Re: Self- Perception « Result #2 on May 29, 2008, 9:17pm »
I agree that this is one way to observe and change behavior. Example, if I were to look at a situation in the context of what happened and why it happened then it would be wise to see if there were an underlying negative or false belief was driving my behavior. i.e. I get angry at someone for what I perceive as a disrespectful act, I would need to ensure that I didn't have a false belief that was driving me such as "I wasn't worth receiving respect." So in this way it is true; however, this theory does very little for reinforcing good behaviors.
dockirk Phi Rho Tau Member Resident Vegan member is offline
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 34 Karma: 1
science vs. Religion « Result #3 on Apr 20, 2008, 8:29am »
re: our recent meeting on Church and State:
Something has been bothering me a little since the last PRT meeting. I think it is how the meeting ended with a rather relativistic compromise that might be summed as follows: "Explanations of how the universe operates are dependent upon the culture within which such explanations are formed." There is certainly SOME truth to this and I think this was Jonathan's point. However, this begs the question, "by what criteria can one decide between non-testable religious assumptions and scientific one?" or "Is there a criterion at all?"
I think there is such a criterion, and it can be stated as so "A scientific finding is one that eliminates all other explanations." So, if you take the "world is flat" cultural assumption, this can clearly be tested and those tests replicated.....So, regardless of cultural/religious belief, the world is not flat. The assertion that all life on earth is the result of completely random processes in a universe where "matter has always existed" is not testable and is subject to many alternative explanations.
Another example, one cannot reasonable argue that Neandertals never existed. There is no other reasonable alternative explanation for the fossils/skulls that have been found. However, one might argue about why Neanderthals were here, or what their relationship was to Homo Sapiens.
Another observation: Growing technology characterizes scientific discovery over the last 500 years, IOW, things that were once inexplicable become explicable when better observing technologies are invented. So..it is always possible that some future technology will make some current metaphysical issue a scientific one. For example, what if some future technology proves a non-physical dimension of Mind? I actually think this might happen. This would put to bed all speculations about purely physical explanations of "mental" problems, for example...
dockirk Phi Rho Tau Member Resident Vegan member is offline
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 34 Karma: 1
Re: Child Labor Laws: anachronism? « Result #5 on Feb 3, 2008, 7:54pm »
I just figured out that I am NOT making typing errors. The computer filter wont allow me to type "D*ckens" because it thinks it is a cuss word. Lets try it with some other non-cuss words that sound like cuss words:
dockirk Phi Rho Tau Member Resident Vegan member is offline
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 34 Karma: 1
Re: Child Labor Laws: anachronism? « Result #7 on Feb 3, 2008, 7:49pm »
O.K. Silas, I'm still here! Its good to see someone is reading/posting. What about the argument that child labor laws were inacted because the situation was so crappy in the first place??? Have you read Charles thingyens? How can you be so sure that the situation wouldn't slowly revert back to that?
BTW - My parents both have Master's degrees, but I am the only one of their three children to finish high school. And....both my "dropout" brothers make more than I do!
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 19 Karma: 0
Re: Child Labor Laws: anachronism? « Result #8 on Jan 31, 2008, 7:34pm »
Take advantage of them how? They would have to be paid minimum wage (if anyone did hire them)
Once again: I'm not saying anyone forces them to work, and no one is forced to hire them. I doubt anyone would hire them, considering how unreliable a worker who doesn't rely on his job for his living would be.
I just firmly believe that the government has NO right to say where or whether I work no matter how old I am.
By the way: I dropped out of school and did fine without it.
let's see how many more months pass before someone else replys
Re: Child Labor Laws: anachronism? « Result #13 on Nov 6, 2007, 2:25pm »
since america isnt bangladesh i dont see your point. Kids in america dont work. They go to school and live with their parents. I think that if we allow smaller kids to work not only will company's try to take advantage of the kids naiveity but will raise childrens rate of being seriously hurt and more children will drop out of school believeing that they can do better without it. By children i mean kids under the age of 16. I believe that at 16 kids should be able to work and overall they do.
