Greek: There are 2 connotations of "faith." 1. Faith based upon empirical proof/s 2. religious faith which is based soley upon "hope." Which one are you referring to? Seems to me to be religious faith. Lets say tho that we go with your "definition," would "immortality" based upon that which cannot be necessarily proven be a "reasoned' response in reference to my question?
One might argue that there are truths that are, as Thomas Jefferson might say, "self evident"
Faith the can be based on a type of inner wisdom or truth that can not be easily explained, measured or proven.
This need not be limited to the area of religion.. In fact, some of the greatest advances probably started off with little more than faith in an idea or a concept, without any empirical proof backing it up.
Of course, that does not mean that this inner wisdom is at all accurate. Then again, empirical proof once dictated that the world was flat
greek: lolol "Empirical proof" that the world was flat?...oh my gosh. IROTFL Any thing that was created based upon faith, was, just a very strong "hope" that it would turn out right... I can't accept your response as being well "reasoned." :-)
Back in the day the 'proof' was that the world was flat… mind you the sources to disprove that were limited (and were often killed most unkindly)
Back in the day, Aristotle was thought to have known it all... later discoveries proved him wrong.
To give another example, wasn’t it based on faith that the American colonies could separate from England. Certainly evidence would have suggested they would lose easily
Faith has always been a powerful component in human development and progress. By definition it is something that does not need to rely on the type of ‘evidence’ you are looking for.
I, for example, have faith that I will one day match Mark Knowles’s blogging revenue streams. Based on the evidence in by bank account today, I have no proof of that.. but you never know.. he might take me under his wing
Greek: "To give another example, wasn’t it based on faith that the American colonies could separate from England. Certainly evidence would have suggested they would lose easily." That kind of "faith" ='s "hope."
Hope is a human emotion. Whether you are religious or not, there is always something to remain hopeful about.
Examples: I hope I get the job promotion. (You have faith in yourself, therefore you are hopeful.) You can't prove you will get that job promotion until you actually get it, the same with religion of any kind. No one can prove God or the Goddess or Mohammad or whoever you worship exists until it comes time to "meet your maker" or go lie in the soil for the rest of eternity.
Hope and faith can be completely separate from religion.
As for religious texts, I've never had much use for them. If you put a Bible outside, the wind and the rain will dissolve its pages. The wind and rain ARE my Bible
faith is merely shining the flashlight on an object already there, just not visible to the optic view aka in the darkness. calling the thing forth as not, as though they are -cuz, well, they are. simple.
There is no such thing as immortality in the sense that the same person does not live forever....However: the sense of Pure Being is immortal. And since this feeling of pure awareness is the same in all of us ..we are all immortal.
Cags: Ya have to re-write this...lol I'm trying to figure this out; "Even Einstein said "Imagination is important than knowledge". Did you leave the word "more" out? ...and what does this mean? "All our present knowledge claims or appears to point to it not realistic,..." did you leave out a word here too or did you mean: ...appears to point to it as not being realistic? Soooo...I'm not quite getting your point. Wanna try again?
My point was that you were limiting yourself to say that it was an impossibility- immortality.
And, Yes- Einstein said "Imagination is more important than knowledge". I say that because Imagination is key to exploration in all fields of science, for which, are key to humanity's understanding of itself.
Immortality compared with the collective knowledge of humanity, the two put together would not compute on any level. Just the concept exists presently because our knowledge is limited.
Cags; What an improvement! :-) I don't think I used the word "impossible" tho. How did you come up with that from my question? I don't think of anything as being "impossible." Improbable? Absolutely. "Immortality" as it relates to any form of life is a foreign concept to me. Do you think you are able to "broaden my horizons" in ref to it? My mind is seeking well reasoned "input." :-)
Thank you. Most average people would completely dismiss it as impossible more than anything else. It is a foreign concept to most. Don't feel bad. I can compare the thought of "immortality" to the thought of "world peace", both have a chance of becoming a reality, but not before a change in the way we think about these concepts come to be a reality.
