Why can we not observe God?
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
"the correct application is "gnome on the throne" lol."
"The gnome" sounds better. It gives an air of a feared, well known hitman or a mafia enforcer...lol.
uh oh, they must mean business, they have called in "the gnome".
Locked and loaded
@OP: Who said we can't see god?
I was on my way to work this morning and there he was! One of the Blue Universe Creating Bunnies.
You sure that ain't one of the Hellcats that ate the bunny?
@arakish: Heathen! Blasphemer! Sinner! Burn In Hell! The Faithful never question the Blue Creator Bunny!
Wait a second, that animal seems animated and unstuck to the ground...
@Cog Re: Blue Bunny pic
Hah! You despicable charlatan! You LIE! For it states very clearly in the Sacred Book of Bunnies, "1. And, lo, let it be known that the Blue Universe Creator Bunny is not meant to be gazed upon by the eyes of mere mortals. 2. For whosoever looketh upon the holy Blue Universe Creator Bunny shall instantly be transformed into a truffle and savagely consumed by the swine of the land!" (1st Peter Cottontail, 4:1-2)
So, Banana Brain, unless you are a mushroom that was recently ingested by a pig, I'm calling that photo a fake!
Wow! Obeying those two commandments really do work.
I got better.
I just spoke with the Pope. He says you need special glasses to see God. (Click on Image)
If science could build a machine that could listen in to some of the ravenly fucking insane shit that I hear in my head ... they would give me medications to help.
No. I kid. But If there was a machine that could amplify my thoughts, you’d all change your minds about Supreme Beings.
@Kafei: "CONCRETE." I'm still waiting for anything, anything at all, Concrete, to come out of your mouth. So far this has been one long trip on the express train to nowhere. "Woooo Wooooo! Woooo, Woooo!"
I wish I had the time to follow all your links. I do appreciate the time you take to support your arguments. This is at the very least considerable more effort then what a lot of debaters do. But in the interest of time I am going to respond to what you write and not get into responding to the links you present.
I am familiar with ego death. I have taken psychedelics before, but stopped short of something super strong like DMT, I have experienced some ego loss, but never ego death. The initial ramp up on "softer" psychedelics for me terrified me some, even though it quickly passed and I was able to enjoy the rest of the experience in a safe/happy place. I don't think I will ever try DMT or something similar as I am genuinely rather terrified of it, and I tend to try to face my fears instead of hide from them and I am still not very interested. I did experience fairly intense effect of the loss of the ability detect the passage of time. In my most intense psychedelic experience I could not have told while I was in it if I was in for 2 seconds or 2 hours. My first question coming out of it was "how long was I on the floor?" Pretty much the same as when I have suffered concussions, "how long was I out?"
I will follow the link you post here and get back to you on this, as it seems pretty central to this conversation.
Are you saying shaman's/mystics etc can stay in this state of ego death? Perhaps I got the wrong impression about ego death, but my understanding (and "edge" experience of it." A true ego death would leave a person unable to communicate while "ego death" is taking place.
Agree there, I do think that ego death is a temporary transformation of the consciousness, but at least in my own (limited!) experience and my observation of others (small limited sample size to be sure!) That no greater "truths" are found that I was not already aware of. I have noticed I was able to channel some of psychotropic experiences to help aid me in the long term subtle ways to be less anxious, more relaxed and at "peace" with a little bit better understanding of myself and other humans. I also (other then brief onset/ramp up periods,) have had great experiences with psychotropics that was overall quite enjoyable to me as just experiencing "life" from slightly different "lenses" for a while. I even tried mediating both with and w/o drugs focusing on more philosophical thoughts, writing them down etc. And finding later that thoughts that I thought were profound at the time, simply are not when examined with a clear mind at a later time.
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
Well, I've responded a bit more elaborately on another thread. William James spoke about the noetic quality of this experience. I'll also link to a talk by Alan Watts on the nature of this quality. However, if you're really interested, and would like some reading material, I recommend my post to Einy @173 at the freethoughtsblog for The Atheist Experience. I really believe to gain from the insights of this experience, there must be a complete "ego death," not partial as you've described, there must be a complete "trip" as Jordan Peterson might put it, or a "complete" mystical experience is how it's referenced in the research.
You have to love how 'God' in any religion, is everywhere, everything etc.....
And yet it pushed into the furthest boundaries of possibilities, reasoning and rationality in order to prevent a bunch of moderately evolved primates from knowing its true essence.
And how the fuck do these people know what their God is? How do they know it's an 'absolute' for example.
Utter bollocks of the highest possible order.
Could you imagine scientist pulling of the same shit with say evolution? Or the big bang?
Rather then investigating, we will just say that's what it is, that's the cause and push any possibility of finding out more to the furthest reaches of possibility.
