Posts by Etude

20

The Final Truth?

by Mistah MOJO in

"the final truth is that there is no final truth.

" this statement was contained in a recent email from a close friend who is an existentialist, and by extension a nihilist.

how many here would agree with this?

OK. Here it is. The answer to everything is “496”. That’s it. It’s a not empirically verifiable through experimentation, but is via Mathematics. When convincing physical proof arrives, it will be elegant, which means it will be powerful, enlightening and simple. That is the answer to the equation worked out by Michael Green and John Schwartz when they finally solved the anomalies in the String Theory equations:
Well, even though what I’m saying is true, I know it doesn’t relieve your dilemma. However, due to the fact that this is the way things go in Science, we may have to accept that the “real Truth” may be unattainable, although we get closer and closer every day. That doesn’t mean we can’t reach some level of satisfaction. If we had been content with all the answers Isaac Newton provided us, formidable as they were, everyone, including Einstein, would never had looked further to come up with a different picture of the Universe. Now, String Theorists are looking from the point where Einstein and Quantum Mechanics left off or failed to answer troubling questions: What is the Universe really made of and how does it work? How do we come up with a unified theory that explains everything (TOE or M-theory)?

I don’t doubt that when we get some physical verification, we (I’m speaking for mankind as a whole) will also have to deal with the idea of a source, the metaphysical questions of how it all came about – what or who caused everything. From there, we should be able to derive a personal answer or Truth. Its validity should be determined by how it fits with the rest of what surrounds us. Thinking in scientific terms, I’m perfectly happy to say: “I don’t know”, and accept that as an answer when the evidence does not allow me to conclude anything further. That does not mean that I will stop asking or searching. In addition, we must recognize, as Science is proving now, that we have a “spiritual” center in our brains and that it needs to be satisfied. In light of that, I ceased to differentiate between religion, life, the law of gravity or what have you. As far as I’m concerned everything I do or think is merely a part of the greater whole that is my existence. Why should it be separated and compartmentalized? A good “religion”, if we are to have one, should not pit itself against any other “Truth”, especially those in Science. The term “religion” has lost meaning to me. Belief is more appropriate, but more along the same terms as my belief in the force of Gravity or the power of X-rays.

There was a mathematician (I’m not sure of his discipline but he was a famous thinker) who proposed the following: If you come home late one night after spending a merry time at the local pub having consumed a few brews, after staggering a bit and searching for your keys at your front door, you realize that you’ve lost them. Where would you look for them? C’mon. Guess. The answer is: Under the any lamp post along the way to your house from the pub. The reason is that if you looked where there was no light, your chances of seeing your front-door key would reduce 0. Scientifically, that makes sense. So, it’s easy to see how Descartes could only come up with one major conclusion after his dissertation on the right way of thinking, the famous “Gogito ergo sum”: “I think, therefore I exist.” Meaning, he wasn’t sure about the existence of anything or anyone else. That didn’t stop him from accepting the very reality he experienced yet could not prove and enjoy what turned out to be a very brief life.

I’ve thought long and hard about this issue. However, that’s not significant because I would have to live a very long time to make my efforts in this matter yield an all-satisfying conclusion. Just remember a few simple rules:

Truth is universal. It doesn’t make sense to have the laws of physics (or belief or religion) that work for us in this neck of the Universe not work for the rest of the Universe. If that appears to be the case, then we need to modify our conclusions about what we had determined was true in the first place.
Truth should be spoken of in the present tense. Never say: “It was true…” No. It IS true that Napoleon Bonaparte WAS the Emperor of France.
If something that was considered true has been proven to no longer be true, then it was never true in the first place. Don’t argue with people who question a currently accepted truth on the basis that something which was accepted as true no longer is.
Logic (the discipline of Logic) is the best tool for making conclusions, or not, about what you encounter. Your conclusion will be correct if your premises are true. Ah, there’s the rub! That’s why we must question everything and not accept anything too readily. Skepticism works for me!

If all else fails, be glib and facile and assume that the answer to everything, the Truth, is: “forty-two”. That’s the answer that the intergalactic supermegacomputer named Deep Thought came up with after seven-and-a-half million years of computation.

"Forty-two!" yelled Loonquawl. "Is that all you've got to show for seven and a half million years' work?" "I checked it very thoroughly," said the computer, "and that quite definitely is the answer. I think the problem, to be quite honest with you, is that you've never actually known what the question is." From “Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.”

Might as well. Hell, the earth is going to blow up anyway. Etude.

