Do you guys believe in Ghosts?

Deleted member 3373

And it took several thousand years of philosophers to look beyond just accepting. The groundworks for the Renaissance and Enlightenment were laid even by Christian Monks in the 15th century, centuries before it actually happened. I think NOT just accepting what our gut feeling and socio-evolutionary instincts tell us is a huge achievement for us as a species. In my opinion the need for something spiritual is a coping mechanism for our conciousness. We are self aware of our mortality and unlike most animals (I don't want to open that can of worms rn) don't just think about death when it's about to happen. We are self aware of our existence, basic philosphy like Cogito Ergo Sum and this puts a huge stress on us mentally and I think religion and spirituality are man made remedies. Not actually transcendental beings existing but brain made figments to lull us in. And it works so we should accept them in a away but also be aware of the mechanism itself.


In accordance to what I said to Linkat already and your last sentence especially: the design of it all.
I'm just too aware that it IS all designed by humans. I wouldn't even know what God to pray to. Zeus? Odin? Allah? Ra? Some nature spirit from the Germanic Tribes that lived thousands of years before me where I live now? Who is correct? Who would I as a mere mortal be to decide that? The Romans and Greeks looked at the stars and saw a Lion and a Bull, the Indians, several hundred miles and years away saw the very same stars and saw something else. Some stars that make up important constellations in "our" zodiac system are not even recognised in others, so why should they influence my life over the other?
To me, those are all stories. The norse Edda, the Greek Odyssey, the Bible, the Quran. Stories about mythological heroes that show us a relatable characters to idolize and aspire to because stories are the best medium to convey morals and humans naturally gravitate towards characters because of our empathy and general social inclinations and I don't think I will ever be able to shake this view of the instrumental nature of spiritualism. I could suspend my disbelief enough for some escapism but never for serious conviction.
And that's why you are right with it being very personal. For some it just never happens.
And yet I find my gut instincts are oftentimes more accurate than my brain is. For example I may have just eaten a very small amount of pork blood. It's small enough to where I don't think it's going to do me any damage. But still my body reacts with a degree of fear because it inherently knows it is not good to consume blood. If I listened to an expert telling me to eat blood, well I might be in some trouble. Some knowledge is beyond reason.

And honestly a lot of this issue goes away if you accept a parennialist take. That is that all religions are trying to appeal to the same God and that there are just different understandings of what God is. For example those Pagan dieties you mentioned (for all the problems they caused) are not actually at odds with the concept of God at all. The Greeks reasoned monotheism long before Christianity. In fact Hinduism (possibly the only remaining large scale pagan religion) isn't at odds with monotheism either as they conceive of their gods as just parts of a single overarching essence. They also have the concept of the godhead which is surprisingly similar to the holy trinity. Once you highlight the similarities over the differences you really start to see that there is an appeal to a universal truth in all religions. When you reach that point the concept of God doesn't seem so well, for lack of a better term, scary. At that point you start to see there really isn't this God that is harshly judging you for every wrong decision you make. In fact it's the total opposite.
 

Andy Kaufman

i know
Joined
Feb 19, 2022
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
4,781
Awards
209
Because saying it's all designed by humans shows more than a bit of hubris about humanity's place in the Cosmos at Large.
What religious text or belief isn't designed by humans? Even the idea of animism itself has been our idea, not because actual spirits inhabit everything. That's the catch.
Everything being One, and Everything stemming from the same Source, coupled with animistic thinking and pragmatics leaves me with almost no questions as to the how or why of existence and a feeling of happiness, contentment, and am unfettering companionship with the world around me. No more "Who is right?" Because kernels of truth exist in all things;
As we said, it's a personal thing. These musings mean nothing to me, they are just mumbo jumbo to calm yourself. But I'd also rather keep it that way for me. I am not uneasy with my reality and the question of "Who is right?" was more rethorical in nature because I know that the answer is "no one"/"everyone". Ancient civilisations had good reasons to believe in gods commanding their fates. And a good chunk of our morality and philosphy was built on Christianity so there's a good reason to respect its teachings (not necessarily believe in them). As I said, I see these things are purely instrumental and when I see you believing I merely see you using these instruments for your own good. I personally don't feel the need to use them.
God is always calling out for everyone to hear Him, I don't think people have to give up on listening for Him just because the path to see evidence of God has been hard. But a Leap of Faith must be taken, at a point. Another almost literal hurdle or chasm to cross.
What God do you mean specifically? the christian god?
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Andy Kaufman