Well put. That was exactly part of my point. These experiments evidence nothing except drugs can change your mind state. We even now HOW they do it.
That Kafei tries to plug a "god" or "gods" or "divine oneness" into it somewhere is just utter bollocks. So far it is a chemical reaction that causes certain types of hallucinations, that is all we know.
The reactions of the various subjects gets us no closer to a 'divine" object or anything 'godlike', it just demonstrates something we already fucking know about the human brain....As I said, when Kagfei gets some fucking evidence he can show it here, otherwise he is just pissing in the wind like every other theist.
@Kafei: Still waiting for anything, anything at all, that's "concrete."
What's concrete is the evidence produced by decades worth of legitimate scientific research that's been established. I'm waiting for atheists to properly examine the established science that's been done.
I love how that link jumps right to a part of the video that lists a bunch of bullshit words. :D
I love how someone just being introduced to this research thinks they're encountering a word salad or "bullshit words." It's a pretty good indicator that the content just flew over your head. The mystical states of consciousness are well established in the scientific literature. You might want to actually examine the scientific research before hastily and ignorantly judging it.
Not sure if the research is word salad, but your posts often contains huge bowls of it.
You keep saying "well established in the scientific literature" but keep linking to a Youtube video. Why not link directly to the the literature itself?
Because the legitimate research doesn't justify his conclusions about a 'divine oneness', that is why. All the research has shown is that hallucinatory mystical experiences vary in depth and intensity (hence the table of intensity in experience) .
That after very high 'heroic' doses of certain drugs certain brain centres are paralysed (for want of a better description) and others agitated giving rise to a euphoria or sensations of timelessness and "universal love" (to coin a much abused phrase)
The facts are that certain meditation techniques can also give a sense of timelessness or slowing down of time. It is something that my martial art (kendo) practises for. I was lucky in experiencing it twice. Similar effects are sought in Kyudo, Iai, and Jo-do. All of which I have also practised. That these effects exist are NOT proof of a divinity, god or oneness, and coupled with extreme doses of drugs are doubly subject to error.
In short chemical psychedelia research is NOT related to legitimate consciousness research which has been conducted for a very long time.
Any attempt to introduce a god/divine/oneness concept as a reality or that these studies provide any solid evidence for such a thing apart from personal revelation is absolute buggery bollocks.
It is not borne out in the academic papers excepting some wild fringe practitioners who seem to be presuppositionalists. It is a theoretical abstract which is yet to be confirmed, and short of universal "CME" will not be.
You keep saying that. Drug studies do not justify anything mystical They justify the "drug induced."
Lets look at the idiocy of this moron's comments.
"Where science and the sacred are meeting." (Science is a method of inquiry and not a thing. Sacred is not defined."
He states "Maslow captured it? What the fuck is "it" in the psychology of science. Nothing but wooo wooo here.
We are not talking about empirical, reductionist, testable science but some amorphous concept of science at the "frontiers of human knowledge." Not "REAL" science but some amorphous definition that allows this idiot to get away with terms like "spirituality."
NOTHING 'CONCRETE' HERE.
"Creating new concepts, exploring new paradigms." ALL WITHOUT FACTS OR EVIDENCE OR ANYTHING "CONCRETE."
1ST FALLACY: Obviously if you can not understand what I am saying your are not as well "educated psychedelically" as the rest of us. (You must be an idiot if you can not understand what I am saying.)
Beginning by asserting "There is no such thing as "The Psychedelic Experience." Muddy the water. So what in the fuck are we talking about? And so far we have approached nothing at all "SACRED." We are talking about reactions to psychedelic drugs.
Now, somehow we JUMP to alternative states of consciousness --- Drug Induced. What we are really discussing is the brain's reaction to chemicals that are introduced to it. There are all these experiences and we don't know what the fuck is going to happen when you introduce a drug into a human brain. You might have one of these experiences... It's like the "tie dyed t-shirt effect"
NOT A THING "CONCRETE IN ANY OF THIS GIBBERISH."
The guy is talking about the therapeutic effects of psychoactive drugs. Set, setting, dosage, Nothing to do with Sacred.
"It may sound like an exert from a book of Midevil Virtues than modern scientifically grounded guidelines." HIS WORDS NOT MINE. (TRANSLATION --- NOTHING FUCKING "CONCRETE" HERE.)
What do you imagine this man said that is "Concrete." That defines anything at all mystical or spiritual?
Why on earth would you be waiting for that? Atheists don't validate or falsify scientific data, that can only be done by the scientific method.
What always strikes me as blindingly obvious here is the kind of global reaction any remotely objective person would have to anticipate from the much touted theistic claim that there is scientific evidence for any part of their beliefs. I've just checked and not only has this [paradigm shifting news entirely escaped the mainstream global scientific community,, not a single global news network seems to have noticed.