23

IS JEHOVAH A PERVERT?

by jayhawk1 in

sometimes i wonder how something made it into the bible in the first place.... genesis 38, the story of judah and his daughter-in-law tamar.

background judah's firstborn son er was bad in jehovah's eyes, so jehovah put him to death.

genesis 38:6. so judah being the good father that he was gave tamar to his second son to have sex with and have children in the name of the fallen er... we pick up reading in genesis 38:9.

Etude

Well, I never looked at it that way -- I mean considering that men literally penned the Bible and that they might have shaded the message with their views. Whichever way one looks at it (Divine inspiration or just an account from humans), it might have been important for the readers at that time to know such things, keeping in mind how the lineage to the Messiah did or did not happen. On the other hand, I fail to see the full implication of relating what I suspect was the first homosexual act in history (if that Bible account is meant to signify something more than a juicy tale), when Noah was taken advantage of by Ham during a drunken stupor in his tent. I confronted some elders with this issue one time and pointed out the wording in Genesis 9:20-25: 20 And Noah began to be a husbandman [a man of the soil or farmer], and planted a vineyard:
21 and he drank of the wine, and was drunken. And he was uncovered within his tent.
22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without [outside the tent].
23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father. And their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.
24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his youngest son had done unto him.
25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. -- 21st Century King James Version Here’s what I couldn’t understand: It just seems that putting a curse on someone and all their descendants is a wee bit over-the-top for just "looking" at somebody naked and telling others. My guess is that, even then, people wore very little clothing, kids (up to a ripe age) ran around naked and modesty was probably not a big issue. My guess is that Ham saw more than just a naked body. He probably saw the diluvial giggle-stick and maybe did something with it. You'd think that Shem and Japheth would have tripped walking backwards while blocking their vision by a garment to put over Noah. How could they even find him if they couldn't see him to cover him? What makes this account strange for me is the wording: "…Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his youngest son had done unto him." What the heck did he do? Ham saw Noah naked and told his brothers, who covered him up? I don't know. Seeing him naked and telling the others would have been a favor. How did Noah find out what “his youngest son had done unto him”? I bet that sore ass was a dead give-away. On the other hand, Ham couldn't have helped it if Noah was naked and Ham happened to have walked into the tent. How could that be enough to elicit such condemnation? Or, did he just "happen" to walk into the tent? Or instead, after walking in (by accident or not), did he just take advantage of a drunk and horny man? After all, Noah was not that old considering how long he lived. If not, should he have gouged his eyes out because he saw his father naked? For crying out loud! If Witnesses think that was bad -- after all, it would probably be interpreted as a biblical example of what not to do just like birthdays -- they should ban showers and locker rooms at Bethel, where it happens to be my observation, some guys would get naked first after a shift and wait in line for a shower stall while parading their schlongs for everyone else. Believe me, it wasn’t casual. But I didn't see it as perverted either. It's just something guys do, like Latin men grabbing their package constantly or the way other guys spit all the time. Nevertheless, it was hard on the other guys that were not so well endowed or were experiencing "shrinkage" at the moment. Correct me if I'm wrong (maybe somebody can give the biblical reference), but I read somewhere in Isaiah, I think, were God describes the nation of Israel as his "wife" who has run off to spread her legs "under every luxurious [or expansive] tree" with the men of Syria "with members like those of horses". I was shocked then. Now, I must conclude that the men of Syria were well-hung and that women, particularly those used for the biblical analogy, liked guys with above-normal tally-whackers (I'm trying to keep it clean). I remember mentioning this passage to one of my JW sisters when she tried to paint Jehovah as a clean, loving and family-oriented personage. I asked her: "Then why is such language used in the Bible if it's not meant to show reality at its rawest, while God displays anger and derogation at his 'wife'?" I will not ascribe the label of "pervert" to the Supreme Being, just in case He really is there and I experience some Divine retribution manifested by my kielbasa turning into one of those tiny Vienna sausages. I'd have to borrow my wife's tweezers to take a pee. Perverted or not, I fail to grasp the complete intent for such biblical accounts, except that it is obvious, particularly in the Old Testament, that frankness abounds and people had a different way when it came to societal behavior. I can never forget the account of the Levi priest who cut up his wife, who had been repeatedly raped until she died, into twelve pieces and designated one piece to be paraded around each tribe’s homeland. Gee! I wonder who got...never mind. Pretty gruesome, but apparently it was tolerable in those days even if it contained a good measure of shock-value. I guess if one assumes that Ham did more than take a peek at the patriarchal one-eyed snake and that Onan, being Catholic, couldn’t use a condom and failed to give Tamar an orgasm, or that Lot had a “Noah” pulled on him by his daughters (yep, they got him drunk and took turns at him so it was incest too [Gen. 19-30-38]), we have to at least wonder about the purpose of such stories. Funny how the Bible fails to mention if Lot or the daughters went back for seconds. As to whether or not Jehovah is a pervert, I want to keep my Doctor Johnson intact, thank you very much. Etude.

