramatic, but still. And most dreams that I can remember don't, or can't. I suspect the mind subconsciously comes up with all sorts of stuff that your conscious mind isn't dealing with or acknowledging while dreaming. I'd be much more surprised at stories like this if they didn't exclusively refer to the elderly and the sick. People that the storyteller would have naturally been concerned for already. I won't flat out deny the possibility that there is more to it anymore than I'd flat out deny the possibility of some kind of god. But neither does it move me to believe that there is more to it than a concerned subconscious preparing the conscious for the inevitable.

No offense taken. I posted the story because I knew I would get honest opinions and not some bullshit story about souls and the like.

I spent several years researching the obvious. I too said it was nothing more than the conscious/unconscious mind at play during that timeframe. Yet, it is one of those situations where all the right stuff happened at the right time to make you think twice, or even thrice.

The timing of it all is the worst to deal with; because she died the same day/evening I had the dream. I can't recall the exact time because I was asleep but that isn't what mattered to me.

The issue with this is that I had the same dream twice. Now I blew it off the first day thinking that every thing was OK and that she was alright. After all, every one I spoke to that evening said she was OK. The second evening though was the same dream which lead me to believe a) she had died and was trying to tell me a message or b) she had not died and I was only having the dream over and over until it was confirmed. What if my girlfriend HAD NOT told me the truth? Would I still have had the dream?

The other thing is that I did not have the dream the day before or any time during the two weeks while I was in China. I really had no issues with thinking about her being old. I was really having too much fun being a single guy with several thousands of dollars buying really cool stuff at extremely cheap prices. Yes, subconsciously I could have been thinking about her, but honestly, I really did have any outstanding issues. My closure with my grandmother was complete and I had nothing left to worry about.

I'm cool with the whole experience. It sort of goes along with my buddhist belief system. I still don't believe in heaven or god.

 

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

digitalbeachbum wrote:

 

Do I believe that some form of me, non-physical, will exist after the body dies? Yes

 

 

What non-physical part was it you had in mind, Digital? 

Good question, let me think about this one for a little bit. I want to make sure I don't come across like a crunchy granola yoga instructor who thinks that we have some energy connecting us to the ground, which flows out of our head in to the sky (or vice versa. I'm always getting that shit mixed up).

 

*****************

EDIT

*****************

I believe that every thing in this world, in this Universe, is an illusion. This illusion is based on our ego to build attachments to material items, including our body. Once your body ceases, the illusion ceases.

I do not believe in life-after-death. Far too often I hear people talk about "living" in heaven or some other place of existence. Unfortunately living in this Universe is the only place they will experience this form of living. After you die, this form of living ceases.

What or where will people exist after death, that I do not have an answer for you.

 

 

 

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Eventually the conversation turns to granddad's health and he says that he's tired of having heart attacks (he had heart disease from contracting malaria twice, so his heart problems had been going on for decades) and that he's led a great life and is ready to go home and see Jesus.  My grandmother protests, of course, and he just keeps going on about it, talking about how he's done all these things (which were truly amazing, many of which I didn't learn about until my own father passed away about 3 years ago).

Sorry to hear about his heart problems. It must have been difficult to deal with all those years.

I've watched family and friends deal with sicknesses and it can be heart breaking because I want to help but there is usually nothing you can do but give them support and love.

My grandmother had a rough life. She apparently had a lot of issues when she was younger because she started to talk about things which were not true to us. After several visits to her with my mom, my mother figured out that she was talking about her old apartment in New York (long before my mother was born). It appears she was re-living her childhood as she could recall several of her best friends down the street.

Several episodes became difficult to control and my mom had to have her drugged. It appears that life in Brooklyn during the early 1900's was extremely difficult and violent. So many different, unknown stories which none of us ever knew about were eventually thrown out at us. It took us all by surprise and we eventually understood my grandmother even more for the way she was as an individual.

 

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:Sorry

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Sorry to hear about his heart problems. It must have been difficult to deal with all those years.

I've watched family and friends deal with sicknesses and it can be heart breaking because I want to help but there is usually nothing you can do but give them support and love.

It really wasn't that bad.  He contracted malaria in South America in the 20's, then went home to Canada to recover.  When he returned to South America again, he once again contracted malaria.  Apparently malaria causes damage to the lining of the heart, which can cause heart problems later.

Other than the frequent heart attacks -- I believe it was more than a dozen before he died -- he was as strong as an ox.  He was born in '01, as I recall, and well into the 1970's he was working his "family farm" on the side of a mountain.  He died at age 74, as I recall, as active as can be, up until the very end.

In his case, his illnesses were linked to something he really enjoyed -- being a minister -- and I suppose that made it all worthwhile in his mind.  I'm heading on 50 and have a few aches and pains I don't need to have had, and they too are related to things I enjoyed that came with their own risks.

On the subject of "Woo", for years after his death I would try to imagine what he'd tell me if I could have asked him for religious advice.  If there is something I'd tell Atheists it's that even if there is no such thing as an Immortal Soul, there's no reason you have to lose contact with someone you've known and been close to.  My grandfather never appeared to me in some kind of "vision", but it took a long time before he was finally "gone", if you understand my meaning.  To this day I prefer clergy who are more direct than subtle, and who are more passionate than mellow.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:On the

FurryCatHerder wrote:
On the subject of "Woo", for years after his death I would try to imagine what he'd tell me if I could have asked him for religious advice.  If there is something I'd tell Atheists it's that even if there is no such thing as an Immortal Soul, there's no reason you have to lose contact with someone you've known and been close to.  My grandfather never appeared to me in some kind of "vision", but it took a long time before he was finally "gone", if you understand my meaning.  To this day I prefer clergy who are more direct than subtle, and who are more passionate than mellow.

