Creative Destruction

January 21, 2007

Another Thing to Worry About

Filed under: Content-lite,Health Care — Daran @ 5:19 am

We’re all doomed.

Advertisements

14 Comments »

  1. I would not say that we are doomed, but our present way of life is. What many do not know is that we are spiritual beings who are indestructible so we are not doomed. The soul is a point of light consciousness and we sit in the center of the forehead.

    We forget we are this and replace it by thinking we are the body. This simple forgetfulness has put us out of balance with ourselves and nature.

    If we change and see ourselves as the beautiful and peaceful souls that we are under the layers of misunderstanding, we can change the world. Then we automatically begin to experience inner peace and other natural qualities such as true altruistic love, happiness and wisdom.

    When we do not have this experience we seek to find these through others or material gratification. We lose our self-respect which is replaced with ego, anger, greed and so on. This is at the bottom of how we are destroying the planet. When we change the world will change in response.

    To understand more there areFree Courses Worldwide.

    Comment by Helen — January 21, 2007 @ 4:41 pm | Reply

  2. now I know we’re doomed

    Comment by Chuck Butcher — January 22, 2007 @ 1:24 am | Reply

  3. Now, Chuck. You’ll generate bad ego energy.

    Although she’s right about the indestructible spiritual being part. (Well, almost indestructible.)

    Comment by Robert — January 22, 2007 @ 3:06 am | Reply

  4. Bah. So mobile phones have skin flora on them. So what? What do you think you have an immune system for anyway?

    Comment by Dianne — January 22, 2007 @ 11:38 am | Reply

  5. Well, almost indestructible

    Heh? I thought that in Christian doctrine the soul was absolutely indestructible (except, I suppose, that God could destroy one if He really wanted to). Am I missing something or are you talking about something else altogether?

    Comment by Dianne — January 22, 2007 @ 11:39 am | Reply

  6. Ah, at last, a practical justification for implanting cell phones in people’s bodies!

    Comment by ohwilleke — January 22, 2007 @ 12:44 pm | Reply

  7. Ah, at last, a practical justification for implanting cell phones in people’s bodies!

    What? Like this?

    Comment by Daran — January 22, 2007 @ 1:13 pm | Reply

  8. Heh? I thought that in Christian doctrine the soul was absolutely indestructible (except, I suppose, that God could destroy one if He really wanted to). Am I missing something or are you talking about something else altogether?

    God could destroy a soul if he wanted to, I presume, but he doesn’t.

    It seems as a matter of logic that a soul in Hell (i.e., completely disconnected from God) would eventually sputter out. 2nd law of thermodynamics. Nothing can be truly eternal without being part of God; Hell is the part of the universe that has chosen to be not part of God; q.e.d.

    Comment by Robert — January 22, 2007 @ 1:58 pm | Reply

  9. Helen writes:

    What many do not know is that we are spiritual beings who are indestructible so we are not doomed. The soul is a point of light consciousness and we sit in the center of the forehead. We forget we are this and replace it by thinking we are the body. This simple forgetfulness has put us out of balance with ourselves and nature.

    That’s an opinion, certainly. And it’s shared by more than a few people. But I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s an established fact. Although it’s not too satisfying to contemplate, consciousness studies (a merging of neuroscience, psychology, philosophy, and a few other fields) are quickly converging on a materialist view of consciousness, that it all in fact does boil down to the body. That doesn’t mean we can’t also be out of balance with ourselves and with nature, as Helen opines. But it means we don’t have to subscribe to a supernatural view to get there, and of course, not all of us do.

    Comment by Brutus — January 22, 2007 @ 2:43 pm | Reply

  10. Amazingly, materialists studying consciousness have concluded that it’s completely materialistic. 😉

    Comment by Robert — January 22, 2007 @ 2:57 pm | Reply

  11. Robert wrote:

    materialists studying consciousness have concluded that it’s completely materialistic.

    That’s probably a good criticism. But then, the same can be said of believers who find what they seek underlying consciousness. Of the two groups, one has a higher level of objectivity and evidence. Neither is pure.

    Comment by Brutus — January 22, 2007 @ 5:12 pm | Reply

  12. Of the two groups, one has a higher level of objectivity and evidence.

    Show me the physical object you are labeling as “objectivity”, O materialist. 😉

    Comment by Robert — January 22, 2007 @ 5:44 pm | Reply

  13. You should really put that comma inside the quote.

    Comment by Brutus — January 22, 2007 @ 5:55 pm | Reply

  14. Can’t. Syntactic rules derive from nonmaterial causes. To obey them would be to endorse spiritual values. And I won’t play their game!

    This is fun. It was fun in college, too. Abuse The Philosophy – a game the whole family can play!

    Comment by Robert — January 22, 2007 @ 5:58 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: