Our knowledge of the "Underlying Truths" or Reality

That's just your opinion.

well, as a person who gets paid to do physics, my personal feeling is that there are a few facts
>1) historically there have been lots of cultural "knowledge" that turned out to be wrong, e.g. the shape and age of the earth, the origins of people, how sperm and eggs work. they had all these superstitions throughout history, and we're continually shedding false preconceptions from the past
>2) likewise, now that we have a better understanding, it makes certain things people used to believe in seem less and less plausible, like e.g. humans levitating, humans walking on water, the existence of people with wings, the existence of ghosts, magical things like the Philosopher's Stone or the Fountain of Youth, etc. etc.
>3) organized religions have a very long track record of being either a part of the state (i.e. government) or a tool of the state, or a quasi-superstate. clearly organized religions serve a social function for the societal structure.
for 3) i conclude that organized religions, and the content of their "spiritual" aspects, is plainly corrupted by politics and social engineering

therefore, i think spiritually, the only person one can trust is oneself. so make up your own mind after you try to sort out real from superstition

i for one decided that i honestly don't know -- i've never had any real mystical experience and don't think there is any evidence for the supernatural, but i don't rule out the idea of there being something deeper than materialism. but just because i can't rule something out doesn't mean it's actually real. so i donno. and that's fine, in fact it would be nice if a surprise turned up, right?

>Why can't your brain have an external back up?
I guess something like an aura could be plausible. It exists, but we just cannot detect it yet.
>Why can't there be other game levels?
Because depending on the religion, they have vastly different rules. And that's not even getting into the different "chapters" of a denomination.
>Dumb people are dumb. You can't just extend the label of dumbness to stuff dumb people are associated with though.
Well, then, what's real? If we go by Christianity, which Bible is the real one? Which version is the correct one; Catholicism, Orthodoxy, any of the other ones? I mean, the Hell we know came from Dante, whose writtings the Catholic Church added to the canon. In the Bible, Hell is described as "lonelines" and Heaven as "God's Warmth", whereas in the 2nd Coming all "wicked" simply are erased, and the "devout" join Jesus. I think it's rather unfair, and rather ridiculous, for such a Supreme Being to take notice of us; our squables and feelings, and then judge us.
>Why not? Something external can fuck with things normally not allowed by internal rules. Happens all the time in the software world.
Because if it has an effect on the material world, it can eventually be measured and studied. It stops being "supernatural"; just "higher".
My problem arises from the morality problems. Most religions this day and age preach love and inclusion. But this isn't what the world we live in like. What, are you supposed to sit back, take everything and hope for some great divine reward where you sit around in the clouds? In this life, you do it to them, or they do it to you? What, is this world God's plan? 10 year olds dressing in drag and chopping off their dicks? Fat Cats driving the world into some Cyberpunk dystopia? Hordes invading and taking everything? What am I meant to do; accept it and the fact that "we're all the same in God"? I can't.

Attached: i never asked for this.gif (500x210, 497K)

Sounds a lot like Chris Langan's CTMU

I certainly can't diagnose you over the internet but it does sound like you may need some psychological help. There's no point in letting your brain make you miserable all day if there's a way to improve the situation

What kind of help is there?

Here's the thing though; it doesn't. Back in the day it'd come and go. Last a few days. Now I've managed to control it. Whenever I feel sad I just get really drunk, and/or just, wallow in my sadness, and in a few hours it starts to wane, at which point I turn into the "party by myself" type... I think I'm just lonely and overexaggerate things in an effort to make myself feel special and "just like my movies". I don't know if that makes it worse or better...