When you think that we've used all our chances And the chance to make everything right Keep on making the same old mistakes Makes untipping the balance so easy When we're living our lives on the edge Say a prayer on the book of the dead -Iron Maiden-
dockirk Phi Rho Tau Member Resident Vegan member is offline
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 34 Karma: 1
PRT next phase « Result #17 on Oct 19, 2007, 3:21pm »
Sorry I missed the meeting. I just wanted to touch base and mention some thing that we should probably be working on. 1) Pat ourselves on the back because the dreaded and boring "Bylaws" are done! Now we can move on. 2) If we are going to use the planitarium to show an event, we need to plan it NOW - no, yesterday! I will show extra credit to my classes if they go, if the members of PRT think it is a good idea. 3) Since we will have some PRT members graduating fairly soon, we need to work on our symbols and decide what kind of academic bling we want, and how we are going to pay for it. Thus our graduating members will have stoles/medals, whatever to wear...
dockirk Phi Rho Tau Member Resident Vegan member is offline
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 34 Karma: 1
Re: Reincarnation « Result #18 on Oct 8, 2007, 5:45pm »
O.K. - I think you are playing with semantics a bit on the time thing. So to put it in "non-temporal" terms. Everything is actually happening at once. Time is an illusion. Everyone you have ever been and ever will be are all happening in the Now. You are currently experiencing one "self" in Time. But every possible you and every possible decision as well as the consequences of those decision are all happening NOW. So, if you time traveled, you would not only have to choose "when," but "which" reality to experience. Wheew!!
As to the one soul. The universal soul ("God" some would say) is in everyone. It is like the air in a house, individuated by different rooms. The air is the same but seems different in different places in the house.
This is why not harming other is the basis of morality and ethics in every religion. It exppreses our subconscious knowing that all of us are connect. If I hurt someone, then I am hurting myself.
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 19 Karma: 0
Re: Reincarnation « Result #19 on Oct 8, 2007, 9:36am »
Once again, I reply that increase implies temporal movement.
If one is to increase in consciousness, one needs to have been at a lower state of consciousness before, and a higher state of consciousness afterward.
...
If our soul does retain our personality, than I withdraw what I said about morality.
But if we all have the same soul, which personality does it retain?
dockirk Phi Rho Tau Member Resident Vegan member is offline
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 34 Karma: 1
Re: Reincarnation « Result #20 on Oct 6, 2007, 7:15pm »
Good points.
By "up" I meant increase in level of consciousness. That is the point of the "game."
We do (IMO) retain our personalities, its just that we don't remember them until we are in the "dead" state (there really is no death, just change).
Re: "only one person reaches nirvana.." We are already in Nirvana (in a sense), or at least the non-physical part of us is. We incarnate to accelerate our growth in consciousness. Have you noticed that some people inherently understand the cosmos better than others, even at a young age? This is what "Consciousness" is. It cannot be taught, it can only be grown.
Re: morality: Woah! Yes we do have a basis for morality - a very good one! It is our own growth. Yes, you can choose to behave "badly" or "stupidly" in life, but that will only slow your growth. Why would you want to do that? People do that only out of ignorance - they think nothing matters, but they are wrong.
![[Home]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif)
![[Help]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif)
![[Search]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif)
![[Login]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif)
![[Register]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif)
![[Search This Thread]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Reply]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/reply.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif)
Author
![[avatar]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/avatars/boyandpc.gif)
![[Quote]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/quote.gif)
Logged![[avatar]](http://dpsinfo.com/rufussafer/rufussafer/gallery/screenshot/ff7/rufus1.jpg)
![[avatar]](http://affimg.tfaw.com/coversw/400/14/ddldca11814.jpg)
![[yim]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/yim.gif)