8

Do you stimulate your "G" spot?

by Etude in

jw
friends

im sure that this has been talked about before on this forum, but i have no way of searching.

just in case, id like to bring up the issue from my perspective.

the discovery of the g spot (so called god spot) in the brain is indeed a curious thing.

Etude

Hi Sad emo and Terry:

I realize that I sort of abandoned the thread a bit. I've been busy with visitors here. However, I'd like to make some comments on your comments and hope that someone will still pick up the thread again and reply.

Sad emo: You said: "It's just another part that gets electrically more active by carrying out a particular action." While many people think "Parts is parts", the peculiarity of the brain is that its "parts" are highly specialized. At the same time, the brain is flexible enough to adapt and actually take over a part that is no longer used. For example, if one were to lose one's sight, near-by areas can take over the optic region which is no longer being stimulated by any input. But what makes the brain unique is that each area has a specific function and it's usually (99% of the time) common to all of us, unless there's some sort of decease of congenital anomaly.

The point of the study shows that the "G" spot is specialized for humans as a "spiritual" center and that it is located in the same place for everyone. It is not the "fear" center and may not be the same place where we conceive such things as the "Devil". While you may not think that its sole purpose is to "give us an illusion of something bigger out there", that is the strange thing that was discovered. That is the commonality that persists in our species. Of course, just like any other area of the brain, it stands to reason that this one may be more or less developed from one individual to another due to the influence of environment and/or genetic influence.

So, if "It's simply another part of the brain doing its own job", what is the significance of that job and why did nature need to "invent" such a thing when we already have "fear" and "flight" centers to protect us from danger? We may not be able to explain it, but we can certainly speculate on it. For scientists, it's a bit more than casual. What makes science progress is the insatiable quest to find answers, even if answers are not readily forthcoming. So, I think that takes us back to the original poser. What do you think?

Terry:

You said: "When this happens we lose our sense of self as a SEPARATE entity within the universe. The result is a sense (false sense) of ONENESS with all things." The "G" spot appears to have the opposite effect. There doesn't seem to be a loss of self. There is instead a togetherness and oneness with all things without loss of awareness of the rest of the "being". In fact, it is inclusive, taking in the sum of the being, as if all that one has been is before ones eyes. In a state such as the one that people have experienced, both under artificial stimulation of the "G" spot and via meditation or deep spiritual sessions, the person "feels" in a different state, a state that allows the person to see above everything. There's a feeling of "universality" with the world. However, I see that what you imply is that a "separateness" from our other "senses" or regions of the brain is what can cause the feeling of oneness with everything else. Hmmm. I don't know how that can be accurately ascertained. What your description seems to approximate is "de ja vous", not in that one thinks he's reliving the moment, but in the sense of time and space displacement. I'm not sure that this has been shown to occur in association with the "G" spot.

The problem with the senses is that they can fool us. At times, it is better to rely on logic in order to achieve some degree of certainty. A good deal of scientific knowledge is deduced rather than observed. Observation confirms the deduction but only subsequently. Unless the process is flawed, there's no reason to doubt ideas that simply originate in the brain. Of course, I'm referring to precise postulates. In the case of the "G" spot, it's contribution is not of a precise nature. It seems to create a "sense" which appears to evoke feelings from the corresponding emotional centers of the brain (the Limbic System).

"Presto! We create a place in our mind where we model GOD and SATAN." If I follow your process correctly, actually, it seems to work the other way around. Our "G" spot, by its independent presence, is causing a state in us that induces a sense, which in turn induces "feelings" and imagery in us regarding an entity, perhaps, or a place in the universe. The imagery does not always coincide with a "supreme being".

"People who exercise FAITH deliberately choose to ignore any data which clues them to the irrational/unreality of the model of God or Satan." I'm not sure I buy that, unless you define exactly what "faith" is, and I don't mean credulity. Scientists exhibit "faith". It is by "faith" that scientists assume that there was some sort of "primal atom" which gave birth to the Big Bang. However, there's data to make that a plausible assumption. That is what I call "faith". Again, the "G" spot is not necessarily the source of the concept of Satan. Tenuously, it simply gives feelings of awareness of self on a different plane, inner peace, oneness with the universe and a sense that there's "more". Satan and evil are not things that have been identified with the "G" spot.