One last piece of irony is the palpable hilarity of placing a link entitled legitimate scientific research, which links to YouTube. It's also worth looking at the dictionary definition of mysticism here:
1. belief that union with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender.
2. vague or ill-defined religious or spiritual belief, especially as associated with a belief in the occult.
@Kafei: And adding to what Sheldon has said...... NOTHING HERE CONCRETE. VAGUE ASSERTIONS SUBSTANTIATED BY VAGUE ASSERTIONS. JUMPING FROM ONE ABSTRACTION TO ANOTHER.
mysticism (NO CONCRETE DEFINITION EXISTS - NCDE )
1. belief that union with or (ABSORBTION INTO A DIETY - NCDE) or the (absolute- NCDE), or the (spiritual- NCDE) (apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect - OXYMORON), may be attained through contemplation and (self-surrender - NCDE)
2. vague or ill-defined religious or spiritual belief, especially as associated with a belief in the (occult - NCDE)
Not even the frigging dictionary can be "CONCRETE.:
I have done that. Here's a complete list of all the studies that have been produced by Johns Hopkins and have been peer-reviewed and published in the Scientific Journal of Psychopharmacology. This is ongoing research taking place at Johns Hopkins, and as this research continues to build, so will that list.
@Old man shouts
Actually, this "divine oneness" or Unity is a fundamental core feature of the "complete" mystical experience. It's definitely something universally reported by all volunteers who meet the criteria for the CME. This is the break between the subject-object duality that we all experiencing in our ordinary everyday waking consciousness. That boundary is completely collapses in this experience, this is also referred to as Non Duality in eastern philosophy, Fana in Islam or Theoria in Christianity.
Well, I'm not talking about time dilation or slowing down time, but a very literal impression of there being no time at all, and it is from that vantage point in which a mystic can recognize the very evidence for the Perennial philosophy.
The fact is that this is legitimate science taking place. They just got psilocybin legalized a couple of states now because of this research that's happening at Hopkins. If it weren't legitimate, I don't think it'd carry that much political weight. This research continues at Johns Hopkins University as we speak, and has prompted other psychedelic studies around the world.
I'm pretty sure that's what our physicists are saying today regarding their most advanced ToEs (Theory of Everything). The physicist accepts that all is one, but the mystic intuits it directly.
The CME is well established. It's an actual phenomenon in consciousness, this is not up for debate. None of this has anything to do at all with presuppositionalism, by the way.
Yes, but they also can deny scientific research like this that has the potential to undermine atheism.
If you go on their main CSP website that hosts the studies, you'll find all the times it's been mentioned in the media. People are definitely waking up to this stuff, albeit quite slowly, but it is happening.
The lectures are on the peer-reviewed studies.
Yes, this experience is a complete absorption, and mystics long ago would describe Theoria as an aborption into the Absolute, likewise the Hindu described the experience of samadhi as the dissolution into Brahman. These are not ill-defined, but concretely defined concepts that have been construed from these very specific transformations of consciousness. So that the "esoteric" is not something "vague or ill-defined," but only understood by those who've been initiated, who've had the CME. For the mystic, they need not to read a peer-reviewed paper on mystical experiences, they don't need to read religious scripture about mystical experience, they simply draw upon their own mystical experience for this insight. So, to the uninitiated person who hasn't had this experience, the "esoteric" then seems vague, ill-defined, nebulous, etc.
@Cognostic The guy is talking about the therapeutic effects of psychoactive drugs. Set, setting, dosage, Nothing to do with Sacred.
Pyshechedelics are also called entheogen which means literally "generate the divine with in," it's this aspect of these psychedelic substances as to why they're considered sacred. They were the utmost sacred sacrament for the Mayans and the Aztecs.
Well, pretty every lecture he's taken the time to explain this stuff. Including his interviews.
Taking mind altering drugs can alter your perception of reality, I'm failing to see how this justifies the woo woo claims being made here about woo woo terms like mysticism, and see zero evidence for any deity?
Since you are overly fond of linking of YouTube videos, here is an episode of the Atheist Experience tackling the very claims you are making. There is no peer reviewed study evidencing anything supernatural, or any deity, that is axiomatic, as mainstream science does not support the claims you are making.
Again here is the definition of mysticism.
1.belief that union with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender.
2.vague or ill-defined religious or spiritual belief, especially as associated with a belief in the occult.
How can science objectively test anything that is "inaccessible to the intellect" just for a start? I don't care if double blind clinical trials show that people off their tits on hallucinogenic drugs have a uniformity of experience, how does that evidence anything supernatural, let alone a deity? Note the secondary definition, "vague and ill defined."
Not one study concretly defines any of the terms we are discussing. YOU SAID "CONCRETE" Still waiting.