For me the most helpful thing has been having someone to talk to about whatever crazy thing I'm thinking about, just to get a reality check and some feedback. That can be a therapist or a friend or whatever.
Well if you're not miserable and not harming anyone else, that's fine

based jacked autist
how do you find time to study with all the poon you could be slaying

We don't really die were just some atoms that align with each other every quintillion universes. Each and everyone of us is infinite years old and the periods in between our existances is traversed instantly. We will never die we will continue on forever we will never know peace of not existing. Maybe this is actual nothingness the universe is a close system that is constantly collapsing and expanding and no matter what we do we can't change anything because we are unable to get a reaction out of our system. This will continue forever and we will continue forever.

Attached: 20181030_180206.jpg (157x157, 22K)

>But... souls?
What else makes us what we are, we lack the knowledge to describe it so for me its good enough.
>Hell & Heaven?
You're good for the first six minutes, there's nothing, after that idk.
>All the rules that most people ignore and cherry-pick?
Hoes does other peoples choices about rules mean anything? Plus what rules, the real rules or the ones made up by men? Take the bible, grossly misquoted and the meanings twisted to push agendas, how many rules have you heard that are supposed to be in the bible but are not even mentioned, are twisted/misquoted, from men, or actually from God. Two widely believed examples are:
1) masturbation - not even mentioned although I think relevant versus exist.
2) thou shalt not judge - there's a comma the rest of that verse and several others after. Grossly misinterpreted and misused to silence people.
>My logic tells me one thing, but the fact that I know such few things about reality tells me another. And yet I cannot accept all the Supernatural elements; they seem silly and fabricated.
Yep, fuck magnetism and lol gravity. You take things too literally I think.
>I have a belief in something "Higher", yet tangible, but... what if I'm wrong? I guess... how do you make any important choice in this world if Hell is hanging over your head?
I think your listening to media/movie/church interpretation of the "rules" and not the actual rules. I suggest whatever religion that you read and research the text(s) for yourself instead of taking others word at what's in there and what it means.

There is no conflict between the two for me. They are compatible.

>Because depending on the religion, they have vastly different rules. And that's not even getting into the different "chapters" of a denomination.
There are different theories. So what?
>Well, then, what's real?
Not knowing which one is real is not a good reason for denying the possibility that one is.
>If we go by Christianity, which Bible is the real one?
They're all basically the same (sans NWT and other joke editions).
> I mean, the Hell we know came from Dante, whose writtings the Catholic Church added to the canon.
Is this bait? This has to be bait...
>I think it's rather unfair, and rather ridiculous, for such a Supreme Being to take notice of us; our squables and feelings, and then judge us.
Why? We do the same while training AIs.
>Because if it has an effect on the material world, it can eventually be measured and studied. It stops being "supernatural"; just "higher".
What definitions are you using for supernatural and higher? Supernatural means something happens that doesn't naturally occur. Of course the "happenings" are physically observable but their cause isn't triggered from the usual "physical laws" internal to universe.

>There is no conflict between the two for me. They are compatible.
How? For one thing, the vast majority of people on the planet, fuck around with no regard for anything else. These folks will go to Hell to be fucked with hot metal irons for eternity, just for that.
>There are different theories. So what?
Then how do you choose which one to follow?
>Not knowing which one is real is not a good reason for denying the possibility that one is.
But they're all absolute. Each one demands absolute loyalty and warns about horrific and eternal torture. It doesn't seem fair to me.
>They're all basically the same (sans NWT and other joke editions).
Maybe. But still you have Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Lutherans, and that's for Christianity only.
>Is this bait? This has to be bait...
My bad; I just meant to say that lots of our collective image of Hell has been taken from these poems. When the Bible itself refers to the state after death, it has stuff like this:
>2 Thessalonians 1:9
>They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,

>Jude 1:7 ESV
>Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

>Why? We do the same while training AIs.
We don't flay them for an eternity though.
>What definitions are you using for supernatural and higher?
Dunno, chanting some weird words and raising the dead.
>inb4 that's silly
Well, that's my point. If you take away all the witches and magic, you're left with just the old "any technology advanced enough seems like magic".

>Acts: 19 A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly. When they calculated the value of the scrolls, the total came to fifty thousand drachmas. 20 In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.

