For every question, there's an answer -- and you'll find it here!


Printer-friendly copy
Top The PC Q&A Forum Off-Topic Lounge topic #5940
View in linear mode

Subject: "WHO IS SETH?" Previous topic | Next topic
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 09:41 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"WHO IS SETH?"


          

WHO IS SETH?

"The Seth Material is a system of philosophy presented by Jane Roberts and her husband Robert Butts as a consequence of the trance communications of an entity named Seth. The origin of the material, however, is far less significant than its scope. It has logical consistency, and the validation it receives, as millions of people read and use its ideas in their lives, is growing daily. During our current period of worldwide stress and conflicting ideologies, it makes sense of our situation and gives hope. Between 1963 and 1984, Seth communicated through Jane discourses which have appeared in the twenty volumes that comprise the Seth Material.

Seth: "I have been sent to help you, and others have been sent through the centuries of your time, for as you develop you also form new dimensions, and you will help others. I am in this room although there is no object within which you can place me. You have a vehicle to use, a body that you call your own, and that is all. You are as disembodied as I. I come here as though I appeared through a hole in space and time. What you call emotion or feeling is the connective between us."

http://www.worldlightcenter.com/seth/cprwsjdm.htm

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
1
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
2
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
11
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
3
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
4
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
5
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
8
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
10
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
19
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
21
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
53
                     RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
56
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
39
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
44
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
46
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
47
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
50
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
51
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
57
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
9
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
12
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
14
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
18
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
20
                     RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
26
                          RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
28
                          RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
33
                               RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
36
                                    RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
37
                                         RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
42
                                              RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
45
                                                   RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
48
                                                        RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
49
                                                             RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
58
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
15
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
29
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
30
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
23
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
24
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
25
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
27
                     RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
34
                          RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
41
                               RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
52
                               RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 19th 2002
65
                               RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
54
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
31
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
32
                RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
38
                     RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
43
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
6
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
13
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
40
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
7
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
16
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
17
           RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
22
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
35
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 12th 2002
55
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
59
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
60
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
61
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
62
RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
63
      RE: WHO IS SETH?
Nov 13th 2002
64

MrManTue Nov-12-02 10:44 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#1. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 0)
Tue Nov-12-02 10:51 AM

  

          

?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
old dudeTue Nov-12-02 10:52 AM
Charter member
7641 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#2. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 1)


          

As Mulder says....

"I want to believe,..... but somehow I'm having trouble with this one....."

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:37 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#11. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 1)


          

"The intellect is a part of a highly spontanious process of which it itself knows nothing and the intiuitions that are considered so undeciplined and so unreasonable are based opon calculations far more spetacular than those of which the conscious mind can concieve...."

"Telepathy and clairvoyance have been made to appear as highly unnatural eccentricities of behavior rather than natural components of conciousness...."

--Seth

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

doctormidnightTue Nov-12-02 10:55 AM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#3. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 0)


  

          

Seth: "You were born with a built-in recognition of your own goodness. You were born with an inner recognition of your rightness in the universe....You are a cooperative species and a loving one. Your misunderstandings, your crimes, and your atrocities, real as they are, are seldom committed out of any intent to be evil, but because of severe misinterpretations about the nature of good, and the means that can be taken towards its actualization.


Cool, now I can shoot this dumbass in the head and claim it was a mininterpretation of goodness!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 10:56 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#4. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 3)


          

Oh ye of little faith...

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 11:00 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#5. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 4)


  

          

Faith? You're using that as a justification? Wow, I guess that solidifies my stance against faith.

PS http://www.objectivethought.com/atheism/faithdisproof.html

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:09 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#8. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 5)


          

Albert Einstein, in a letter written on March 21, 1955 to the children of his friend, Michele Besso, who had just died. (Einstein was ill at the time and knew the illness would most likely be his last.)

"And now he has preceded me briefly in bidding farewell to this strange world. This signifies nothing. For us believing physicists, the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion, even if a stubborn one."

