Science proves life after death

[_Maksutov]

SPG, I should clarify. While I did recommend Carl Jung for reading, I have always found him disappointing. Jung desperately wanted to believe; his mentor Freud did not. This was a line between them that widened into a chasm. While time has not been kind to Freud or Jung, I think it has been harder on Jung. Freud did not evolve from protoscientist to scientist, but Jung went from protoscientist to mystic. His mythologizing of his own hallucinations and other experiences in his final Red Book makes this clear. I don't consider the movement from rationalist to mystic an improvement, far from it.

[_SPG]

It's always interesting to me how perceptions differ. I don't think my sigh was the result of finding anything you posted "striking." I think it was just the opposite.

I know. I just like to give a person an "out" when they are being rude. ;)

Your ole "sigh, he is so lost" approach deserved to be messed with. I didn't miss your meaning. I mean, trust me, I think you are lost and confused too, but to act all superior is so cliché.

[_SPG]

SPG, I should clarify. While I did recommend Carl Jung for reading, I have always found him disappointing. Jung desperately wanted to believe; his mentor Freud did not. This was a line between them that widened into a chasm. While time has not been kind to Freud or Jung, I think it has been harder on Jung. Freud did not evolve from protoscientist to scientist, but Jung went from protoscientist to mystic. His mythologizing of his own hallucinations and other experiences in his final Red Book makes this clear. I don't consider the movement from rationalist to mystic an improvement, far from it.

I find Carl Jung's work to be completely crazy, for the most part. But he and I are alike. And I certainly wouldn't quote anything he says as gossip.

However, he sparks in me something that has been awaking anyway and that is mysticism. Everyone is going "too scientific".

Joseph Smith said, speaking for God, "They draw nigh unto with their lips, but their hearts are from me." And, "they have a form of Godliness, but they deny the power thereof."

A nephew pointed out that we need to let go of the beliefs of our "infancy" (speaking of early man) and go with our modern moral code. Testosterone levels in American men are dropping fast. Our more civilized approach could destroy the very life force that gave humanity its chance. I have many friends that blast humanity for its barbarism, but life is barbaric. And while the old religions were definitely barbaric, they did things that to this day confuse us. Such as the great cities of old.

Jung reminds me of the power of mysticism, the power of belief, even if completely nuts.

I tell the story of being in my backyard one day when a sense of awareness came over me. I could feel life in the trees, I could feel the worms crawling in the dirt and the fallen tree limbs rotting. I could feel the pursuit of bugs looking for food. And it was freaking awesome, (no, I don't do drugs.) But it felt. . . . mystical. A certain knowing, without knowing. Like, I could feel things happening, but I wasn't sure of anything like the future or past.

Somehow, the same mystic power that give the trees life, and animals, gave us life. There is an entire universe living inside of us and we are completely unaware. But, we develop diseases. Not quick diseases like the black plague, but slow ones that we struggle with for years. Jung would call this "libido again libido."

His libido is another word for my "desire/want/love" or even my God. Many Christians want to think of God as old man with a white bread, sitting on a throne. I don't see God so much as ruler, but rather a conscious force. Science has not even come close to explaining the forces of life.

[_Res Ipsa]

It's always interesting to me how perceptions differ. I don't think my sigh was the result of finding anything you posted "striking." I think it was just the opposite.

I know. I just like to give a person an "out" when they are being rude. ;)

Your ole "sigh, he is so lost" approach deserved to be messed with. I didn't miss your meaning. I mean, trust me, I think you are lost and confused too, but to act all superior is so cliché.

You're a lousy mind reader.

"We're lost" would be much closer to my thinking.

Do you believe that everything you can imagine represents reality?

[_SPG]

You're a lousy mind reader.

"We're lost" would be much closer to my thinking.

Do you believe that everything you can imagine represents reality?

Yes, everything I imagine represents reality. Reality is perception. What I imagine influences my perception. My reality influences your reality.

[_Res Ipsa]

I can imagine my living room with and without a coffee table? Do both imaginings represent reality?

[_Choyo Chagas]

I can imagine my living room with and without a coffee table? Do both imaginings represent reality?

based on your comments, there is a coffee table

please watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wsYM1GgQLU (3.55)

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...


Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too


And the world will live as one

that atheist, heathen, red, leftist, democrat, negro, gay beatles


the last three adjectives may don't fit, as

In 1965, Queen Elizabeth II appointed Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr Members of the Order of the British Empire (MBE).

- or, queen elizabeth ii was - is? - democrat, negro and gay too


by the way
the word democrat is not the widely used definition ("A proponent of democracy, or democratic government; rule of the people or rule by many.")
but the merkan version ("A member of a Democratic Party: United States")

[Guest]

I can imagine my living room with and without a coffee table? Do both imaginings represent reality?

Yes.

When one is making choices, one usually imagines the possibilities. If 10 different options are imagined and one chosen, the 9 others influenced the choice of the one.

If by imagining your living room, (which has coffee table now) with or without a coffee table, the reality of the universe has changed. The image of the room without a coffee table might inspire you get rid of it, or confirm how much you like it.

Statistically, (I can guess) for every 1000 people that imagine their living room without a coffee room will git rid of the one they have. It has happened to me a couple of times.

If something has absolutely no influence, then it never happened and never existed.

Even unicorns have influence over the world. People who believe in unicorns will behave differently then those that don't.

A thought has a certain psychic force. It might be a small force, or a large force, but every thought has force. Many (most) thoughts are subconscious and we feel the effect of them. A ghost could live in a thought. A ghost can invade your thoughts.

[_Maksutov]

If something has absolutely no influence, then it happened and never existed.

So things that don't exist still happen. That's interesting.

[_Lemmie]

A nephew pointed out that we need to let go of the beliefs of our "infancy" (speaking of early man) and go with our modern moral code. Testosterone levels in American men are dropping fast. Our more civilized approach could destroy the very life force that gave humanity its chance.

Good thing that males are only half the human population, then, hmm? Or when you use terms like we, our, early man and humanity are you referring only to males?