I understand what you mean and with the passing of my grandmother I knew she was "gone" before I had even left for China. I had no issues with her passing. She was 94 and lived a very long and meaningful life.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I have to be

Brian37 wrote:

I have to be the sole or "soul" detractor here. There is nothing going on here other than mundane human psychology. Humans are material and once the brain dies, that is it. Nothing survives our bodies. We are our bodies. Our thoughts and our personalities are merely the projection of our material processes in motion. Just like running is the result of legs moving faster and faster. It isn't a glamorous explanation, but that is the reality.

Your grandmother did not talk to you. You merely had a dream about her that just so happened to happen at the same time she died. This is selection bias and sample rate error. It doesn't take into account all the people who dream about someone dying and they don't die. It doesn't take into account all your dreams that you don't remember, which is a majority. It doesn't take into account your subconscious worry about an old person. She's old, so anyone is going to worry even if they are not aware of it.

It freaks you out because of the timing, but there is nothing going on here but your brain playing tricks on you. Your reaction is also due to being close to her. If you were not, you most likely wouldn't have had that dream.

You are merely projecting and retrofitting because of the nature of your relationship and the timing of the dream.

 

I respect your opinion, even though you got several incorrect comments from my previous post. I never expected any one to say any thing which supported my dream as being "life after death" experiences. I still do not believe in "life after death" even after this experience.

I do believe that this life is an illusion brought on by our desires to satisfy our ego. We build attachments during our lifetime and it is what I believe ceases to exist when our bodies stop.

 

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

I have to be the sole or "soul" detractor here. There is nothing going on here other than mundane human psychology. Humans are material and once the brain dies, that is it. Nothing survives our bodies. We are our bodies. Our thoughts and our personalities are merely the projection of our material processes in motion. Just like running is the result of legs moving faster and faster. It isn't a glamorous explanation, but that is the reality.

Your grandmother did not talk to you. You merely had a dream about her that just so happened to happen at the same time she died. This is selection bias and sample rate error. It doesn't take into account all the people who dream about someone dying and they don't die. It doesn't take into account all your dreams that you don't remember, which is a majority. It doesn't take into account your subconscious worry about an old person. She's old, so anyone is going to worry even if they are not aware of it.

It freaks you out because of the timing, but there is nothing going on here but your brain playing tricks on you. Your reaction is also due to being close to her. If you were not, you most likely wouldn't have had that dream.

You are merely projecting and retrofitting because of the nature of your relationship and the timing of the dream.

 

I respect your opinion, even though you got several incorrect comments from my previous post. I never expected any one to say any thing which supported my dream as being "life after death" experiences. I still do not believe in "life after death" even after this experience.

I do believe that this life is an illusion brought on by our desires to satisfy our ego. We build attachments during our lifetime and it is what I believe ceases to exist when our bodies stop.

 

 

I must do a better job of clarifying my positions. That was merely my lip twitching when it comes to "freaky" things. I don't want the "ah ha" crowed jumping on that. It was meant as general consumption.

But the other point I do make even outside this thread, the world "atheist" does not preclude an atheist from having their own woo. Not accusing you of that, just saying.

Perfect example outside this thread. Right now on the History channel, they have this stupid show about the history of "rouge waves", and it conflates natural events implying they are possibly  beyond nature.

Your experiences WERE real, like having a dream or watching a cartoon is real. It can have real affect even though it was just a dream.

Ultimately it was merely warning everyone not to jump gaps because something "feels real". Nothing more.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I'd tell Atheists it's

Quote:
I'd tell Atheists it's that even if there is no such thing as an Immortal Soul,

There isn't. There never was. Just like if you had your legs cut off you would not be able to run. Thoughts require a material process. Thus claims of ANY god or any "soul" are BOTH absurd claims. I don't care if it is a Christian, Hindu or Shintoist or Jew claiming the "soul" exists. It is merely a reflection of human desire based on our REAL strive to continue as an anthropomorphic placebo reflection.

I am sorry if that reality frightens you. But now that we know what evolution is, there is no need to cling to superstition and make up fictional gods or non existent afterlife's.

THE ONLY way we continue in the minds of those who survive us, nothing more. When we die, that is it. Just like when a tree dies or a cockroach, or even a bacteria. We are not above nature, we are not special, and there is no super hero that will save us. Our species will go extinct and our planet will die and the universe will continue without us. NO MAGIC, NO GOD, NO SOUL needed to explain reality.

The same reason people believe in "souls" is the same reason people believe in Big Foot, or faked moon landing. Their desires override their rational brain. A glamorous explanation to life is more appealing than mundane reality.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
While I wouldn't say that

While I wouldn't say that dreams are completely meaningless I think sometimes people place far too much importance on them. I certainly wouldn't grant them any supernatural quality.