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
MrManTue Nov-12-02 11:37 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#10. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 8)


  

          

First off, quoting someone's assertion regarding a specific belief, especially one as vague as that one, is not proof of said belief.
Secondly, the line "For us believing physicists, the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion" can be interpreted to mean any number of things, few of which implies any amount of faith on his part.
Thirdly, Einstein clearly stated himself to a be nonreligious, rational man.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:52 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#19. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 10)


          

"For us believing physicists, the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion" can be interpreted to mean any number of things, few of which implies any amount of faith on his part."

How do you intrepert his statement here?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 11:58 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#21. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 19)


  

          

I like the explanation provided in this Discover article.

""For us believing physicists," Einstein once wrote, "the distinction between the past, the present, and the future is only an illusion." It was a melancholy remark, made as Einstein faced death, but it flowed directly from Einstein's special theory of relativity. Imagine a group of observers scattered carelessly throughout the cosmos. Each is able to organize the events of his life into a linear order—a world line of the kind just described. Each is convinced that his life consists of a series of nows, moving moments passing from the past to the present to the future. Special relativity urges a contrary claim. The observers scattered throughout space and time are all convinced their sense of now is universal. Now is, after all, now, is it not? Apparently not. Time passes at a different rate depending on how fast a person is moving: While one hour passes on Earth, only a few seconds might pass on a rocket ship hurtling away from Earth at nearly the speed of light. It is entirely possible that one man's now might be another man's past or future. "

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
freespiritTue Nov-12-02 10:09 PM
Member since Mar 02nd 2002
1479 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#53. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 21)


          

"It was a melancholy remark, made as Einstein faced death, but it flowed directly from Einstein's special theory of relativity."

Oh, that's a relief that we have someone to enlighten us about Einstein's thoughts. Of course, we could never take Einstein at his own word. We must have "Interpretation"!

When my father attended Amherst, he had a class in poetry. The professor asked the students to interpret the meaning of a poem by Robert Frost. Grades were given according to what the prof believed Frost meant. The following year, Robert Frost, himself, taught a class there. It was in that class that my father learned that Frost's meaning, in the poem that had been studied, had no relationship to the interpretation of the professor.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
MrManWed Nov-13-02 01:42 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#56. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to freespirit (Reply # 53)


  

          

If you disagree with the interpretation presented by that passage, then refute it and present your own. As of yet you have failed to do either.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 01:20 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#39. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 10)


          

If the distinction of past, present and future is an illusion. That would imply that time is not linear and that all time exists at once. Seems to me that--in and of itself--suggests there's more going on that what your senses tell you.

Additionally, all of our physical senses have thresholds. Could there be activity beyond these thresholds? Sure! A dog's auditory threshold is higher than a human's auditory threshold. Based on so-called logic and deductive reasoning, the sounds a dog hears that we as humans cannot...would not exist.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 01:52 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#44. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 39)
Tue Nov-12-02 01:53 PM

  

          

No, I don't think it necessarily implies that. As relativity theory explains, time is subjective based on several factors, such as the speed the thing or person is moving, how deep they are in a gravitational field, etc. A microsecond would literally be an eternity for a person inside the event horizon of a black hole (assuming they're able to remain sentient after being crushed into a single atom), but it would be almost nothing for us. I think that's what Einstein meant by that comment.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 02:09 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#46. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 44)


          

When you say subjective, you mean relative to an individuals degree of motion in space don't you? If so, that would imply that the measurement of distance varies with one's speed--meaning distance is bent. If that's true, time cannot be linear.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 02:19 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#47. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 44)


          

Excerpt from
Only a Matter of Time

ABC News.com
By Amanda Onion

... " And others, like Halpern, say that past, present and future, might all exist and influence each other simultaneously in our universe.