i know
Joined
Feb 19, 2022
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
4,781
Awards
209
And yet I find my gut instincts are oftentimes more accurate than my brain is.
That's millionsof years of evolution shaping your instincts.
For example I may have just eaten a very small amount of pork blood. It's small enough to where I don't think it's going to do me any damage. But still my body reacts with a degree of fear because it inherently knows it is not good to consume blood. If I listened to an expert telling me to eat blood, well I might be in some trouble. Some knowledge is beyond reason.
Well but "some expert" saying something isn't science. If you feed a large enough group + control group pork blood and even change the amount and even better in relation to body weight and then record the results, then you can give a good estimate of what it does.
Technically eating spicy food shouldn't be a thing because our body (and gut even) tells us pretty clearly that we shouldn't but we know from experience and observation that it's mostly harmless. But I also don't quite get the point of that anectode.
And honestly a lot of this issue goes away if you accept a parennialist take. That is that all religions are trying to appeal to the same God and that there are just different understandings of what God is. For example those Pagan dieties you mentioned (for all the problems they caused) are not actually at odds with the concept of God at all. The Greeks reasoned monotheism long before Christianity. In fact Hinduism (possibly the only remaining large scale pagan religion) isn't at odds with monotheism either as they conceive of their gods as just parts of a single overarching essence. They also have the concept of the godhead which is surprisingly similar to the holy trinity. Once you highlight the similarities over the differences you really start to see that there is an appeal to a universal truth in all religions. When you reach that point the concept of God doesn't seem so well, for lack of a better term, scary. At that point you start to see there really isn't this God that is harshly judging you for every wrong decision you make. In fact it's the total opposite.
This is exactly what makes me shrug it off even more because it just blurs the lines and makes things seem totally inconsequential to me. So it's all and nothing and also very personal and just what you kinda feel. This is not conviction for me. This just seems like post-enlightenment cope. People went to war over this because of true convictions, the believed in it with all their heart. And now it's all been so diluted. The Catholic church making concessions one after another is also an example of this. Religion has been "disarmed" to a point where believing in it isn't much different from not doing so.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Deleted member 3373

That's millionsof years of evolution shaping your instincts.

Well but "some expert" saying something isn't science. If you feed a large enough group + control group pork blood and even change the amount and even better in relation to body weight and then record the results, then you can give a good estimate of what it does.
Technically eating spicy food shouldn't be a thing because our body (and gut even) tells us pretty clearly that we shouldn't but we know from experience and observation that it's mostly harmless. But I also don't quite get the point of that anectode.

This is exactly what makes me shrug it off even more because it just blurs the lines and makes things seem totally inconsequential to me. So it's all and nothing and also very personal and just what you kinda feel. This is not conviction for me. This just seems like post-enlightenment cope. People went to war over this because of true convictions, the believed in it with all their heart. And now it's all been so diluted. The Catholic church making concessions one after another is also an example of this. Religion has been "disarmed" to a point where believing in it isn't much different from not doing so.
The point of that anecdote is that I don't need tests to believe a lot of the things I do. Some of the things in my head are just correct. Mind you I had to have an experience with the holy spirit which left physical evidence in order to truly get it.