Right now, each concept is exactly that- a concept or idea. There isn't any action building either of them to be even remotely probable, much less anything else.
There must be a change in a majority of humanity, a shift in thinking, can make it a reality.
Einstein: "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."(As quoted in Clark 1971:502)
However, it would also seem that Einstein was not an atheist, since he also complained about being put into that camp:
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."
"I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangements of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God."
I started believing in the possability of eternal life in 6th grade when we learned that matter can not be destroyed. We can only change its form by allowing it to decay or burn it or combining the elements. We can not destroy energy but only move it from one location to another. etc.
I believe our concience is energy therefore it is relocated from one place to another????????????
Jerami: What do you mean: "I believe our concience is energy...?" Do you mean "consciousness?" C'mon Jerami, you are being as careless with your English as Cags was. What does whatever you are trying to say have to do with any life being "immortal?"
Getting tired and sleepy as for the spelling I aint so good anyway. This is what I think don't know "HOW" true it is or not But Energy and matter are as diffrent as water and rocks. The matter that makes up this tired old body will feed the worms some day I have the same amount of energy in this tired old body as I ever did, it's just getting weaker now. When the body dies the energy goes someplace. Where does that energy go after is isn't here any more?
I don't know? My science teacher said it cain't be destroy. It can be dispersed or collected That's all I know. I believe that cause my science teacher said it.
There ARE actually entities that do not move at all. Rocks, for instance, are forms of matter that do not move unless someone or something moves them. They don't grow, they don't shrink.
Male and Female
One word: Hermaphrodites
North and South
You forgot Northeast, Northwest, Southeast Southwest, West, East... Not everything goes in one direction or the other.
Light and Dark
What about that happy medium? You know, the time when it's not really dark and it's not really light. It just IS. If you're talking about color, there are very few colors that can be described simply as light or dark. There's medium light, very light, slightly light, medium dark, very dark, slightly dark.
Life and Death
Yes, there is death from every life. However, death can sometimes bring new life, such as flowers or herbs.
Visible and Invisible
Okay, you can have that one.
The point I am trying to make is that there is not always a black and white answer, yes or no answer. There are shades of gray in many areas, which is why your argument is not valid.
None of what you said disputes what I have said. Rocks can be thrown up/down, left/right/ back/forth..etc. It is about movement FACTS not about what can or can't move.
Nothing you have said is an argument...against what I have said. Your statements actually enforce what I've said.
For instance your statement that I "forgot Northeast, Northwest" and that not everything goes in one direction is exactly what I was stating when I said: "Up and down or Height, Back and forth or Length, Side to side or Width" However just because there are Middle Grounds does not mean North and South are not a part of and are extreme opposites of each other. It also does not mean that they CAN exist without each other.
It only shows that they all exist as one and by nature inseparable except in mans eyes.
Your statement about dark and light having a happy medium again does not take away that there is still dark and light. It only reinforces it. Because something such as dark and light being halfway means it is going to the opposite point..dark going to light, light going to dark. Which man has named one day. Which is a whole and is inseparable.
Your statement that " Yes, there is death from every life. However, death can sometimes bring new life, such as flowers or herbs." Really proves my point.
My Premise #1 All of existence contains Dualities that are inseparable and one can't exist without the other
My Premise #2 Man labels these as separate yet they are actually all a whole.
Conclusion Since the above two primes are true then it can be concluded that if Mortality exists then Immortality also exists though man can't see or prove it.
Your statement that the existence of the Male and Female genders are Hermaphrodite is just weird.
This meaningless drivel the religionists come out with to justify whatever it is they are attempting to justify is really quite entertaining. But - it does make it impossible to have a meaningful conversation. I mean when,
"If there is life, there is death If there is visible there is invisible If there is mortality there has to be immortality"
is supposed to be "logic" - how can you speak to them?
This one accused me of lacking the ability to think in logical terms. So - I guess by her definition of the word "logic" - I would have to agree with her.