"Perhaps all of space and time exist at once and our travels through time are simply something that our conscious minds undertake," said Halpern. "If we could break this force that is propelling us forward, maybe we could travel back in time."

Confused yet? Physicists explain part of the reason why time travel may be difficult to grasp is our perception is limited to a fairly moderate world where the laws of physics are not pushed to their limit... "

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/timemachine020306.html

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
freespiritTue Nov-12-02 09:49 PM
Member since Mar 02nd 2002
1479 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#50. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 10)


          

>First off, quoting someone's assertion regarding a specific
>belief, especially one as vague as that one, is not proof of
>said belief.

Well, I guess we can discount anything you assert, then. Afterall, of what proof would it be as to your beliefs?

>Secondly, the line "For us believing physicists, the
>distinction between past, present, and future is only an
>illusion" can be interpreted to mean any number of things,
>few of which implies any amount of faith on his part.

The context in which Einstein wrote his thoughts, says enough. Those were his subjective observations about reality. Your "interpretations", about his beliefs, are just that - your personal spin.

>Thirdly,
>Einstein
>clearly stated himself to a be nonreligious, rational man>.

What possible "interpretation" did you come up with to arrive at the conclusion that Einsein was refering to anything of a religious nature?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
freespiritTue Nov-12-02 09:51 PM
Member since Mar 02nd 2002
1479 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#51. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to freespirit (Reply # 50)


          

Yikes! How'd that highlighted stuff happen, up there!?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MrManWed Nov-13-02 01:43 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#57. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to freespirit (Reply # 50)


  

          

>Well, I guess we can discount anything you assert, then.
>Afterall, of what proof would it be as to your beliefs?

Simply quoting an assertion, unless it provides some sort of argument, is not proof. The quote in question contains no argument, simply an assertion on the part of Einstein.

>The context in which Einstein wrote his thoughts, says
>enough. Those were his subjective observations about
>reality. Your "interpretations", about his beliefs, are just
>that - your personal spin.

The question under debate is whether that quote implies anything of a faith-based nature. Considering that the quote can easily fit into Einstein's theory of relativity, I do not see how it could be interpeted to be anything other then then a perfectly rational statement.

>What possible "interpretation" did you come up with to
>arrive at the conclusion that Einsein was refering to
>anything of a religious nature?

I was simply trying to illustrate that Einstein's pesonal epistemology is entirely rational, and not at all faith-based.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:25 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#9. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 5)
Tue Nov-12-02 11:26 AM

          

1. person X believes in god G.
2. person X's faith is therefore certainty for god G. P(G)=1.
3. person Y believes in god N.
4. person Y's faith is therefore certainty for god N. P(N)=1, which by definition implies P(G)=0.
5. from 2 and 4, we get : P(G)=1 and P(G)=0. This is a contradiction.

LOL! ok, I'm convinced.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
MrManTue Nov-12-02 11:39 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#12. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 9)


  

          

What a great counter-argument Hal! I guess I'll have to step down and concede your intellectual superiority.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:43 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#14. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 12)


          

I'm not interested in presenting an argument. I'm only exposing a concept. I find your initial reaction interesting.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 11:52 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#18. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 14)


  

          

So you don't plan on defending your position? The article I linked makes a very good, logical argument against faith, which you've failed to address.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:53 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#20. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 18)


          

Faith cannot be addressed with Logic.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
MrManTue Nov-12-02 12:12 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#26. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 20)


  

          

Faith is an invalid methodology, no matter how you look at it. No methodology which clearly supports contradictions can be factual.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 12:15 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#28. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 26)


          

http://www.pcqanda.com/dcforum/DCForumID3/538.html#14

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 12:38 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#33. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 26)


          

Faith is not based on methodology, nor is it based on logic. It is outside the box.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 12:51 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#36. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 33)


  

          

Faith is a method of acquiring knowledge and evidence. Thus, it is a methodology.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 01:00 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#37. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 36)


          

>Faith is a method of acquiring knowledge and evidence. Thus,
>it is a methodology.

