There being an isn’t is worthy of the same amount of burden of evidence/explanation. And to say there isn’t an is would be supposition based off your standards. Supposition is defined as an uncertain belief, this would make both there being an is and an isn’t a supposition; this wouldn’t/shouldn’t make anything being a supposition not worthy of ones consideration just because both there being an is and an isn’t suppositions based off metaphysical assumptions.

So you’re saying scientific theory is not worth the time and energy to even consider? Scientific theory being based off metaphysical assumptions. If so, you’re saying The Big Bang wasn’t worth not only the time and effort to think up in the first place, but not worthy of anyone’s consideration?

From you point of view, the claim that there is no “why” would also be an assumption; a supposition.

From you point of view, the claim that there is no “why” would also be an assumption; a supposition.

Why bother with philosophy at all then, if not to ask why?

I remember when I held the same perspective. I like how Gandhi put it: I’ve made it through the “Sahara of atheism.”

It’s not about me.

How does one deliver their opinions in a detailed way without falling into the label of pontificating? Why would it matter if it is pontificating? Does that make whatever is being pontificated hold any more or less value? And if so, why?

I wish you’d at least consider it.

A lot of science and philosophy are a supposition.

“Science is the knowledge of today, discredited tomorrow.” - I forget

What do you feel as though I’m assuming?

I think what we call time is a consequence of conciousness—the extent we’re concious of our surroundings via our sense organs reacting to our environment; our ability to conjure images of the past and the future—our imagination.

Of course the content is important, that should go without saying.

Yes that’s something that can happen, so what are you saying? We shouldn’t do good at all and the “value of virtue” is nonsense just because there’s a potential of that happening?

Of course there’s more to it. It’s far from simple, I’m not arguing that at all. Especially when it comes to the way we organize ourselves. But we can never imagine a future where ourselves are no longer the emphasis if the way we organize ourselves contradicts with it so much, and even forces one in the opposite direction of the true life lived most in the present that a life of selflessness has to offer anyone of any belief. Selflessness is far from being beneficial from only the beneficiaries side of things.

I’m saying in contrast, our capacity to not only imagine selflessness in our heads, but to even toil and suffer for it, not to mention the extent we can then act to apply it to our environment—this especially, is clearly significantly more profound. Stopping other species—not to mention our own, from ceasing to exist for example, or to even pet a cat, etc.

Humans are how any amount of love exists in the world; if everyone’s so busy being so content and comforted with their peace, or to busy willingly blinding themselves via ignorance to remain in a blissful state, who will be there to worry, even suffer for others to find theirs? “The hardest to love, are the ones that need it the most.” - Socrates

Good thing I clearly wasn’t calling what Socrates had to say as unquestionably true considering there being no man made things holding what he had to say as unquestionably true, because what he had to say was to never hold any man made thing as exactly that, especially via the influences of a heaven.

What I have to say regarding all hate and evil being an ignorance is what Socrates (debateably the founding father of philosophy) had to say, as well as the Christian and Hebrew Bibles. I can’t speak for any other man made thing being held as unquestionably true via the influences of the idea of a heaven however.

I equate what we call wisdom as logic, and logic doesn’t become any more or less logical or significant when considering its source. 2+2 is still 4 regardless if it came from Hitler or Jesus; meeting hate with love is significantly more logical than meeting it with the age old hate, even if its Hitler suggesting it.

Star Wars is based off multiple differnet real world theologies: https://writerbuddha.tumblr.com/post/655761886122475520/george-lucas-buddhist-methodist

I’m obviously referring to those that cause anyone any amount of suffering, starving children in this case, apparently. Humans are where any amount of morality in the world originate.

While you do that, I’m going to be toiling, even suffering over teaching the youth of today the knowledge that’s required to gain the incentive that’s needed, to even consider the will that’s necessary to be selfless to the extremes of it. And the irrelevance and the hell that comes with living a life revolved around yourself, ultimately.

From the knowledge that comes from experiencing or learning of great hate, evil, and selfishness comes the knowledge and a newfound appreciation for the potential of great love, goodness, and selflessness; even to the point of giving your life for it. I’m sick and tired of hearing about stories like these:

https://apnews.com/article/missouri-execution-christopher-collings-f5a027c86c53725556a5a66751abd36d

Only when we no longer see the fulfillment of our greatest desires as being our highest happiness—individually, are we able to move beyond the inherently self-obssessed barbarian that’s still within all of us, to a future where at least violence is considered obsolete—collectively.

Tell me of all the people Don pardoned.

Man I knew assuming so much was the wrong way to go but I went and did it anyway lol sorry about that. That’s so amazing you were a pastor by the way, I call them all the time and I praise they’re (not all obviously) warm, massive hearts of gold.

Id add: to see selflessness, including the extremes, as a path not only to begin to stop considering it as suffering at all, but almost as a pleasure; I think the idea of a God or creator of some kind, takes the knowledge that leads to the incentive to do good—set yourself aside and resist yourself, and gives a concious mind the will that’s necessary to live up to it the most. Especially regarding the extremes of it like anger, retaliation, self-sacrifice; in times when it’s the most difficult.

I think it’s love that renders a concious mind most open-minded, and I think it’s the idea of an infinitely forgiving—due to all hate, evil, iniquity being an absence of knowledge—creator or shared origin of everything and the appreciation that comes with seeing a God as having a parents kind of love for you, always cheering you on, opposed to something to fear you into being selfless; an appreciation and a respect for the God sized amount of peace and love it has waiting for you, regardless of anything—I think it’s things like these that lead to the knowledge of the value of virtue and selflessness being taught the most effectively; it being transfered with a concious mind most ready and wiling to consider any newfound influence. I believe this is what determines the extent of one’s ability to imagine, and I believe it’s this that determines one’s capacity for empathy and compassion. This is why I think, amoungst plenty of other reasons, never taking oaths—so to speak, as Jesus put it in my opinion, is so important. Oath taking (considering things as unquestionably true) only hinders the potential of new knowledge, thus a concious minds imagination, and subsequently the extent of its ability to empathize. Just a theory I like sharing due to its potential importance.

What do you think of interpreting what Jesus said regarding “the sign of Jonah,” as him saying that the knowledge to be selfless (the incentive) is an ignorance (a lack of knowledge) and needs to be taught; as well as ignorance (all hate and evil in this case) being infinitely forgiven as a result?

I completely agree regarding existence, even to the point that the nature of existence doesn’t even need explaining, and the need to do so only comes from our inherent sense of self; a worry, fear or need for ourselves; a selfishness; an “evil.” I think this is the level of selflessness Jesus was suggesting. Why even bother, when “we can’t even turn a speck of hair on our head from black to white?” (I think it makes more sense as: from black to white opposed to the opposite) With ultimately, selflessness being what’s most important. And only potentially—due to our uncredibility via our blindness, being men—drawing people away from the idea of a God or creator of some kind, thus a shared origin and a shared purpose: to strive to be as selfless as possible; to be able to acknowledge any of your potentially most barbaric desires, and abstain from them for a purpose other then yourself—God or not. Because it would make sense from any point of view; dare I say: it’s the truth. We absolutely are the most capable of either ourselves or everything else on this planet, so of course the lesser barbaric or more righteous way to live, would be to consider it as exactly what it is: a desire stemming from one amoungst an entire collection of concious beings on a planet—and even toil to resist it.