And not really. You see there are tiers of truth in religion so some are closer to the truth than others. I don't think any religion has the whole truth as to comprehend the whole truth is, well... impossible as far as I'm concerned. To me it's more a case of which religion is closest to the truth. There are also cultural reasons behind it. For example Christianity is inherently more appealing to me (although I should reiterate it was not exactly a choice I made) because I live in a western guilt culture. And that's the thing. War over religion doesn't really exist as far as I'm concerned. Religion can be used to back up a particular cause (although I would always advise against doing so) but most wars in history are about things like territory. And believe me, it does make a difference. It provides a bedrock that lacks in a purely materialist worldview. I'm not just a collection of atoms but instead there is something supporting me at all times. Even if it is somehow all fake it's good for people. Not to mention the amount of degenerate behaviour it can curb.
 

Outer Heaven

Stranger in a strange land
Bronze
Joined
Oct 25, 2021
Messages
781
Reaction score
5,621
Awards
230
When countersignalling le evil SJWs and >redditcostanzayeahrightsmirk so hard turns you into unironic medieval peasant level of retarded.
costanzayeahrightsmirk
Instead we should take the enlightened centrist route of being atheistic or agnostic lmao. Somehow its much easier to assume that every single supernatural entity across space and recorded history is people rationalizing things or hallucinating regardless of their similarities. Somehow in the last 100 years weve progressed so much as a species that suddenly we as the enlightened modern humans have no need for the core beliefs that shaped us for millennia. This centrism is not only fallacious but more of a midwit take than anything else in this thread.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

TRXTR

Classified Personnel Only Past This Point
Silver
Joined
Dec 17, 2021
Messages
66
Reaction score
161
Awards
49
Website
krowznezt.net
What religious text or belief isn't designed by humans? Even the idea of animism itself has been our idea, not because actual spirits inhabit everything. That's the catch.
In your own personal perception that may seem true, but it is not necessarily true, and not even if God exists in some capacity, but even otherwise.
As we said, it's a personal thing. These musings mean nothing to me, they are just mumbo jumbo to calm yourself. But I'd also rather keep it that way for me. I am not uneasy with my reality and the question of "Who is right?" was more rethorical in nature because I know that the answer is "no one"/"everyone". Ancient civilisations had good reasons to believe in gods commanding their fates. And a good chunk of our morality and philosphy was built on Christianity so there's a good reason to respect its teachings (not necessarily believe in them). As I said, I see these things are purely instrumental and when I see you believing I merely see you using these instruments for your own good. I personally don't feel the need to use them.
You may need them in the future, and it is always better to be prepared than not to.
What God do you mean specifically? the christian god?
No, my conception of God uses ideas from a wide smattering of the global spiritual repertoire, a synthesis that I find, as you say, "comfort" in, but really what just makes most sense to describe as something that is ultimately indescribable.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Andy Kaufman

i know
Joined
Feb 19, 2022
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
4,781
Awards
209
Even if it is somehow all fake it's good for people.
Yeah this has been the point I was trying to make all the way through. That's why I personally don't mind religious types (only when they try to convert me).
You see there are tiers of truth in religion so some are closer to the truth than others.
But then you go on that it's something "to you". So that truth is very personal again and just a matter of circumstance or choice. Intrisic in nature and that's a weakness to me. For me need that physical proof that happened to you as you claim and have that stand the test of empirical science.
Instead we should take the enlightened centrist route of being atheistic or agnostic lmao.
No, we should just let others believe what they want and not attack them for what they think like calling them midwits, retards, NPCs etc. because they think they probably did not see a ghost when they were 6.
much easier to assume every single supernatural entity across space and recorded history is people rationalizing things or hallucinating regardless of their similarities
Because none have been proven so far.
Somehow in the last 100 years weve progressed so much as a species that suddenly we as the enlightened modern humans have no need for the core beliefs that shaped us for millennia.
I literally said multiple times now that the believes are valuable but imo not because they were bestowed from us externally but because they help social cohesion and individual well being. You can appreciate religion while still being an atheist.
And yes, in the last 100 years, we literally left this very planet we thought to be so much else for these millenia you talked about. The knowledge of other planets and galaxies, the milky way, black holes, atoms, quarks, photons etc. really isn't all that old so you could say that the last 100-200 years have been pretty big. Look at it like this:
Humans have been wrong for the longest time about many things just because they lacked the instruments to investigate them. People died horrible deaths because the scientist that discovered bacteria being the main source of infections was shunned and disregarded. People thought the sun revolved around the earth for longer than it has been the other way around. And while still scratching the surface, we've never known more about our brains and DNA than ever before and most of these discoveries are also pretty recent.
It may seem arrogant to believe us today to be special but the rapid technological advancement of the last century really does put us in a special place. The fact that we can even have this conversation right now through the internet with computers in our heated homes with electricity is more awe inspiring to me and I think it's wierd how this is such an outrageous thought.
Now I'm not saying that we have it all figured out now. Far from it. But the rapid advancement of technology DID prove most of our ancestors wrong. Unfortunately they used a lot of spiritual angles to explain the world so as our knowledge about the world grew, it undermined the belief structure a lot, hence why many people turned away from actually believing most of what the religious texts suggest. Now they mostly serve as guidelines and to comfort our spiritual needs (mostly in times of crisis, personal or larger scale).
In your own personal perception that may seem true
Well this comes down to falsifiability for me.
1649370361368.png


