• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Death is Freedom

Dwigie

New member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
658
MBTI Type
INFP
A reply to the question: honestly, do you really want freedom?

Death is freedom, a state of being void of all thoughts and attachments...


Thoughts are but a reflection of your past state, attachments an entity bound to your future state, and together they enslave a person to a reality of nothingness where the best scenario is death and the worst a contemplation of suicide.
I am having a lot of trouble understanding exactly what you mean by this paragraph above. Can you re-explain it to me please?(I mean that in the least aggressive and disagreeable manner of course:))

In death reality is neither bound to the past nor the future because neither one exists,
Hm?- I'm lost here too.
in death your existence is reborn to a reality living in the present grasping that feeling that seemed to always torment you and slip from the fringes of your mind -- But I thought we weren't talking about physical death:shock:? I'm seriously getting lost.
happiness; the feeling of well being; a state where the current mind is one with your surroundings and your instinctual desires( what do you mean by instinctual desire?) depicted by these present entities; the oneness of self.
I think I'm getting lost in the terms here. I probably jumped to a conclusion earlier on by only taking death in the physical sense of the word but I'm very confused here.(Interesting topic though by the way)

Only(why "only?") in death can one be free and only(same) in freedom can one be happy. So, do I truly want freedom, you ask? I want it with every living breath that I make, every step that I take, and every fiber of my being that lights my existence; The only thing in life that is important enough to die for, on more than one level...

Basically you desire freedom above all or am I way out of line here?
 

metamorphysics

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
32
MBTI Type
INTP
Oh I see
So I'll define Unicorns as 2 wheeled vehicules and say they exist.

Great, I'm a genius. (yawn) I can prove anything too.
What you just did is called sophism. The art of empty logic.

1) If you define unicorns as 2 wheeled vehicles thats fine, they would indeed exist(for you maybe but probably not to most of society). It was a miscalculation to assume people where reasonable and can infer the general definition of a concept, which is why i later define my term.

2)What i just did you defined as sophism(empty logic)... funny, I would claim your logic which draws that conclusion is "empty". Than again claiming something doesn’t make it true, most of us need evidence or proof, i would claim my proof is in your lack of proof. Who knows i might be wrong and you may be some superior being which surpasses even my logic.

3) You cant "prove anything too"(at least in context of the form of truth, becouse you can "prove" anything to anyone or yourself if they/you believe it), you can have a perception/definition of anything, that may or may not be right.... and please in the future judge my logic logically.
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
1-Your miscalculation was to assume you're culturally hyperrelativistic and opportunistic self contained sophism was in fact, philosophy.
2- yes apparently. You know ocam's razor? What is most likely. That you're not as smart as you think you are or that I'm zeus living on the mount olympus? ;)
3- you can't judge yours to begin with. It would be kind of a waste of time.

I'm glad you can convince your high school friend with that logic but that's as far as it should go.
No hard feelings.



ow and welcome on the forum :laugh:
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
The art of empty logic.

Kinda like abstract art, of this sort:
Original-Abstract-Art-OneBigFantasy.jpg
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
Well at least you can hang that on a wall if you're missing some wall paper.
And I can see a patern there.

Since it's a painting and not some supposed truth, I don't ask for more.
 
Last edited:

metamorphysics

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
32
MBTI Type
INTP
1-Your miscalculation was to assume you're culturally hyperrelativistic and opportunistic self contained sophism was in fact, philosophy.
2- yes apparently. You know ocam's razor? What is most likely. That you're not as smart as you think you are or that I'm zeus living on the mount olympus? ;)
3- you can't judge yours to begin with. It would be kind of a waste of time.

I'm glad you can convince your high school friend with that logic but that's as far as it should go.
No hard feelings.
honestly i lost interest when this turned more into a brawl than intellectual conversation. Lets leave it at that.

dwigie, sorry its taking me some time, but ill respond soon.
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
The classic intp retreat, never gets old.

carry on child, carry on.
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
Since it's a painting and not some supposed truth, It don't ask for more.

I don't think the balloon is really listening to the art. :huh: Art asks itself to be seen as a deeper more philosophical truth, too, quite a few times. Well, only the beret wearing serious kind.