I guess, my point is, if we take the Bible to its word, then the majority of people everywhere are heading for a fiery death, simply on account of being sluts and mansluts. But you'd be hard pressed to find any modern believer who takes that into account; "times have changed", they'll say. The Creator of all things then sits around and cares whether ants fuck each other or kill one another? And what, are we just supposed to submit, let the "wicked" do whatever they want here, ignore all changes and circumstances, thinking to ourselves "yah, sure, I'm getting raped 6 ways to Sunday, but boy, will he be sorry when he's getting flayed for an Eternity"? Is that it? Then why not just fuck off to a Cabin, die a virgin and surely get into Heaven?

>There is no afterlife user.
That's a strong claim, what's your evidence?

simulation-argument.com/

slatestarcodex.com/2018/04/01/the-hour-i-first-believed/

There's no reason you can't combine spirituality and science.

Read philosophy. Stoicism and existential philosophy helped me escape nihilism. Science has the objective answers, but for the subjective answers such as those regarding meaning, philosophy is the way to go.

>Then how do you choose which one to follow?
You research and look into them. Nobody is going to spoonfeed you everything in life.
>But they're all absolute. Each one demands absolute loyalty and warns about horrific and eternal torture. It doesn't seem fair to me.
How is it any different from life? Pick the right drug when you're deathly ill and you'll be saved. Pick wrong and you'll die a horrible death.
>We don't flay them for an eternity though.
You could make the argument that deleting someone is the worst thing you could do.
>Dunno, chanting some weird words and raising the dead.
That's just one of many possible forms that supernatural events "could" happen by. No different than sci-fiction envisioning future scientific technologies that "could" happen and sometimes getting it laughably wrong. It's not an argument against supernatural as an idea.

It's pretty easy user, we don't know shit about why there's a Universe at all.
It's just there against all logic.
Physics is just us trying to make sense of what we can observe, but it's just that, nothing else.
The only thing we can say for sure, is that it's all very fishy.

Instead of looking for truth in religion and spirituality, try looking for it in math, physics, and philosophy. I think you'll be surprised at how deep it really is. Here are some that I've come across in my studies:
>All lies imply each other, but not all can truths imply each other
Godel's incompleteness theorem
>nothing is absolutely relative
Basic modal logic ~[](X&~X)
>There is, in fact, a randomness to the events of the universe
Basic quantum physics
Anything else you'd like to know about the universe?

>>All lies imply each other, but not all can truths imply each other
>Godel's incompleteness theorem
Fedoras are so fucking retarded.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting, care to elaborate? BTW the second and third are definitely correct, and all lies do imply each other. But in any axiomatic system, there are unknowable truths. (pretty sure this is Godel.)

Michio Kuku recently convinced me that Einstein's (or really rather Spinoza's) idea of "god" isn't crazy. If you think of it as a higher realm (i.e. something impersonal without any intentionality to it) rather than a higher entity it's not all that far fetched. It seems reasonable to believe that there might something more to reality or the totality of existence than just this universe that is empirically accessible to us. It's not unreasonable that something could be empirically inaccessible to us, yet still exist and be real. That's all that is meant by the word "god". It's just inscrutable, so yes obviously lies outside the bounds of what physics will ever be able to touch.

>Each and everyone of us is infinite years old and the periods in between our existances is traversed instantly. We will never die we will continue on forever we will never know peace of not existing.
Increasingly, this is the conclusion I keep coming to as of late. It's impossible to die.

Are you a CS major?
>and all lies do imply each other
And imply all truths. This is day 1 intro to proofs.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuous_truth
>But in any axiomatic system, there are unknowable truths. (pretty sure this is Godel.)
Cringe.
>the second and third are definitely correct
No.

Ah, as it turns out, you are the idiot.
>vacuous truth
A lie is not the same thing as failure to meet the hypothesis. Explain how the second is incorrect.