When you talk about dreams, such things are already inexplicable even without considering the occasional, unlikely convergence of thought and real life event. Of course if it weren't improbable it wouldn't be a coincidence. The bizarre nature of it notwithstanding I'd probably write it off as such.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I must do a

Brian37 wrote:
I must do a better job of clarifying my positions. That was merely my lip twitching when it comes to "freaky" things. I don't want the "ah ha" crowed jumping on that. It was meant as general consumption.

But the other point I do make even outside this thread, the world "atheist" does not preclude an atheist from having their own woo. Not accusing you of that, just saying.

Perfect example outside this thread. Right now on the History channel, they have this stupid show about the history of "rouge waves", and it conflates natural events implying they are possibly  beyond nature.

Your experiences WERE real, like having a dream or watching a cartoon is real. It can have real affect even though it was just a dream.

Ultimately it was merely warning everyone not to jump gaps because something "feels real". Nothing more.

I agree, the experience was unique and different, but not super natural or a miracle. It was what is was, an experience for me, but I still don't believe that when I die nothing exists beyond the death of the body. I can't see it as being logical because of the simple reason that before the start of this Universe there was more to it (not matter or energy). There is a cycle of things out there and it is constantly repeating itself. Matter, energy, etc. Always being recycled.

Which is why I believe in multiple universes and (I hate to use the word) but reincarnation.

 

 

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:There isn't.

Brian37 wrote:
There isn't. There never was. Just like if you had your legs cut off you would not be able to run. Thoughts require a material process. Thus claims of ANY god or any "soul" are BOTH absurd claims. I don't care if it is a Christian, Hindu or Shintoist or Jew claiming the "soul" exists. It is merely a reflection of human desire based on our REAL strive to continue as an anthropomorphic placebo reflection.

I am sorry if that reality frightens you. But now that we know what evolution is, there is no need to cling to superstition and make up fictional gods or non existent afterlife's.

THE ONLY way we continue in the minds of those who survive us, nothing more. When we die, that is it. Just like when a tree dies or a cockroach, or even a bacteria. We are not above nature, we are not special, and there is no super hero that will save us. Our species will go extinct and our planet will die and the universe will continue without us. NO MAGIC, NO GOD, NO SOUL needed to explain reality.

The same reason people believe in "souls" is the same reason people believe in Big Foot, or faked moon landing. Their desires override their rational brain. A glamorous explanation to life is more appealing than mundane reality.

I went through several stages of nothing, something, god, no god, etc, until I picked buddhism as my belief. While I reject all that dogma bullshit you see and reject those douches who suck up money just so they can be like the rich in other religions, I still believe in the basics of the philosophy. I reject gods. I reject miracles. I reject saviors.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:There isn't.

Brian37 wrote:
There isn't. There never was. Just like if you had your legs cut off you would not be able to run. Thoughts require a material process. Thus claims of ANY god or any "soul" are BOTH absurd claims. I don't care if it is a Christian, Hindu or Shintoist or Jew claiming the "soul" exists. It is merely a reflection of human desire based on our REAL strive to continue as an anthropomorphic placebo reflection.

I am sorry if that reality frightens you. But now that we know what evolution is, there is no need to cling to superstition and make up fictional gods or non existent afterlife's.

THE ONLY way we continue in the minds of those who survive us, nothing more. When we die, that is it. Just like when a tree dies or a cockroach, or even a bacteria. We are not above nature, we are not special, and there is no super hero that will save us. Our species will go extinct and our planet will die and the universe will continue without us. NO MAGIC, NO GOD, NO SOUL needed to explain reality.

The same reason people believe in "souls" is the same reason people believe in Big Foot, or faked moon landing. Their desires override their rational brain. A glamorous explanation to life is more appealing than mundane reality.

I went through several stages of nothing, something, god, no god, etc, until I picked buddhism as my belief. While I reject all that dogma bullshit you see and reject those douches who suck up money just so they can be like the rich in other religions, I still believe in the basics of the philosophy. I reject gods. I reject miracles. I reject saviors.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:but I still don't

Quote:
but I still don't believe that when I die nothing exists beyond the death of the body.

In what context?

Our bodies decay in the ground when buried,  or get cremated and in both situations become the atoms or energy for something else. And we DO live on in those who know us and their memories who survive us.

It sounds to me like you want to reject the woo of Abraham, but are still looking for some eternity that does not exist.

Woo is woo.

We ARE literally our brains. Once our brains die, that is it. "We" as individuals are nothing more than the end result of our biological processes. Just like no snowflake is the same and cannot exist after it melts no matter how pretty we think snow is.

The earth was around before you or I were born. "Nothing" to us as individuals existed. How was before you were born, going to be any different than after you die?

 

 


 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:In what

Brian37 wrote:

In what context?

Our bodies decay in the ground when buried,  or get cremated and in both situations become the atoms or energy for something else. And we DO live on in those who know us and their memories who survive us.

It sounds to me like you want to reject the woo of Abraham, but are still looking for some eternity that does not exist.

Woo is woo.

We ARE literally our brains. Once our brains die, that is it. "We" as individuals are nothing more than the end result of our biological processes. Just like no snowflake is the same and cannot exist after it melts no matter how pretty we think snow is.

The earth was around before you or I were born. "Nothing" to us as individuals existed. How was before you were born, going to be any different than after you die?