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPR_5TOsh-Y


You may need them in the future, and it is always better to be prepared than not to.
Maybe. Maybe my kind of preparedness is a different one. I think the loss of a loved parent was already my personal stress test for this kinda thing.
No, my conception of God uses ideas from a wide smattering of the global spiritual repertoire, a synthesis that I find, as you say, "comfort" in, but really what just makes most sense to describe as something that is ultimately indescribable.
I see. Unfortunately I can't make much of this.

So to wrap things up (as I really need to go to bed now): I respect you opinions, I am just exhausted by the fact that the modern stereotype of r*ddit and atheists in general makes it very hard to defend my standpoint in these kind of environments sometimes but I am grateful for the mostly respectful discussion.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Outer Heaven

Stranger in a strange land
Bronze
Joined
Oct 25, 2021
Messages
781
Reaction score
5,621
Awards
230
It may seem arrogant to believe us today to be special but the rapid technological advancement of the last century really does put us in a special place. The fact that we can even have this conversation right now through the internet with computers in our heated homes with electricity is more awe inspiring to me and I think it's wierd how this is such an outrageous thought.
Now I'm not saying that we have it all figured out now. Far from it. But the rapid advancement of technology DID prove most of our ancestors wrong. Unfortunately they used a lot of spiritual angles to explain the world so as our knowledge about the world grew, it undermined the belief structure a lot, hence why many people turned away from actually believing most of what the religious texts suggest. Now they mostly serve as guidelines and to comfort our spiritual needs (mostly in times of crisis, personal or larger scale).
This doesn't just seem arrogant, it is arrogant. None of this advancement will ever explain why anything is the way it is and cant even explain how things started or basic truths like consciousness since its rooted in materialism. Just like the Romans were not suddenly more evolved than proto Greeks just because they had an advanced society, we are not any more special than the Romans were. When society eventually collapses like it does in every historical time period lets see how enlightenment man is so much better than the people that came before. I'm sure it would have comforted the Romans knowing that they were so much more civilized than their forefathers when the barbarians were at the door and everything was collapsing.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Andy Kaufman

i know
Joined
Feb 19, 2022
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
4,781
Awards
209
None of this advancement will ever explain why anything is the way it is and cant even explain how things started or basic truths like consciousness since its rooted in materialism.
But our gut feeling can? The bible, written by humans, can? Religion can?
No. They can just provide illusions so that you can pretend knowing.
The rational and scientific approach isn't to claim that we know the answers to these essential questions but to accept that we might never but still do our very best to try.
This is humble and not arrogant.
Also Greek philosophers and mathematicians WERE pretty advanced and we use their insights to this day.