I've tried to be as accurate as I can about what I understand regarding the research on this subject. So, what do you think? The specific "sense" that the "G" spot creates is common and should not be confused with other cognitive or sensory functions of the brain. Given what it does, what do you think is its purpose, whether one thinks there is a God or not?

Etude.

4

I need help with search

by Etude in

can anyone help me find a thread about kh experiences.

the particular one i need has a tale about an elder with a british accent who kept confusion balaam's ass with arse.

i've tried using google ("elder arse site:http://www.jehovahs-witness.com") and tried it from the jwd site "powered by google.

Etude

Thanks everyone! That was quick.

Etude.

4

I need help with search

by Etude in

can anyone help me find a thread about kh experiences.

the particular one i need has a tale about an elder with a british accent who kept confusion balaam's ass with arse.

i've tried using google ("elder arse site:http://www.jehovahs-witness.com") and tried it from the jwd site "powered by google.

Etude

PLEASE! Can anyone help me find a thread about KH experiences. The particular one I need has a tale about an elder with a British accent who kept confusion Balaam's ass with arse. I've tried using Google ("elder arse site:http://www.jehovahs-witness.com") and tried it from the JWD site "powered by Google. Can anyone help?

Etude

33

City person or Country person

by JH in

jw
friends

.

i travelled alot recently and i passed through many major cities, and i saw the contrast between nice small quiet towns and huge cities with so much traffic.. so, where would you rather live, in a quiet small town where there isn't much to do,but where it's quiet and there is not much stress, or in a big city with lots of traffic jams, where life is more expensive, but where there is more to see?.

i like the smaller town life.

Etude

I've lived in NY City, in the country upstate NY, in a town (Middletown, NY), in another small town (Steamboat Springs, CO), in Newport Beach and Huntington Beach, CA, in a mid-size town (Oxnard, CA) and I've visited dozens of small towns in CO, PA, MA, AZ, OH, ME, NJ as well as fairly big cities like Durham, NC, Nashville, TN, Tampa, FL, Huntsville, AL, Dallas, TX, Phoenix and Tucson, AZ, plus a few others. Now, I live in another small town (relatively) of about 15,000 people. It's on the 101 corridor between L.A. and Santa Barbara, CA. California is quite different from the East. In the East, you generally know when you leave one town and enter the next. Here, as you enter the San Fernando Valley, unless you pay attention you won't know one town from another almost all the way to San Diego. It's a bit different after you go North (actually West) past Ventura. It's a bit more open.

I feel I have the best of both worlds. Santa Barbara is about 15 minutes away. It's not a huge metropolis, but it's very cosmopolitan and very quaint with its unique Spanish style architecture. I like the fact that where I live we only have three stop lights in the whole town. It's quiet and it's on the beach. L.A. is not that far (about 80 miles). It would normally take you an hour and a half to get there. But realistically, with the magnitude of traffic in Southern California, it could take 2 and half hours. I don't like going there much for that reason. In fact, because I lived in the country once, I would be happy to live in an isolated place. I can't because my wife is an extremely social person and she would feel lost.

I do like city living and sometimes miss the activity and availability of things to do. In California, things are spread out and you can't exists without a car, unless you live in L.A. proper. NYC has just about anything that you can imagine, from museums to every kind of restaurants, Broadway, exhibits, you name it. It also has a lot of crazy stuff happening and its just a bit too crowded for me. I like to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there. That is, unless somebody paid me a lot of money.

Etude.

8

Do you stimulate your "G" spot?

by Etude in

jw
friends

im sure that this has been talked about before on this forum, but i have no way of searching.

just in case, id like to bring up the issue from my perspective.

the discovery of the g spot (so called god spot) in the brain is indeed a curious thing.

Etude

I’m sure that this has been talked about before on this forum, but I have no way of searching. Just in case, I’d like to bring up the issue from my perspective.

The discovery of the “G Spot” (so called God Spot) in the brain is indeed a curious thing. My exposure to how this was certified consists of an experiment I saw on a Catholic nun (80 plus years old) whose brain was scanned while she was deep in prayer. What they found was activity in a part of the brain located on the right-rear parietal area. Since, they have been able to confirm that, when you are in a “spiritual” mood, that part of the brain is activated. Conversely, they have been able to artificially (via electrodes) stimulate that area of the brain and produce in the person those feelings of “spirituality” such as: a sense of being part of something greater; feeling one with the universe; feeling peace and reverence. The discovery is attributed to a group of neuroscientists at the University of California at San Diego . The work stemmed from a study on individuals with Epilepsy. However, I’m familiar with the work of Vilayanur S. Ramachandran who studies general brain anomalies. The guy is a freeking genius and has achieved tremendous advances about how the brain works and he appears to head that team in UCSD. It’s becoming so popular that I found a web site once that was selling a helmet to “help” you achieve a spiritual state. I can only find this one now.