Instead of looking backwards, to old philosophies and superstitions about the possiblility of immortality, how about looking forwards towards emerging/developing demonstrable scientific progress?
If you care to Google Aubrey de Grey, the LEF Foundation, or the work of Ray Kurzweil, you will quickly learn that much measurable scientific progress has already been made on identifying the so-called "aging gene."
As knowledge of gene manipulation continues to expand, the possiblity of achieving immortality through science is a real possiblity - maybe even within the next couple of decades (according to those who work in this field of research.)
I am not sure if that would be a good thing or not. This little earth is going to get very crowded if no one got old and died and everyone kept on having babies. Or we build a lot of busses to other planets??? Seems like when man fixes one problem a bigger one emerges.
Einstein on several occasions point blank refused any association with religion. (See my earlier quote as an example)
"I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."
Spinoza's God is not infact creationism, and Einstein does not support creationism, but he uses the word God, as did Spinoza, to refer to god as a connection between living things.
This is why Einstein was not an Atheist, because he did not 'crusade' against religion, nor did he deny religion, he simply stated his personal view that religion was wrong, however he did not deny that their were connections beyond human understanding, to this point he was agnostic
("My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment.")
If you have any real desire to know for sure about Einsteins point of view on religion read some of his works. If anything Einstein leant more towards a personal Buddhism where he focused on finding the best qualities in life.
Jewel: Pls tell me how this can be considered to be due exercise of the faculty of logical thought? I read what you just wrote and qualify the whole message as just being meandering, valueless opinion. I'm trying to understand why you even offered it...except maybe to engender comments like mine. After all, the forum is a form of entertainment and the "devils advocacy" attitude is certainly ok...:-)
I think jewel is referring to sense of pure Being. I agree, the feeling of being is immortal as it does not depend on time and space. This feeling exists when we have let go of all conceptual knowledge. Detached from sensory experience yet awareness of being is possible. Maybe I should write a hub about this as it keeps coming up.
What mankind has been looking for since Adam & Eve is immortality. It is elusive to mankind because we believe in only our own reality-what I can see, touch, smell or hear. Can anyone say how long space, that's right space, not the universe but space itself has existed?-(I didn't think so) If can find how old space is then how does one know how long it's been around? Does anyone see and end to space, will there come a time when there is no more space?
Logic always seems to break down in these forums as people always attempt to argue issues without any attempt to categorize the things they're arguing about. Reason and logic would fall into the category of concepts. Material objects would fall into an entirely different category.
In the case of immortality there's two categories: the material body and the energy we call consciousness of itself. Some might believe that consciousness is a chemical process, if that is the belief, then it falls into the same category as the physical body. If not, then consciousness would fall into a category separate from the body. So, therefore, the question shoud be something like "Is consciousness immortal?" If so, what part of consciousness is immortal, consciousness of one's physical body and memories, or consciousness of something greater?
This is a fascinating topic and I have enjoyed reading responses from other Hubbers. I am not able to give a well reasoned answer so maybe you won't like it very much. I know that I was born 52 years ago, I know, that I will die in the future (not too soon, I hope). Why does everyone worry about death and about being plunged into 'nothingness' when no-one worries about where they were before they were born! Did we have an existence before, were we nothing, were we created at that moment of conception? If we were nothing before and became what we are now, is it not logical to think that if we become nothing again at our deaths that we can 'be' again in the future? With all the trillions and trillions of possibilities it seems to me that there is nothing that is impossible.
I just started a forum looking into the subject. It was great and polite but the discussion veered into all about people who believe in God and how that is fallacious.Here I hope we focus on the atheist. Can the atheist...
Is Imagination more important than the bibleEinstein quote knowledge is limited. imagination encircles the world The tree as the source of immortality and universal knowledge is not unique to the Bible. We meet...
Having declared ourselves as free thinking righteous believers (meaning we understand the concept of a right and wrong).* Would curtailing shock jock radio announcer's verbal expressions over the airway be immoral?*...