Arrogance is claiming that your gut feeling provided the answers to these essential questions. That what some humans wrote down thousands od years ago is an unchanged truth that doesn't need to be tested ever. Arrogance is that even though your understanding of how the world is and works was proven to be mostly false but still hanging on to the rest without questioning it.

Most religions are simply too old in the context of the newly found knowledge. They're self centered because they of course didn't know other galaxies exist out there. They were basically built on false assumptions and the more isolated the community was, the more incorrect they were most of the time.
A tribal island folk that never developed the means to leave their island will think that island is their entire world and thus their religious mythos will only revolve around it.
It works for them as long as they're non the wiser but put them on a ship to NYC and they have to hastily "update" or discard their narrative.
GettyImages-11410491702-07f03ccd0eb54d36a9b62212cd2f55a1.jpg


Leaving the planet and peeking far out into space was such a moment for humans and that moment was very recent, that's why it is a very special time we live in. It was a great revelation that shook everything most people believed in up to that point. Maybe it's hard to imagine when you grew up learning these things in school and think this knowledge is just normal but again: we're the first few Generations to even be able to learn about this and many other things that have been gated off to our ancestors by the lack of technology.

I think if we ever make it into a space faring age that new religions will emerge whose mythos doesn't revolve around humans and earth as the centerpieces anymore. Maybe people will still tell tales of Jesus in 10k years but considering how religion developed alongside science I don't think it will be in a spiritual context. We will have new myths and heroes that are more relatable to the modern day human because the old ones are obsolete in all but their moral guidance.
 
Last edited:
Virtual Cafe Awards

Deleted member 3373

But our gut feeling can? The bible, written by humans, can? Religion can?
No. They can just provide illusions so that you can pretend knowing.
The rational and scientific approach isn't to claim that we know the answers to these essential questions but to accept that we might never but still do our very best to try.
This is humble and not arrogant.
Also Greek philosophers and mathematicians WERE pretty advanced and we use their insights to this day.

Arrogance is claiming that your gut feeling provided the answers to these essential questions. That what some humans wrote down thousands od years ago is an unchanged truth that doesn't need to be tested ever. Arrogance is that even though your understanding of how the world is and works was proven to be mostly false but still hanging on to the rest without questioning it.

Most religions are simply too old in the context of the newly found knowledge. They're self centered because they of course didn't know other galaxies exist out there. They were basically built on false assumptions and the more isolated the community was, the more incorrect they were most of the time.
A tribal island folk that never developed the means to leave their island will think that island is their entire world and thus their religious mythos will only revolve around it.
It works for them as long as they're non the wiser but put them on a ship to NYC and they have to hastily "update" or discard their narrative.
GettyImages-11410491702-07f03ccd0eb54d36a9b62212cd2f55a1.jpg


Leaving the planet and peeking far out into space was such a moment for humans and that moment was very recent, that's why it is a very special time we live in. It was a great revelation that shook everything most people believed in up to that point. Maybe it's hard to imagine when you grew up learning these things in school and think this knowledge is just normal but again: we're the first few Generations to even be able to learn about this and many other things that have been gated off to our ancestors by the lack of technology.

I think if we ever make it into a space faring age that new religions will emerge whose mythos doesn't revolve around humans and earth as the centerpieces anymore. Maybe people will still tell tales of Jesus in 10k years but considering how religion developed alongside science I don't think it will be in a spiritual context. We will have new myths and heroes that are more relatable to the modern day human because the old ones are obsolete in all but their moral guidance.
Well for one thing those island mythologies weren't exactly wrong in the context of where they were written. Sure they featured the island as a centrepiece but did they deny the existence of a world beyond their island? In most cases, no. They were simply concerned about what was on the island because that was their world. It doesn't make them irrational for only caring about their island. And really none of this stuff has been proven "false" because this stuff about truth claims about material reality. It was about the nature of ultimate reality. And it features humans' as a centrepiece because the chances of us becoming intergalactic are virtually nill for so many practical reasons. And mind you, I think people want to go to space because they are dissatisifed with Earth. Part of the reason for this is because of the lack of serious religious belief (which I largely blame on the industrial revolution).
 