What if we're stuck in the one alternate universe where's there's no evidence of the supernatural or higher being, while other universes have actual deities that visit mortals, wouldn't that be terrible haha

Attached: 1523490866626.jpg (626x717, 34K)

I think the best explanation for God is that something rather than nothing occurs. If you look at it from a Statistical perspective, some things have a 0 likelihood of even existing. That's proof of God. But that's too fundamental. Anything beyond that is just guesswork so whoever claims this or that is just nonsense. Even math cannot explain that despite having some very fundamental concepts. Think of a true random function, one which f(x) != f(x). That is Godel's work right there. But if you look at it, it means that even when replicating the same parameter, you get a totally different output. In other words, this function is independent of inputs which is exactly how something like God will ever work. So in essence this function is akin to f() != f(). This is not at all like probability or even Cauchy distribution. Rather this is bizarre and unpredictable.

That something rather than nothing MUST necessarily occur is easily provable with simple logic. No god needed.

I'm not a nihilist though.
>You research and look into them. Nobody is going to spoonfeed you everything in life.
But if the majority of them have superficial differences, and are based on a single book that is the culmination of various "he said she said", then how do I know which one is the "right one"? It's not like I can catch a mistake in some numerical act and say "aha, this is wrong". Or time-travel and say for sure that these things written down in that particular book are absolute truth, and lay forth the rules of reality.
>How is it any different from life? Pick the right drug when you're deathly ill and you'll be saved. Pick wrong and you'll die a horrible death.
...Because that's something finite and Eternal Punishment or Reward is... Eternal? That's kind of the point. And a drug can be seen and tested. But I don't know if putting my bob into a vagene will condemn me to having it flayed for eternity.
>You could make the argument that deleting someone is the worst thing you could do.
Yeah, no. I'd rather get deleted than have my balls smashed with a sledgehammer every single day for an eternity.
>That's just one of many possible forms that supernatural events "could" happen by. No different than sci-fiction envisioning future scientific technologies that "could" happen and sometimes getting it laughably wrong. It's not an argument against supernatural as an idea.
So you think wanking under the moonlight during a Full Moon will make your desires come true?
Sure, not dissagreeing. But doesn't the whole "you either choose the actually real rules or do anythign else and you get your skull bashed in forever" worry you; even a tiny bit?
>Anything else you'd like to know about the universe?
I don't know. I just wonder if others feel that "dread" once in a while.
I read that a few years back. It seems plausible enough. It's the whole thing with Rules that I take issue with.

he doesn't need to.
you neee to supply us with evidence of it's existence, if anything

>But doesn't the whole "you either choose the actually real rules or do anythign else and you get your skull bashed in forever" worry you; even a tiny bit?
Well yeah, but here's what should puzzle your almonds:
Given that there's no logical reason for a Universe to be there, then any creation story might as well be true.
Because even creation being a fact doesn't solve anything.

Christianity is dangerous and all you christians are hallucinating.

This "post" is pretty "deep" "bro".

Attached: 1551732532030.png (474x711, 90K)

All christards have shitty lives and cope with religion.

the mormons would like a word with you

Americans lack culture, so people search for communities like these.

Prove anything supernatural exists or don’t waste time.

>The fedora is commenting on shittily lived lives
kek

“What, is this world God's plan? 10 year olds dressing in drag and chopping off their dicks? Fat Cats driving the world into some Cyberpunk dystopia? Hordes invading and taking everything? What am I meant to do; accept it and the fact that "we're all the same in God"? I can't.”

And it’s a /pol/tard nililhist teen.

Don't know bud, all those third worlders don't seem pretty atheistic to me.

>Christianity is dangerous
Atheists have killed more in the last century than all the religious wars in human history combined :^)

>doesn't know how implications work

back to your containment board, code monkey

>So you think wanking under the moonlight during a Full Moon will make your desires come true?
Is there any logically reason why that couldn't have been coding into the universe as a cheat code besides "you don't like that idea"?