*sheesh, the whole world wants to be taken seriously. :emot-emo:
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
I don't think the balloon is really listening to the art. :huh: Art asks itself to be seen as a deeper more philosophical truth, too, quite a few times. Well, only the beret wearing serious kind.

*sheesh, the whole world wants to be taken seriously. :emot-emo:
I was mostly joking around. Art is a purely human craft. A closed system. More so than philosophy.

But I think it's more about expressing one's personnal truth. And by using emotions and pattern recognition, which are pretty much standardly wired into our dna, it atteins a kind of humanity-wide truth.

Quite a beautiful idea :)
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
I was mostly joking around. Art is a purely human craft. A closed system. More so than philosophy.

But I think it's more about expressing one's personnal truth. And by using emotions, which are pretty much standardly wired into our dna, it atteins a kind of humanity-wide truth.

Quite a beautiful idea :)


Mops the puddle that is Eck. 98 luftballons.

But, can't the intp-dude's perspective be as such too? Personal existential thought of freedom from death? Death of freedom? And, how one balances on the tight-rope in between? Doesn't it speak to a human truth for some sort of affirmation of purpose of *self* in this world?
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
Yeah but you can't encourage sophism, or they'll start running around thinking they're superior and doing online iq tests all day.
He'll get mad, he'll go out for some air, meet friends, have a girlfriend.

So I'm really being kind to him.

In the end, everything is arguable, I'm an entp for god sake, I could argue that the earth is flat for sports if the church decided to back me up.
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
In the end, everything is arguable, I'm an entp for god sake, I could argue that the earth is flat for sports if the church decided to back me up.

Churches have gotten into quite a few troubles for such similar statements, uttered by some of their priests offering the same type of service.

Everything is arguable cuz very few things are definite in the realm of conceptual thought. [not that that disregards the very accurate argument regarding entps. ;)]
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
Churches have gotten into quite a few troubles for such similar statements, uttered by some of their priests offering the same type of service.

Everything is arguable cuz very few things are definite in the realm of conceptual thought. [not that that disregards the very accurate argument regarding entps. ;)]
As long as we're all really delusional freaks, we might at least be honest about it (and enjoy it):cool:
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
As long as we're all really delusional freaks, we might at least be honest about it (and enjoy it):cool:

Honesty in delusion. Is that really then delusion? [...sometimes, I wish I had an 'off' switch]
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
Honesty in delusion. Is that really then delusion? [...sometimes, I wish I had an 'off' switch]



You know zeno's paradox?

YOu know the story about achilles and the rabbit.
Achilles can never keep up with the rabbit because he always has a smallest and smallest "fraction" of distance separing him from the damn rabbit. To understand the race we have to know that, we can only estimate positions by stopping\'freezing time'. So at constant speed the position at 1 sec will be 2 times further than at 0.5, 1000 times further than at 1ms et caetera.
This introduce an infinity in the variables. While we know the distance between the rabbit and achilles (or the arrow and the apple, further below) is finite, the computation is infinite, and achilles gets ever closer to the rabbit without ever reaching it.

I'm lazy so I'll google..
Stated for Dummies, this Parodox means that Achilles (the fleet-footed Greek war hero of Achilles Heel fame) can never catch up to the slow-poke tortoise if aforesaid tortoise has any sort of head-start, however short that head-start is. Whenever Achilles reaches a point that is somewhere the tortoise has already been, the tortoise will have, by then, advanced 'slowly but surely' past that point, so that Archilles will still have farther to go, even if it is an infinitely small one. Therefore, Zeno says (and rightly), swift Achilles can never overtake the tortoise.

The issue of the imperfect human truth.


Our general understanding of the universe is getting closer and closer to a 1:1 model of the universe without ever reaching it.

Each time we explain let's say, gravity. We expand our knowledge and find out that the orbit of i-forgot-which-planet isn't accounted for correctly(mercury?) IS OFF, then the human achilles advances again, shining upon the 'wrong orbit' darkness by finding out about relativity. But einstein's theory lead to theorize and indirectly observe new unknown limit states such as black holes and the big bang, create some new terra incognitae. The unknown advances further.
And so on, And so on.