Recently, it has been suggested that the use and development of this center of the brain may be responsible for extended life and health. The fact that it is a spiritual center does not necessarily infer that “God” must be its focus. It is also responsible for the state of peace that is achieved under meditation and other trance-like states that are peculiar in Eastern disciplines. So, the question for those here who have come out of the “collective” is: “Do you vote for the existence of this brain area as confirmation that it is an “antenna” to God and that such is its purpose or do you believe that the existence of this brain area is simply some vestigial center that simply gives us the illusion that there’s something greater than ourselves?

Mind you, it would be nice if you try to explain logically why you believe as you do. For example: If you think that it is an antenna to God, its existence would justify its purpose and vice versa. But that is rather circular in logic. At least explain why it couldn't be anything else. If you believe that it’s merely an evolutionary trait, at least explain why and for what purpose would a blind, unintelligent process in Nature find the necessity to fabricate this center in us and for what purpose. Lastly, you may want to address how much influence did your sense of “spirituality” have on your decision to join the JWs or to go to another religion or not after you left. Have at it!

Etude.

3

THE END OF DEATH ?

by Erich in

does a british researcher hold the key to life eternal?.

by rafaela von bredow

the dream of eternal life is as old as mankind.

Etude

Man, that's a tall order. I don't doubt that we will achieve that aim, to live for a very long time, if not forever. However, I doubt that it will happen with nano-robots. It will probably involve some gene splicing. The first thing, though, is to address disease.

Recently, I heard about a newly discovered genetic peculiarity called RNAi (Ribo-Nucleic Acid interference). This one seems to offer some real hope. Basically, they found that the cell (RNA) has an ability to automatically eliminate duplicate copies of genes. When it sees as a duplicate piece of genetic material (I think a mirror image molecule), it simply eliminates both copies. What they propose is to systematically select specific genes, splice a mirror copy to it and let the cells eliminate both copies in order to identify what the gene does. With that process, you can then do the same to the DNA of any virus or bacteria and essentially eliminate the disease. Furthermore, you can affect in a human a mutation like Sickle-Cell Anemia or Down Syndrome to get the body to eliminate the offending genetic material. That is simple, elegant and not a pipe dream. It can even happen in our lifetime.

Etude.

69

NO LONGER SATISFIED AS I WAS, WITH JWD FORUM

by outoftheorg in

no this is not another { i am leaving this forum }.

it is just that i no longer am so hungry for the many posts as i once was.

i could not wait to get home and sign on to read all the posts from newbies and the heavy hitters.

Etude

outoftheorg:

It seems to me that you are overwhelmed right now in your personal life. At 70 (I'm 53), you were supposed to be enjoying the rest of your life in peace and comfort. That's the ideal. Reality is a different thing. Your post is so diametrically opposed to what I just finished reading on this other thread that it caught me by surprise.

Although JWD can be life-saving for some, comforting for many and informative for others, it's not a panacea. I know you value it, but I hope you realize that all things have their purpose for a time. I have so much in my life (mostly good, some mundane and a little bad) that I barely have time to log in to read and respond (I stopped posting for a year), although lately, I've broken my own record. This medium is limiting. Nothing can replace the human touch and personal interaction. That's why we need to find that elsewhere, especially when we need it, and we always need it. Considering your personal situation and the limitations of this medium, all I can think that most of us can do is listen to you and comfort you and offer support.

I experienced unbearable loneliness and absolutely no support from anyone when I was younger. I'm glad now because it would be much harder to bear at my age. But I realize that it always gets worse as we age because our contemporaries become isolated from us or die off. I'm looking out for my last surviving parent with Alzheimer's and I've noticed her isolation and depression. I tend to think that I wouldn't have any problems being isolated. But, I'm probably underestimating the how important having good people around me will be I'm older. When my family basically abandoned me, I started building friendships to take their place. That helped a lot. I hope you can find that here.

Etude.

70

Who all here was personally helped by JWD

by Ticker in

i was and i am ever thankful to this board and all the wonderful members on it that have contributed to my freedom.

thankyou all so much and i think i might be becoming a jwd addict.

i love this board it is so helpful.

Etude

CYP, you're on my pedestal (just below JWD) for expressing yourself with such eloquent clarity. I'm new here and I haven't encountered too many of you posts. But, your last one of thanks takes the cake. I join you in thanking Simon, et. al., and JWD as a whole for the purpose it has it fulfilled allowing us to be understood, counseled, instructed and comforted regarding all things related to JW.

Etude.