Andy Kaufman

i know
Joined
Feb 19, 2022
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
4,781
Awards
209
And really none of this stuff has been proven "false" because this stuff about truth claims about material reality. It was about the nature of ultimate reality.
If the Island People believe they're living on the back of a giant turtle then their assumptions about material reality are wrong and if they base the rest of their mythos on said turtle, they will most likely be wrong about the rest too. It's a matter of credibility and trust. It's like asking an inhabitant of plato's cave about the world. Why would I trust someone who fundamentally believed the shadows on the wall to be absolute reality to teach me about the world? Human discoveries of the last centuries is basically us leaving that cave, bit by bit.
You can of course sit by them and listen to them if the cave and its shadows is all you want. I just think it is wierd to call that an ultimate reality when it is mostly a personal, subjective one.
chances of us becoming intergalactic are virtually nill for so many practical reasons.
Just as humans achieving flight or there being another continent past the atlantic. I'm not saying it is guaranteed to happen and I know about the obstacles but these absolute predictions about the future rarely came true so I refrain from them. A series of scientific breakthroughs that transforms our lives fundamentally (yet again) isn't out of the question otherwise it would mean we already know everything there is. These could happen tomorrow, in 10 years or 100 thousand years. Or never. Sure from our CURRENT standpoint it seems basically unachievable but so is building a smartphone for 14th century peasants.
And mind you, I think people want to go to space because they are dissatisifed with Earth.
Some. Like the pioneers left for the Americas. Some were driven by poverty or misery, some by pure adventurous spirit.
. Part of the reason for this is because of the lack of serious religious belief (which I largely blame on the industrial revolution).
I don't think so. The Puritans that left on those ships into a new world to leave their cosy homes behind were almost driven by religious belief to do so. There's always that daring 10% of our species that has a very high tolerance for risks and new things to bring us further while the rest ensures we prevail by being more conservative and trust on what worked before.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Deleted member 3373

If the Island People believe they're living on the back of a giant turtle then their assumptions about material reality are wrong and if they base the rest of their mythos on said turtle, they will most likely be wrong about the rest too. It's a matter of credibility and trust. It's like asking an inhabitant of plato's cave about the world. Why would I trust someone who fundamentally believed the shadows on the wall to be absolute reality to teach me about the world? Human discoveries of the last centuries is basically us leaving that cave, bit by bit.
You can of course sit by them and listen to them if the cave and its shadows is all you want. I just think it is wierd to call that an ultimate reality when it is mostly a personal, subjective one.

Just as humans achieving flight or there being another continent past the atlantic. I'm not saying it is guaranteed to happen and I know about the obstacles but these absolute predictions about the future rarely came true so I refrain from them. A series of scientific breakthroughs that transforms our lives fundamentally (yet again) isn't out of the question otherwise it would mean we already know everything there is. These could happen tomorrow, in 10 years or 100 thousand years. Or never. Sure from our CURRENT standpoint it seems basically unachievable but so is building a smartphone for 14th century peasants.

Some. Like the pioneers left for the Americas. Some were driven by poverty or misery, some by pure adventurous spirit.

I don't think so. The Puritans that left on those ships into a new world to leave their cosy homes behind were almost driven by religious belief to do so. There's always that daring 10% of our species that has a very high tolerance for risks and new things to bring us further while the rest ensures we prevail by being more conservative and trust on what worked before.
Once again it's not about material reality. Metaphor is very common in religious tradition. And yes ultimate reality is to some degree personal as you are a fundamental part of that reality. Your soul is an eternal component of existence. So yes there is (perhaps) a degree of subjectivity. And space travel is impossible because most planets are fundamentally incompatible with life (especially life on Earth). You got any idea how cold it is on Uranus? The only planet that is possibly habitable is Mars and even then it's not ideal (it is around the same temperature as Siberia). And those technological "advances" you mention are fundamentally what's killing this species. The only way space travel can work is through transhumanism. In other words a material form of hell. And that's the thing, those settlers operated within limits. The limits of the Earth. When they got to America they truly appreciated it. Modern people on the other hand do not appreciate what they have. They now want the entire universe in a desperate attempt to find a new source of dopamine. Religion teaches you to be a grateful for what you have which is honestly a much healthier way to live than endless novelty seeking.
 