The root of the word "methodology" is method. The word "method" is defined as a way of doing something, esp. a systematic one; which implies an orderly logical arrangement (usually in steps).

What method am I employing in choosing to believe?




  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                
MrManTue Nov-12-02 01:30 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#42. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 37)


  

          

Faith is a method based on subjective evidence, such as emotions. You are using subjective evidence when choosing to believe something not based on reason.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 01:57 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#45. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 42)


          

Faith is a method based on subjective evidence, such as
emotions. You are using subjective evidence when choosing to
believe something not based on reason.


In post #26, you said:
Faith is an invalid methodology..."

How can an invalid methodology be a valid methodology? How can evidence possibly be considered subjective based on the scientific definition of evidence? In fact, it's the exact opposite.

An emotion is a feeling, neither is it evidence or subjective. It just is. If subjective is defined as taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias, then one has to pause for the act of subjectivity to actually take place, an emotion--unless suppressed--is experienced spontaneously.

Faith is contrary to any scientific evidence. Unless by evidence you mean information one has chosen to accept that is contrary to empirical evidence.


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 02:23 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#48. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 45)


  

          

What one feels is valid subjective evidence, since it is dependant on the observer and can be used to formulate conclusions. Faith allows the usage of such evidence, thus proving it is invalid.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 02:35 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#49. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 48)


          

>What one feels is valid subjective evidence, since it is
>dependant on the observer and can be used to formulate
>conclusions. Faith allows the usage of such evidence, thus
>proving it is invalid.

On the contrary, proving it is valid! BTW Mr. Man, that was an excellent stream of thought!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                
MrManWed Nov-13-02 01:46 AM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#58. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 49)
Wed Nov-13-02 01:47 AM

  

          

Subjective evidence proves that faith is valid? What?
As the objectivethought.com article I linked previously explained, being based subjective evidence opens the way for contradictions, which proves that faith is invalid, seeing as no valid methodology can allow two conflicting statements to be proved.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
doctormidnightTue Nov-12-02 11:44 AM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#15. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 9)


  

          

I would take those premises and their conclusion over the ramblings of Seth, High Commander of the Vinderlooian Empire.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
doctormidnightTue Nov-12-02 12:16 PM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#29. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 9)


  

          

Interesting equation. Unfortunately, it can only imply that neither belief is correct. There could be a belief structure that is stated as G if and only if F, but never -G. Any other belief structure that says P implies G1 would have nothing to do with G, since they are technically seperate entities and have nothing to do with each other (as long as -G is not present in the argument, that is).

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
MrManTue Nov-12-02 12:20 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#30. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 29)


  

          

That equation is a quote from the article I posted:
http://www.objectivethought.com/atheism/faithdisproof.html

Here's the full quote:
"With this in mind, let us posit a person X which believes in a god G. Let us also posit another person Y.

Person Y believes in a god N. N is defined as : "a god different then G, whose existance entails that any other god does not exist."

1. person X believes in god G.
2. person X's faith is therefore certainty for god G. P(G)=1.
3. person Y believes in god N.
4. person Y's faith is therefore certainty for god N. P(N)=1, which by definition implies P(G)=0.
5. from 2 and 4, we get : P(G)=1 and P(G)=0. This is a contradiction."

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 12:03 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#23. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 5)


          

Do you believe all that exists is only what your sensory apparatus tells you?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
MrManTue Nov-12-02 12:06 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#24. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 23)


  

          

I rely on both empirical and deductive evidence when making conclusions.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 12:09 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#25. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 24)


          

You haven't answered the question.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 12:14 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#27. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 25)


  

          

Yes. Of course, one must also be careful that empirical evidence is not based on illusions of the senses, which is where deductive reasoning comes in.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 12:43 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#34. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 27)


          

"Yes. Of course, one must also be careful that empirical evidence is not based on illusions of the senses, which is where deductive reasoning comes in."