In the context that this existence is a falsehood based on emotional responses of an untrained mind. I agree that when our body dies, that it ceases and so does that illusion. I reject all creators (gods) because I've yet to see any evidence to show they existed except for providing comfort to those who fear the unknown. Woo! Woo! Chuga Chuga! We are not literally our brains unless you are trying to say that we are literally our hair, toe nails, poop, etc. In that case, our body is our body. The "we" is part of the illusion and is based on emotional conditioning that the self is a reality. Nothing is always nothing when you are speaking in a mathematical sense; empty sets are empty sets, but in the sense of the Universe there has always been "something" but never "nothing".

****edit****

I'll direct you to these pages as it assists in my attempt to explain my viewpoint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_science

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_Evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_psychology

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
There isn't. There never was. Just like if you had your legs cut off you would not be able to run. Thoughts require a material process. Thus claims of ANY god or any "soul" are BOTH absurd claims. I don't care if it is a Christian, Hindu or Shintoist or Jew claiming the "soul" exists. It is merely a reflection of human desire based on our REAL strive to continue as an anthropomorphic placebo reflection.

I am sorry if that reality frightens you. But now that we know what evolution is, there is no need to cling to superstition and make up fictional gods or non existent afterlife's.

THE ONLY way we continue in the minds of those who survive us, nothing more. When we die, that is it. Just like when a tree dies or a cockroach, or even a bacteria. We are not above nature, we are not special, and there is no super hero that will save us. Our species will go extinct and our planet will die and the universe will continue without us. NO MAGIC, NO GOD, NO SOUL needed to explain reality.

The same reason people believe in "souls" is the same reason people believe in Big Foot, or faked moon landing. Their desires override their rational brain. A glamorous explanation to life is more appealing than mundane reality.

I went through several stages of nothing, something, god, no god, etc, until I picked buddhism as my belief. While I reject all that dogma bullshit you see and reject those douches who suck up money just so they can be like the rich in other religions, I still believe in the basics of the philosophy. I reject gods. I reject miracles. I reject saviors.

 

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either. It is a mistake to think that Buddhists don't have the same baggage other religions do. It is just as rooted in superstition as any other religion and was started in the same unscientific ignorant age as any other.

And just like any other religion, those who share the label "Buddhist" can be just as diverse in how they interpret their label as any other group. It is also a mistake to assume that it has been free from being violent. The region where Buddhism is predominate has never been free from violence anymore than the history of our species has been free from violence. You are merely focusing on pockets of Buddhism's history and the west's sympathy for Buddhism as a minority as part of our current perception.

Humans will do what humans do regardless of label. "Buddhism" will NOT automatically make one moral anymore than "Christian" or "Muslim" or "atheist."

What causes humans to do either good or bad is our evolution, not our labels. Please don't take this personally. I hate it when Sam Harris talks about Buddhism too. Victor Stinger blasts all the major labels, including Sam Harris in his book "The New Atheism". Good reading.

His conclusion is the same as mine. Our labels don't own a monopoly on morality and what humans do good or bad is merely a product of evolution.

You may find comfort in Buddhism, but I'd tell you the same thing I would tell Sam Harris, you don't need it, you just buy into it because it feels right to you. Sam may be a neurologist, but Newton also postulated Alchemy. Victor's book explains the common ground our species has always had in both our good and bad behavior.

I am not attacking you personally, just suggesting that you don't need Buddhism anymore than Furry needs to be Jewish anymore than a Christian needs to believe in Jesus. Our species existed and evolved way prior to all those religions, and if humanity sheds any or all of them, we will still exist in the future. Most likely with newer superstitions and will look upon these current popular beliefs just like we treat the Egyptian myths as such.

And again, after our species goes extinct, there will be no future generation to market any of those labels to. The species will be gone, and even our planet will die. The universe will continue without us.

Just saying.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37

Brian37 wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:
I went through several stages of nothing, something, god, no god, etc, until I picked buddhism as my belief. While I reject all that dogma bullshit you see and reject those douches who suck up money just so they can be like the rich in other religions, I still believe in the basics of the philosophy. I reject gods. I reject miracles. I reject saviors.

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either.

What is your understanding of Buddhism, in such a way that it is this deserving of not getting a "pass"?  Do the teachings or observations of =anyone= get the Brian37 "Pass of approval"?

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Philosophicus
Philosophicus's picture
Posts: 358
Joined: 2009-12-16
User is offlineOffline
...

digitalbeachbum, first you said:

Quote:

Do I believe that some form of me, non-physical, will exist after the body dies? Yes

 

And then you said:

Quote:

I still do not believe in "life after death" even after this experience.

 

Do you mean that you think some non-physical part of you will survive your death, but that this non-physical part of you will be non-conscious?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Brian37

FurryCatHerder wrote:
What is your understanding of Buddhism, in such a way that it is this deserving of not getting a "pass"?  Do the teachings or observations of =anyone= get the Brian37 "Pass of approval"?

Stop it. Jews, Buddhists and atheists, especially in America, are minorities, this isn't about anyone needing to seek my approval. I am no one's boss. So knock off your false attitude that I think I am superior. If anyone has that you do in thinking Jews are special. Your fictional friend has special laws for us gentiles, remember? Separate but equal laws under your god.

NO ONE IS SPECIAL, not even me.

When I say "You don't get a pass", I am merely saying I won't buy your claim simply because you find comfort in it. THAT'S IT, nothing more.