No, totalitarian dictatorships did. Why the lie? That’s a sin, you know.

>Is there any logically reason why that couldn't have been coding into the universe as a cheat code besides "you don't like that idea"?

Prove the universe has been “coded”.

>And imply all truths.
Do you think contradicts what he said, retard?

What is North Korea?

>inB4 th-they're not true atheists, in fact they're very religious, the most religious. You see, religion bad. True atheistic states have never been tried.
>inB4 th-they're not true communists, in fact they're very capitalistic, the most capitalistic. You see, capitalism bad. True communism has never been tried.

Attached: 1384714649745.jpg (1582x1190, 331K)

He thinks this is something profound and related to Godel Theorem.

North Korea is literally a theocratic monarchy. They attribute outright supernatural and messianic qualities to their dictator and former dictators.

What???

Start with binary. Things either Are, or Are not.
Things have form, texture, context and dimensions. We call this Matter.
Immeasurable points of matter make up all things. All things are both expanding outward, and moving through time.
No different from code.
Cells in a bloodstream, cars on a highway, bits on the web. If there's code; there's a coder.

A much more accurate comparison, one you’d refuse to make because you’re dishonest, would be to compare the Netherlands or Czechoslovakia to Pakistan.

"Could have been" and "has been" are not the same thing.

“Start with binary. Things either Are, or Are not.
Things have form, texture, context and dimensions. We call this Matter.
Immeasurable points of matter make up all things. All things are both expanding outward, and moving through time.
No different from code.
Cells in a bloodstream, cars on a highway, bits on the web. If there's code; there's a coder.”

“Thing A is comparable to Thing B therefore Thing A is literally Thing B.”

Wow

>>much more accurate comparison
>because Netherlands and Pakistan are exactly the same except for religion
>because North Korea and South Korea don't share a common history, people, language, culture, environment, ...
Confirming your biases is not a "much more accurate comparison"

I love how you neglected to refute the fact that North Korea is a theocratic monarchy, because you can’t. You lose.

South Korea is majority non religious, by the way.

>if(npc.is_jerking_it() && moon.is_full())
>>for(item in npc.desires)
>>>execute(item);

>Melt rock to make metal
Thing A is Thing B
>Chop tree to build house
Thing A is Thing B
>Amphibians change gender to balance ecosystem
>Gravity uses stardust from supernovas to create new planetoids
>Etc
You'll figure it out.

“These things change so they’re code I fard an shid”

>South Korea is majority non religious, by the way.
>according to a 2012 survey, only 15% of the population declared themselves not religious in the sense of "atheism".[207]
Unaffiliated with organized religion doesn't make them atheists/anti-theists. Stop making this fallacy.

>theocratic monarchy
No, it's an atheistic communist state.
>North Korea officially describes itself as a "self-reliant" socialist state, and formally holds elections,[24]
>religions are restricted by the government.[268][269] Amnesty International has expressed concerns about religious persecution in North Korea.[270]
The people cheering like crazy in videos are doing so because they know what will happen if they don't.
>independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/kim-jong-un-north-korea-execute-officials-death-penalty-anti-aircraft-gun-a7215906.html
>dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3768569/Kim-Jong-executes-education-minister-firing-squad-not-sitting-properly-meeting.html
>Kim Jong-un executes education minister by firing squad for not SITTING properly during a meeting
>Kim Jong-un had his education vice premier executed by firing squad
>Dictator was infuriated by Kim Yong Jin's poor posture during a meeting
>He was interrogated and found to be an 'anti-revolutionary agitator'
>Another aide with an 'overbearing attitude' was sent to work on a farm

>I love how you neglected to refute ... because you can’t. You lose.
Are you seriously like 12 or just really autistic? When people say something stupid, most people don't even dignify it with a response. It's not an admission of defeat or incapability to reply. It happens all the time.

Also, that was a completely different post than the one being replied to. Why would you expect a response?