You still have not answered the question.

Are you suggesting that the information your senses relay to your brain are an illusion?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
MrManTue Nov-12-02 01:28 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#41. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 34)


  

          

To answer the question, I believe in an objective reality, one which is independent from the senses. While empirical evidence can tell us a lot about the universe, there's always the possibility of the existence of illusions (eg the motion of the Earth. We don't feel the Earth moving, however we know it is through photos from space and other evidence. Thus, the "stillness" we feel is an illusion). Through deductive reasoning we can come to reasonable conclusions regarding reality, however there's no certainties, just probabilities.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 09:55 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#52. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 41)


          

As you've pointed out, one cannot perceive the earth's motion and yet we know it has motion. So based on that logic, there is a reality independent from the physical senses--an objective reality. Since one's perception of reality is based on one's physical perception of it--limited in terms of what one's physical senses perceive because of sensory thresholds--objective reality exists beyond the scope of physical senses which many claim can be perceived by a Sixth Sense. Our senses relay information to us through nerve impulses at the synapse--this electronic firing of information occurs in pulses. What exists between the pulses? If earth's stillness is an illusion, then why couldn't our perception of time as linear also be an illusion, based on the same understanding of our relationship to matter and space?

Our perception and understanding of matter itself is in the process of being re-evaluated and re-defined.

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/10042002-054139-9483r.htm

http://www-ed.fnal.gov/qtoq/qtoq_story.html

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                        
hal9000Tue Nov-19-02 04:36 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#65. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 52)
Tue Nov-19-02 04:47 PM

          

Physicists Puzzle Over Unexpected Findings In "Little" Big Bang

"Scientists have recreated a temperature not seen since the first microsecond of the birth of the universe and found that the event did not unfold quite the way they expected, according to a recent paper in Physical Review Letters. The interaction of energy, matter, and the strong nuclear force in the ultra-hot experiments conducted at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) was thought to be well understood, but a lengthy investigation has revealed that physicists are missing something in their model of how the universe work...."

""The basic nature of the interactions within the hot, dense medium, or at least the manifestation of it, changes depending on the angle at which it's viewed. We don't know why...." Full Article:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/11/021113071031.htm

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
freespiritTue Nov-12-02 10:30 PM
Member since Mar 02nd 2002
1479 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#54. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 41)


          

"I believe in an objective reality, one which is independent from the senses."

I'm not educated in physics but, isn't there something about the observed being affected by the observer, taught in that discipline?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 12:27 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#31. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 5)
Tue Nov-12-02 12:29 PM

          

Mr. Man,

Do you believe in intuition?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
MrManTue Nov-12-02 12:37 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#32. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 31)


  

          

What it is we call intuition is most likely merely a function of the subconcious. Not being a psychologist, I can't answer this for sure, however I see little evidence which suggests intuition is anything more then said neurological function.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 01:06 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#38. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to MrMan (Reply # 32)


          

>What it is we call intuition is most likely merely a
>function of the subconcious. Not being a psychologist, I
>can't answer this for sure, however I see little evidence
>which suggests intuition is anything more then said
>neurological function.

Intuition is the antithesis of evidence.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MrManTue Nov-12-02 01:38 PM
Charter member
4706 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#43. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 38)


  

          

I assume you refer intuition in the "gut instinct" sense. In that case, I stand by my previous statement. I've seen very little evidence to support claims that intuition is based off some magical sixth sense.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:00 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#6. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 3)


          

Do you fantasize about violence frequently?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
doctormidnightTue Nov-12-02 11:41 AM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#13. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 6)


  

          

Yes. Against asshats, mostly, but occassionaly a non-asshat will garner my attention.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 01:23 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#40. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 13)


          

"asshats"

LOL!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

LackosleepTue Nov-12-02 11:03 AM
Charter member
579 posts
Click to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#7. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 0)
Tue Nov-12-02 11:06 AM

          

Seth is Bob Dobbs wayward brother.
oops, had to edit link to the church of the subgenius, had bad links on the page, sorry Mods.