You don't need to be Jewish, he doesn't need to be Buddhist and I don't need to be atheist. The species was around before all of us and will be around long after all of us are gone. The human ability to have sex and make babies, is independent on our positions.

I am questioning WHY people believe what they believe, not their civil rights. I am questioning why they feel the need to hold a label not the right to hold a label.

I know Beach isn't taking what I am saying personally, nor would Sam Harris for that matter. You on the other hand ARE getting pissed because I wont give you a pass.

YOU don't give him a free pass either. If he said "Buddhism is the way to go" you dont say "Ok, if it is good enough for you than it is good enough for me". SO don't hand me any crap. You reject others claims, even if you accept their right to claim it. I accept his right to claim it, I am simply suggesting he doesn't need it.

If you want to claim that invisible pink unicorns are real, I don't care. But to try to imply the position of others should not be questioned is absurd and that credulity in our species history has held us back. I think Beach has a much better understanding of what I am doing here than you do.

Get over yourself. You and he and I are merely 3 of 7 billion. Liking a person does not mean I have to like every claim that particular person makes, nor does it mean that claim deserves a pedestal and we should never challenge the claims of others.

I like Beach, and if when you are not pontificating about how special  being Jewish is, you can be quite reasonable. Your compassion for other minorities is not my issue, your using that as a front to excuse a taboo you yourself want is.

He can speak for himself and defend his Buddhism himself, he is a big boy. And I think he has already admitted that it is merely "his thing" that he settled on. That is far more than you are willing to admit.

Beech, am I hurting your feelings? Or as I suspect, you accept that I am merely saying "You don't need it"?

Now Furry, when he says "You are not hurting my feelings", please knock drop your "poor me" crap. If he isn't taking it personally and he knows it is not about his rights then you need to STOP your persecution complex by hypocritically defending a Buddhist while claiming that your God has special laws for the pet gentiles who sit at the back of the bus.

THIS IS STRICTLY about claims and evidence, not civil rights or liking him OR ANYONE. I can like someone without liking every claim they make.

NOW it is quite simple why I reject Buddhism. Same reason I reject Christianity and Hinduism, and Shintoism and would reject Zoroaster if it were still widely popular today. Same reason I reject your religion as well.

It is all popular tradition and mere tradition and was not started through empirical scientific method and WAS ALL started during an age when all our species was scientifically ignorant.

Again, you want to paint me out to be an insensitive monster because that is a way to take focus of yourself and a way to ignore looking in the mirror. I find this tactic laughable considering that you want a King and a pecking order for your "chosen people" land. That would put the Buddhist you claim to be defending at the back of the bus along with me.

Let him fight his own battles. I think he can handle it. I don't think he has the thin skin you do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Philosophicus
Philosophicus's picture
Posts: 358
Joined: 2009-12-16
User is offlineOffline
...

digitalbeachbum wrote:

We are not literally our brains unless you are trying to say that we are literally our hair, toe nails, poop, etc. In that case, our body is our body. The "we" is part of the illusion and is based on emotional conditioning that the self is a reality.

In the physicalist view, the mind is a function of the brain; the mind is what the brain does.  There's no view in physicalism that our hair or toenails are a substrate for our minds.  Evidence of this is that when you get a haircut or clip your toenails, your mind is unaffected.  But when the brain is damaged, functioning of the mind is lost. 

You can say that when you get a haircut that your mind is somewhat affected.  For example, when you get a good haircut you feel good or when you get a bad haircut you feel bad.  But this is extremely uncomparable to the loss of mental functioning that results in specific areas of brain damage.

 


Philosophicus
Philosophicus's picture
Posts: 358
Joined: 2009-12-16
User is offlineOffline
...

Brian37 wrote:

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either ...

 

I hate it when Sam Harris talks about Buddhism ... Victor Stinger blasts all the major labels, including Sam Harris in his book "The New Atheism" ... 

 

You may find comfort in Buddhism, but I'd tell you the same thing I would tell Sam Harris, you don't need it, you just buy into it because it feels right to you. Sam may be a neurologist, but Newton also postulated Alchemy ...

 ... [I'm] suggesting that you don't need Buddhism anymore than Furry needs to be Jewish anymore than a Christian needs to believe in Jesus. Our species existed and evolved way prior to all those religions, and if humanity sheds any or all of them, we will still exist in the future. Most likely with newer superstitions and will look upon these current popular beliefs just like we treat the Egyptian myths as such.

Sam Harris isn't a Buddhist.  He likes the meditation techniques because they train his mind, but he doesn't adopt the metaphysics of Buddhism.  He might adopt some of the morals, but that doesn't count as woo unless he accepts a false metaphysical view about the moral.  You can look at meditation the same way you look at lifting weights.  It's possible to have false beliefs about the weights, but you don't have to have the beliefs to in order to enter a weightlifting program.

Or drinking beer.  You can drink beer without having false beliefs about it; just enjoy the buzz.  You can even accept the fact that if you drink too much of it your health will be affected.  Look at smoking -- it's the same analogy.  Taking a walk in the park is another analogy.  You can enjoy the psychological benefits of clearing your head, getting away from people for awhile, getting your thoughts together, and enjoying the fresh air and scenery.  You don't have to believe the trees are talking to you and that elves are running around through the forest.

 

 

 

 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Philosophicus wrote:Brian37

Philosophicus wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either ...