To apply the concept of the zeno's paradox
:

Human understanding may accelerate exponentially faster and faster, but the steady progression of the unknown will always be one step, one tenth of a step, one billionth of a step further. Because the only way to really totally 'understand' the universe, is to be the universe. So the best we can do is getting closer and closer to a perfect comprehension.

To use a formula from a book I read some time ago, the speed of dark is faster than the speed of light.
Because wherever there is light, it was preceded by darkness. And without the darkness, there'd be nothing for the light to shine upon.

Applying that to the idea of the delusion, yes, we're always wrong, and everytime we display our knowledge and call it light, we omit there's always darkness lurking.
So we'll always be a little wrong, no matter how far we go. Towards the infinitely small.


Using the paradox of the arrow it would be translated such as: the arrow is our science of the universe, the human truth. The apple is the absolute truth.

Shoot an arrow towards a man standing 1meter away, you can say that.
In half the time it went half the way to the man. *50cm left/50% to the target*
In 9\10th of the time. *10cm left/10% to the target*
In 99\100th of the time. *1cm left/1% to the target*
In 999\1000th of the time. *0.1cm left/0.1% to the target*
And so on AD INFINITUM, The arrow never reaches the man.


But you see, zeno's paradox has an answer. Calculus
Now I started writing a book but I decided to stop and just use a simple concept you should know.

0.9999999 = 1
Endlessly getting closer to 1 is 1. endlessly looking for the truth is the truth.

Therefore as long as our ignorance and our delusions strive for the truth, to get further and further ahead, to free our knowledge from the bondage of human relativity and try, endlessly and hopelessly to reach for the stars and grasp the multiverse.

As long as this is our ideal, as long as we stay honest to it, we hold the truth forever in our hands.


EDIT: In conclusion: The truth lies not in what we know but the unknown, and the very fact of pursuing it is already truth in itself. But the danger lies in sophism, in closed logic that only thrive on ego and a desire to prevail rather than a geniune pursuit of the unknown, wherever it lurks.
 
Last edited:

erm

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
1,652
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5
technically everything that made up ur body cells\structure is different from the guy you remember from a few years ago. So we're probably just more or less only existing in the present\near present and, in the best case disolve like:
Time -1: 1 = <1>
Time 0: (now): 1 -0,5=0.5 + a new 0.5 = <1>
Time 2 : 1-1=0 T0(0,5)+a new 0.5 = <1>

So we're just people remembering about somebody else and convinced we are that person.
And that present self disappears as a weave spreading through space into infinity.
One day another total stranger will remember being the present you.

So if you want to die and end up free.. don't worry, just wait.

I don't think we know enough about consciousness to judge that kind of thing. It does seem intuitive though considering we only experience memories (recordings) of the past and predictions of the future, all in the present moment. It could simply be the same consciousness drifting through time however, though who knows what our memories aren't recording (e.g a complete change in consciousness).

What's the reasoning that would lead you to imagine that we will have the facilities required for consciousness after death?

If we assume that consciousness has nothing but a physical causation, then what's to stop that physical causation happening again?

If it has more than just a physical causation, then who knows?
 

Grayscale

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
1,965
MBTI Type
ISTP
i always find this sort of thing funny. why should i even bother replying when you dont truly believe your own argument? :alttongue:

the insinuated benefit of freedom is to gain, without life you cannot lose, yes, but neither can you gain... im willing to take that risk.
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890


Applying that to the idea of the delusion, yes, we're always wrong, and everytime we display our knowledge and call it light, we omit there's always darkness lurking.


Why would our acknowledging that we have gained a certain knowledge, automatically transfer to us negating/omitting that there is darkness lurking? If anything, advancement of knowledge is the *key* to finding out more accurately, that which we do not know. I thus don't support your dichotomy, of why an omission will then occur with a gain in knowledge.

So we'll always be a little wrong, no matter how far we go. Towards the infinitely small.

Not knowing, is not the same as being wrong. Evolution is falsifiable. But, those against the theory often bring up 'holes' that we haven't yet explained through evolution, and call it contradiction. Like the evolution of how the mind processes images (how the eye works). But, not knowing doesn't contradict evolution. We're not wrong. We just don't know. (yet)

Therefore as long as our ignorance and our delusions strive for the truth,

Again, ignorance is not delusion. They're not the same. One is a lack of knowledge, the other a twisting of knowledge.