Eternal Salvation or TRIPLE Your Money Back!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
golouisTue Nov-12-02 11:45 AM
Charter member
1326 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#16. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to Lackosleep (Reply # 7)


          

Who or whatever SETH is, it all started in Jane's head (imagination)during a trace-like state.

By auto-suggestion she can (and has) passed the idea on to others and they to can imagine (in semi-trance state or otherwise) SETH ideas. Each individual who imagines SETH adds some personal ingredient and thus a body of SETH grows and develops.

There is of course no hard-fact evidence for any of this being more than a figment of imagination(s).

Louis

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
golouisTue Nov-12-02 11:50 AM
Charter member
1326 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#17. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to golouis (Reply # 16)


          

On closer examination of the text it seems clear that SETH is an extra-terrestrial being who invaded Jane's mind:

Seth: "Your civilization is in sad straits -- not because you have allowed spontaneity or fulfillment to individuals, but because you have denied it, and because your institutions are based upon that premise. "

and

Seth: "According to what you have been taught, you are composed of physical matter and cannot escape it, and this is not so. The physical matter will disintegrate but you will not. I can assure you that death is another beginning. You have lived before and you will live again, and when you are done with physical existence, you will still live. I want you to feel your own vitality. Feel it travel through the universe and know that it is not dependent upon your physical image."

Seth is obviously used to universe travel.


Louis

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 11:59 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#22. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to golouis (Reply # 17)


          

Correct.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

hal9000Tue Nov-12-02 12:47 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#35. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 0)
Tue Nov-12-02 12:48 PM

          

woops

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

freespiritTue Nov-12-02 10:53 PM
Member since Mar 02nd 2002
1479 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#55. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 0)
Tue Nov-12-02 10:54 PM

          

BTW - The Seth books have nothing, whatsoever, to do with reigion - other than to dispell such notions. In a nutshell, the message is that form follows consciousness. In other words, we are responsible for the reality we create - individually or collectively.

These books are worth reading and are quite profound. If you are interested in the nature of reality and your role in creating it, you'll find plenty to think about. If you are the religious type, you'll probably think the inforamtion came from Satan.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

hal9000Wed Nov-13-02 06:45 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#59. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 0)


          

"The fruits of science so far, put into the hands of governments, have turned out to be cruelties and stupidities exceeding by far those of the Spanish Inquisition and Genghis Khan and Ivan the Terrible and most of the demented Roman emperors, not excepting Heliogabalus."

--Kurt Vonnegut

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

hal9000Wed Nov-13-02 06:48 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#60. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 0)


          

"My compliments to the devil, for it is he who rules the world."

--Voltaire

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
labyrinthWed Nov-13-02 07:17 AM
Member since Oct 13th 2002
1252 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#61. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 60)


          

Voltaire's world anyway.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
hal9000Wed Nov-13-02 07:22 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#62. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to labyrinth (Reply # 61)


          

...or just the world around him.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
No_OneWed Nov-13-02 07:22 AM
Charter member
805 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#63. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 60)


          

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."

Socrates
(w/ my quotes)



"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Mark Twain, and/or
Proverbs 17:28

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
hal9000Wed Nov-13-02 07:32 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#64. "RE: WHO IS SETH?"
In response to No_One (Reply # 63)


          

I would rather be ashes than dust! I would rather that my spark burn out in a brilliant blaze than it be stifled by dry-rot. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.
- - - Jack London, 1916

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Top The PC Q&A Forum Off-Topic Lounge topic #5940 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.27
Copyright 1997-2003 DCScripts.com
Home
Links
About PCQandA
Link To Us
Support PCQandA
Privacy Policy
In Memoriam
Acceptable Use Policy

Have a question or problem regarding this forum? Check here for the answer.