Andy Kaufman

i know
Joined
Feb 19, 2022
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
4,781
Awards
209
Once again it's not about material reality. Metaphor is very common in religious tradition. And yes ultimate reality is to some degree personal as you are a fundamental part of that reality. Your soul is an eternal component of existence. So yes there is (perhaps) a degree of subjectivity. And space travel is impossible because most planets are fundamentally incompatible with life (especially life on Earth). You got any idea how cold it is on Uranus? The only planet that is possibly habitable is Mars and even then it's not ideal (it is around the same temperature as Siberia). And those technological "advances" you mention are fundamentally what's killing this species. The only way space travel can work is through transhumanism. In other words a material form of hell. And that's the thing, those settlers operated within limits. The limits of the Earth. When they got to America they truly appreciated it. Modern people on the other hand do not appreciate what they have. They now want the entire universe in a desperate attempt to find a new source of dopamine. Religion teaches you to be a grateful for what you have which is honestly a much healthier way to live than endless novelty seeking.
I see this as pessimism and complacency. Where you see ungratefulness, I see aspiration. I think we are just very opposite characters.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Deleted member 3373

I see this as pessimism and complacency. Where you see ungratefulness, I see aspiration. I think we are just very opposite characters.
I just see it as being realistic and in the process making yourself a lot happier. Setting down your expectations does that. I'm not sure if you consider MBTI to be valid or not but I'm INTP (which is one of the least religious mind you).
 

Rebel

This Is War, Huh, Wow!
Joined
Oct 11, 2021
Messages
62
Reaction score
88
Awards
26
I'm not sure really, I'm a bit of a skeptic.
That being said, I have had quite a few experiences throughout my life that I can't really explain.
I'm also a big fan of ghost hunting, I've visited one murder site in my area at night but experienced nothing - I do plan on doing more though.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Andy Kaufman

i know
Joined
Feb 19, 2022
Messages
1,184
Reaction score
4,781
Awards
209
I just see it as being realistic and in the process making yourself a lot happier. Setting down your expectations does that. I'm not sure if you consider MBTI to be valid or not but I'm INTP (which is one of the least religious mind you).
I think that's where we differ. I see most realism as pessimism. I know that it isn't from your perspective but if I were to adopt your viewpoint on this matter it would make me depress. I have a very hopeful outlook on the future and that's exactly what makes me happy and gives me energy. Setting down my expectations is what I did a lot when I was about 16-23 and it made me very miserable.
People say that having low expectations protects from disappointment but for me a short disappointment is more managable than having no glimmer in my eyes for my entire life.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Deleted member 3373

I think that's where we differ. I see most realism as pessimism. I know that it isn't from your perspective but if I were to adopt your viewpoint on this matter it would make me depress. I have a very hopeful outlook on the future and that's exactly what makes me happy and gives me energy. Setting down my expectations is what I did a lot when I was about 16-23 and it made me very miserable.
People say that having low expectations protects from disappointment but for me a short disappointment is more managable than having no glimmer in my eyes for my entire life.
But the afterlife is hope. Much more so than other planets. With other planets you will eventually tire of them as the dopamine release dies down with each planet. In heaven I'll be beyond brain chemistry and thus be able to truly stomach eternity. Well that's how I think about it, I don't actually know what heaven is like. Either way eternity in the material realm would be hellish due to depleting dopamine over time. In the spiritual realm it will be far better as it will be beyond the limitations of the material.