EDIT: In conclusion: The truth lies not in what we know but the unknown,

The asolute truth. The whole. If we say that it can be broken down into infinite smaller pieces such that unless we *are* the truth, we cannot truly ever know the truth. Then, wouldn't the same logic stand that when we build *on* a truth, as it is THE absolute whole, it means that there can be infinite inter-connections, so, the unknown may very well be a realistic failure to conceive of all infinite connections that makes up the whole? Rather than merely the concrete unknown.

As such, honesty can lie in ignorance. But, not in delusion.
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
Not knowing, is not the same as being wrong. Evolution is falsifiable. But, those against the theory often bring up 'holes' that we haven't yet explained through evolution, and call it contradiction. Like the evolution of how the mind processes images (how the eye works). But, not knowing doesn't contradict evolution. We're not wrong. We just don't know. (yet)

Yes I'm sorry, I mis used the word wrong thinking about an inexact model of a reality. In my mind 'right' was the absolute reality. You're right to note that point. thx
Again, ignorance is not delusion. They're not the same. One is a lack of knowledge, the other a twisting of knowledge.
As such, honesty can lie in ignorance. But, not in delusion.
What is a delusion?
It’s when one’s perception of reality isn’t compatible with the general concept of truth.
Here we face two problems:
if we can say that the general rule is ‘you walk into a wall you will hit the wall’.
Then you’d say that if that wall was really an optical illusion for example, there’d be honest ignorance.
While the delusional individual would for example, start with the belief he can go through the wall, GO through the wall and think it makes him right.

Now we can say, yes, but you’d just have to give the delusional individual the way more probable experience of hitting the wall to discredit his belief.

So the delusional individual really thinks he has a super power, but then he can never go through the wall. He’d keep swearing he did it but would keep being proven wrong.
But let’s take the concept of delusion to the field of research. Our instruments and technologies allow us to observe more and more accurately on the human, macro and nano+quantum scales.
So when the delusional man and the ignorant man meet this new situation, what are the grounds for calling one interpretation a delusional one and another honest poke in the dark made by the ignorant man?
We need to infer the mechanisms ruling the new grounds of reality we uncover and I don’t see how we can ‘honestly’ call the first a delusional man and the second an honest ignorant.

Therefore delusions seem to mostly apply to human scale and social interactions and are designed rather by norms than the purest empiricism. Now yes, if everybody could have absolute undeniable certainty of a perfect understanding the whole of the universe, then you'd be able to perfectly weed out delusions from a no longer existing state of honest ignorance.

The asolute truth. The whole. If we say that it can be broken down into infinite smaller pieces such that unless we *are* the truth, we cannot truly ever know the truth. Then, wouldn't the same logic stand that when we build *on* a truth, as it is THE absolute whole, it means that there can be infinite inter-connections, so, the unknown may very well be a realistic failure to conceive of all infinite connections that makes up the whole? Rather than merely the concrete unknown.
I’d have to disagree. If the ‘human truth’ is part of the whole and is therefore subject to corrections.
Those corrections are a part of a process, which process can be indefinitely divided and understood as a potentially infinite series going towards 1.

And 1 is 1 as a whole, the absolute truth is the universe, multiverse, or whatever is the last step. In other words, what we are talking about is simply Reality.

This Reality is a self contained system and not a process.

If time can be considered as a dimension within this multi\universe there’s no point at stating it’s a dynamical process.

Now the counter attack would be: but then how is the ‘expansion of the human sphere of knowledge not also reduceable to a dimensional construct.

Well, It’s because this sphere isn’t self contained, it constantly adds new knowledge within its midst If the universe at any given time could be reduced to an X, and then at another time into an Y.
X would be equal to Y.
But the sum of the human knowledge constantly adding to itself would result into an X at T0 < Y at T1.
 

AOA

♣️♦️♠️♥️
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
4,821
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8
Instinctual Variant
sx
Death is freedom? Mmm, so what are we doing here (in existence)?
 
Top