 

I hate it when Sam Harris talks about Buddhism ... Victor Stinger blasts all the major labels, including Sam Harris in his book "The New Atheism" ... 

 

You may find comfort in Buddhism, but I'd tell you the same thing I would tell Sam Harris, you don't need it, you just buy into it because it feels right to you. Sam may be a neurologist, but Newton also postulated Alchemy ...

 ... [I'm] suggesting that you don't need Buddhism anymore than Furry needs to be Jewish anymore than a Christian needs to believe in Jesus. Our species existed and evolved way prior to all those religions, and if humanity sheds any or all of them, we will still exist in the future. Most likely with newer superstitions and will look upon these current popular beliefs just like we treat the Egyptian myths as such.

Sam Harris isn't a Buddhist.  He likes the meditation techniques because they train his mind, but he doesn't adopt the metaphysics of Buddhism.  He might adopt some of the morals, but that doesn't count as woo unless he accepts a false metaphysical view about the moral.  You can look at meditation the same way you look at lifting weights.  It's possible to have false beliefs about the weights, but you don't have to have the beliefs to in order to enter a weightlifting program.

Or drinking beer.  You can drink beer without having false beliefs about it; just enjoy the buzz.  You can even accept the fact that if you drink too much of it your health will be affected.  Look at smoking -- it's the same analogy.  Taking a walk in the park is another analogy.  You can enjoy the psychological benefits of clearing your head, getting away from people for awhile, getting your thoughts together, and enjoying the fresh air and scenery.  You don't have to believe the trees are talking to you and that elves are running around through the forest.

 

 

 

 

 

Sam isn't a Buddhist, but he DOES use the word "spirituality" AND thinks there is "something" to Buddhism, whatever that "something" is. Victor Stinger would say there is nothing to Buddhism.

And yes I agree, one can drink beer without believing it was made by unicorns. Still not my point.

If you know beer exists but you don't know how it is made, the labels on the bottle are just mere labels. Buddhism is not required  nor is "spirituality" to observe nature or human behavior anymore than the label "Budweiser" tells you how beer is made.

Sam does not hold woo in the conventional sense, no. I simply would say he needs to drop the word "spiritual" and stop talking about Buddhism as if it is responsible for any kind of modern method, or at least don't imply that there is "something" to it. It is merely something he is fond of, even if he tries to pass it off like a secular Jew. It still doesn't make Buddhism valid for any type of study other than the study of a tradition in a historical sense.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Buddhism

Brian37 wrote:

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either. It is a mistake to think that Buddhists don't have the same baggage other religions do. It is just as rooted in superstition as any other religion and was started in the same unscientific ignorant age as any other.

And just like any other religion, those who share the label "Buddhist" can be just as diverse in how they interpret their label as any other group. It is also a mistake to assume that it has been free from being violent. The region where Buddhism is predominate has never been free from violence anymore than the history of our species has been free from violence. You are merely focusing on pockets of Buddhism's history and the west's sympathy for Buddhism as a minority as part of our current perception.

Humans will do what humans do regardless of label. "Buddhism" will NOT automatically make one moral anymore than "Christian" or "Muslim" or "atheist."

What causes humans to do either good or bad is our evolution, not our labels. Please don't take this personally. I hate it when Sam Harris talks about Buddhism too. Victor Stinger blasts all the major labels, including Sam Harris in his book "The New Atheism". Good reading.

His conclusion is the same as mine. Our labels don't own a monopoly on morality and what humans do good or bad is merely a product of evolution.

You may find comfort in Buddhism, but I'd tell you the same thing I would tell Sam Harris, you don't need it, you just buy into it because it feels right to you. Sam may be a neurologist, but Newton also postulated Alchemy. Victor's book explains the common ground our species has always had in both our good and bad behavior.

I am not attacking you personally, just suggesting that you don't need Buddhism anymore than Furry needs to be Jewish anymore than a Christian needs to believe in Jesus. Our species existed and evolved way prior to all those religions, and if humanity sheds any or all of them, we will still exist in the future. Most likely with newer superstitions and will look upon these current popular beliefs just like we treat the Egyptian myths as such.

And again, after our species goes extinct, there will be no future generation to market any of those labels to. The species will be gone, and even our planet will die. The universe will continue without us.

Just saying.

I believe I said that there are issues with buddhism. There is dogma. There is corruption. There is greed. Buddhists are after all are human.

I will assume that your knowledge and research of buddhism is extremely limited.

Siddhartha taught that we should not take his word for it and to go out and experience life itself.

While buddhism is often used like a religion, the teachings of the buddha's instructs others not to get stuck in the dogma which hinduism did; he realized that this is one of the illusions which misleads humanity.

Other than buddhist monks lighting their selves on fire, there is nothing violent about it. Buddhism itself is non-violent. Please show where there is a buddhist war or conflict where people are shouting "In the name of buddha, we must kill our enemies" or where buddha speaks that you must go forth and kill others. In all the teachings of the buddha, I have nothing other than the The Kalachakra Tantra which speaks of a war inside the self. This is the battle against the enemy within,which creates disturbing emotions and impulsive behavior.

Ah yes, labels! You Strong Atheist!

I do not make the claim that buddhism is better for solving human problems. Plenty of buddhist followers have murdered, stolen, lied or violated others.

I don't find comfort buddhism per say, I don't follow any dogma. I don't hide in it as an effort to avoid life. I use it to describe where I come from because I follow strictly the 4 Noble Truths which is the core of all Buddhism

The 4 Noble Truths:

1 - there is suffering

2 - you will suffer

3 - there is a path to non-suffering

4 - you will eventually find the path to non-suffering

Every thing else in buddhism, including the 8 fold path, the 5 aggregates, the 10 virtues, etc are all tools to assist in the 4 Noble Truths. I don't follow all of them nor do I spend much time talking about them. They are part of the "dogma" of buddhism.

And the Universe will one day die too.

BTW - What is beyond our Universe? What is beyond that beyond? What was before the "big bang"? There is never "nothing" but always "some thing". Even "outer space" has stuff in it but people always call it "empty".

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Brian37

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:
I went through several stages of nothing, something, god, no god, etc, until I picked buddhism as my belief. While I reject all that dogma bullshit you see and reject those douches who suck up money just so they can be like the rich in other religions, I still believe in the basics of the philosophy. I reject gods. I reject miracles. I reject saviors.

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either.

What is your understanding of Buddhism, in such a way that it is this deserving of not getting a "pass"?  Do the teachings or observations of =anyone= get the Brian37 "Pass of approval"?

Nice!

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3123
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
I'm curious what did Grandma

I'm curious what did Grandma die from?

There may be something to intuition or the subconscious mind knowing things of which the conscience mind is not aware.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Philosophicus

Philosophicus wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

We are not literally our brains unless you are trying to say that we are literally our hair, toe nails, poop, etc. In that case, our body is our body. The "we" is part of the illusion and is based on emotional conditioning that the self is a reality.

In the physicalist view, the mind is a function of the brain; the mind is what the brain does.  There's no view in physicalism that our hair or toenails are a substrate for our minds.  Evidence of this is that when you get a haircut or clip your toenails, your mind is unaffected.  But when the brain is damaged, functioning of the mind is lost. 

You can say that when you get a haircut that your mind is somewhat affected.  For example, when you get a good haircut you feel good or when you get a bad haircut you feel bad.  But this is extremely uncomparable to the loss of mental functioning that results in specific areas of brain damage.

 

Yet another person who doesn't really understand buddhism. Let me try to put this is a way that might help you understand me a little more.

The teachings of the buddha don't focus on where you came from or where you are going. They focus on the now and the suffering. Sure you can plan ahead for the future or even learn by looking back at your past, but you should be focusing on the now.

Suffering is the key to understanding buddhism, that is where the 4 noble truths come in to play. They are the key to all buddhists because with out them you are not a buddhist no matter what any one says.

Buddhism does not doubt that at moment of death, when your brain ceases to function, you are dead.

What happens at the time of death, per the teachings, is that your ego dies because it can no longer exist with out the material world. What is left is your mind or imagination, but not a spirit or soul.

The reason why you and most other people disagree with this assessment is that you don't believe that this life is an illusion. You think that those emotions and desires are all part of a chemical process brought on by the arousal of some woman's boobs which causes a man to get a erection. This is only partially true. The man can control his desires because it is usually only specific boobs which will get him aroused. If it was only boobs which gave erections then why is it when a man looks at a (let us say) extremely obese woman does he look away in disgust?

Ego.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:If you know

Brian37 wrote:

If you know beer exists but you don't know how it is made, the labels on the bottle are just mere labels. Buddhism is not required  nor is "spirituality" to observe nature or human behavior anymore than the label "Budweiser" tells you how beer is made.

Sam does not hold woo in the conventional sense, no. I simply would say he needs to drop the word "spiritual" and stop talking about Buddhism as if it is responsible for any kind of modern method, or at least don't imply that there is "something" to it. It is merely something he is fond of, even if he tries to pass it off like a secular Jew. It still doesn't make Buddhism valid for any type of study other than the study of a tradition in a historical sense.

Do you need to know how beer is made to enjoy it? What is the purpose of labeling every thing?

Buddhism is not required for any thing. The word "buddhism" is yet another label we apply to people who follow the teachings of the buddhas (aka: the 4 noble truths).

You disregard buddhism for one sole reason, because some one else told you to disregard it.

Buddhism teaches many different things and science is using it to assist with other areas of medicine. I think you need to stop following Victor Stinger around like a little puppy dog and start doing the research yourself.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:I'm curious what

EXC wrote:

I'm curious what did Grandma die from?

There may be something to intuition or the subconscious mind knowing things of which the conscience mind is not aware.

Good question.

From what I was told "things" started to fail. I remember hearing my mom say that their were various "counts" dropping. I'm not sure if the liver failed. It might have been a group of things all at once. Sort of like total system failure?

When I left for China she was stable and healthy. She was sedated only because of her dementia.

I also was in China for over two weeks before she died. I called home only once every three days because it was so expensive to call. I started buying calling cards because it was cheaper.

The one item which I'm still curious about is that the dream and the action of her dying all took place during the same window of opportunity. Again, I wouldn't know if the dream took place at 1am or 3am, but when I woke up a remembered it.

Others have told me that, "you don't remember the other dreams of her dying" but that is a false, unfounded statement.

If I would have had this dream previously then I would have called home to check up on her, but I didn't.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote: I'm curious what

Please delete


Philosophicus
Philosophicus's picture
Posts: 358
Joined: 2009-12-16
User is offlineOffline
...

Brian37 wrote:

Sam does not hold woo in the conventional sense, no. I simply would say he needs to drop the word "spiritual" and stop talking about Buddhism as if it is responsible for any kind of modern method, or at least don't imply that there is "something" to it. It is merely something he is fond of, even if he tries to pass it off like a secular Jew. It still doesn't make Buddhism valid for any type of study other than the study of a tradition in a historical sense.

I agree Sam Harris should drop the word "spiritual."  I propose to replace it with "aesthetic."  It conveys what people using the word "spiritual" are conveying: beauty, wonder, a sense of awe, amazement, etc.  These are all aesthetic qualities.  So, Sam Harris isn't spiritual, he's aesthetic.  Plus, it doesn't carry the substance dualist baggage of "spiritual."

The main use for Buddhism would be in psychotherapy, but it would only be the meditation exercises and possibly some of the moral techniques for happiness. 

 


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:
Brian37 wrote:
digitalbeachbum wrote:
I went through several stages of nothing, something, god, no god, etc, until I picked buddhism as my belief. While I reject all that dogma bullshit you see and reject those douches who suck up money just so they can be like the rich in other religions, I still believe in the basics of the philosophy. I reject gods. I reject miracles. I reject saviors.
Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either.
What is your understanding of Buddhism, in such a way that it is this deserving of not getting a "pass"?  Do the teachings or observations of =anyone= get the Brian37 "Pass of approval"?
Nice!

Well, I was hoping to get a better response from Brian37, but I didn't.  Such is life.

What I learned from Buddhism, which I try to keep in mind at all times, is "Attachment is the source of all suffering".  I don't think this is "Woo" in the least, because when I've looked at why I'm experiencing something that might be considered "Suffering", I've found that I'm attached to something that I can either choose to let go, or I can choose to work on to attain.

I've had jobs (and lifestyles which consumed all the money from those jobs ...) where I made large piles of money, and I enjoyed it, and when I need to make a change, I accepted that I needed to make a change.  These changes might be hard, but they are not impossible.  It is the difference, as I've explained to friends countless times, between having a job, or a house, or a lifestyle, and that thing having you.  Because it is my experience that "Attachment" creates slavery -- we become slaves to those things which we are most strongly attached to.

Not a lot of "Woo" or anything else in there that Brian should be refusing to give a "Pass".

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Philosophicus
Philosophicus's picture
Posts: 358
Joined: 2009-12-16
User is offlineOffline
...

FurryCatHerder wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:
Brian37 wrote:
digitalbeachbum wrote:
I went through several stages of nothing, something, god, no god, etc, until I picked buddhism as my belief. While I reject all that dogma bullshit you see and reject those douches who suck up money just so they can be like the rich in other religions, I still believe in the basics of the philosophy. I reject gods. I reject miracles. I reject saviors.
Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either.
What is your understanding of Buddhism, in such a way that it is this deserving of not getting a "pass"?  Do the teachings or observations of =anyone= get the Brian37 "Pass of approval"?
Nice!

What I learned from Buddhism, which I try to keep in mind at all times, is "Attachment is the source of all suffering".  I don't think this is "Woo" in the least, because when I've looked at why I'm experiencing something that might be considered "Suffering", I've found that I'm attached to something that I can either choose to let go, or I can choose to work on to attain.

I've had jobs (and lifestyles which consumed all the money from those jobs ...) where I made large piles of money, and I enjoyed it, and when I need to make a change, I accepted that I needed to make a change.  These changes might be hard, but they are not impossible.  It is the difference, as I've explained to friends countless times, between having a job, or a house, or a lifestyle, and that thing having you.  Because it is my experience that "Attachment" creates slavery -- we become slaves to those things which we are most strongly attached to.

I love the part about non-attachment in Buddhism.  It's not even a metaphysical claim, it's more of an ethical one -- a therapeutic technique.  It's kind of a psychological claim; the category can be debated, but it's a useful technique.  It's helped me out so many times.  I like the parts of Buddhism that focus on eliminating suffering with techniques.  I know that modern psychotherapy has far more accurate theories and more advanced techniques, but I still like to dig around in the past for tidbits.  The meditation techniques of Buddhism are useful, and parts of certain Ancient Greek philosophical schools are useful too, like Stoicism, Cynicism, and Epicureanism.  

Not the whole worldviews, just tidbits.  You can take the ideas apart, mix them, and apply them psychotherapeutically.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2647
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Philosophicus wrote:Ilovethe

Philosophicus wrote:

I love the part about non-attachment in Buddhism.  It's not even a metaphysical claim, it's more of an ethical one -- a therapeutic technique.  It's kind of a psychological claim; the category can be debated, but it's a useful technique.  It's helped me out so many times.  I like the parts of Buddhism that focus on eliminating suffering with techniques.  I know that modern psychotherapy has far more accurate theories and more advanced techniques, but I still like to dig around in the past for tidbits.  The meditation techniques of Buddhism are useful, and parts of certain Ancient Greek philosophical schools are useful too, like Stoicism, Cynicism, and Epicureanism.  

Not the whole worldviews, just tidbits.  You can take the ideas apart, mix them, and apply them psychotherapeutically.

Sounds like you have it all working out for you. That's cool.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10140
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Yoda wrote:Attachment leads

Yoda wrote:
Attachment leads to jealously. The shadow of greed, that is.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.