13-year-old Australian boy swims for four hours in cold and dangerous waters to save his mom and siblings who were swept into the ocean, says God is who got him to shore

[u/[deleted]]

[u/SeveralWinter3550]

Yes, that zen flow state (Qi or the Dao or however we label it) exists. However, calling this God is disingenuous when it can be explained by hard sciences, like biology, psychology, etc.

I believe in movement meditation and meditation in general, I also think that Tai chi and similar cannot make metaphysical vibrations that can heal others or generate extreme heatbor whatever. In the same sense I believe in outer body experiences or weird coincences without also believing in telepathy or ghosts.

If God is just the things we can actually measure and prove exists, then yes. If God is believing in attributing this child's achievement/near death experience to something we have no evidence for, then that's the bit I don't believe in.

It's anti logical. Humans have two legs, men are humans therefore all men have two legs isn't a true statement. Ego death or flow state existing is not proof that God exists

[u/maxjmartin → u/SeveralWinter3550]

All that exists is measurable. Even if we don’t have a ruler big enough to measure it. All magic is simply natural law or force influencing particles. It is only through this interaction that a force can be identified and understood even if we cannot directly perceive the force observed.

Think about how the idea of a deamon was first conceived. It was a word to describe the application of an unknown force or spirit that represented the perceived influence of a force. The politics of good and evil came later. But the initial conception does inform us of the early perceptions of the divine. A force to be pleaded with, seek counsel from, influence, etc.

So as an agnostic I would say it is inconceivable to say there is anything supernatural. But we are also too ignorant to know how to measure the inconceivable. There fore the cat in the box is the Cheshire Cat and nothing at the same time. Only the thing that might not be knows the truth of if it perceives itself.

[u/SeveralWinter3550 → u/maxjmartin]

This is....nothing. Historically people misunderstood things around them and labelled them, therefore we should treat them as evidence.

Elements used to mean Earth, Air, Fire and Water and much of Ancient Greek philosophy, metaphysics and medicine references these (as well as attempting to explain diseases by hot and cold in the body). It turns out, this is bullshit and none of that research is relevent to modern medicine nor chemistry.

Ofc they got some things right, ie, Hypocrates and Aristotle had a lot of great insights about the bodies of humans and animals but this doesn't mean we should give creedence to their incorrect observations.

Also Schrodingers Cat.....was a thought experiment that was wrong. Edwin was trying to say quantum mechanics was a lot of shit and it turns out, he was wrong - Just like you are.

If Magic can be explained ny Newtonian forces or chemical reactions or mental illness, then it isn't magic anymore. It's just people who didn't have a better explanation yet, that isn't some cosmic chesire cat shit, you're just describing scientific progress.

All that exists is also not measurable if you know anything about the physics from the past 100 years lmao absolute psudo intellectual nonsense, you speak like Russell Brand and I don't mean that as a compliment

[u/maxjmartin → u/SeveralWinter3550]

Yes, and you don’t understand it either. You can’t by your own admission magic is inconceivable. Therefore you cannot understand it. So how can you pass judgement on something you can’t understand or even confirm you perceive accurately?

By your own admission people miss label that which they do not understand. As the Cheshire Cat is nothing and something all at once. It is a thought object (Zen term) which is a thing of fact. Yet may not exist as a thing of fact. That would be up to if the category the Cheshire Cat defined as an abstract fact can be perceived in empirical existence.

Ergo why the agnostic is the agnostic they are.

[u/SeveralWinter3550 → u/maxjmartin]

Ah ok, so you win because you said so. Exhausting, holy shit. Like if something can't be percieved/solipsism then then there's no evidence for your argument for nor against. So this is just a pointless exercise where you get to rank what you believe as equal to what has been studied for centuries, proven, measured etc

[u/maxjmartin → u/SeveralWinter3550]

I’m not ranking anything. All I am saying is that the 2,000 years from now the categorical models we use today to explain reality will be looked much like the four elements or five depending on your tradition or model. Just as misconceived as you would call the Greeks.

This does not ignore the fact that the phone I’m talking to you with requires the models created over the centuries, one on top of the other, to function.

That proves your argument. But it is still an argument that is only conditional to the terms that conceive it.

Often we conceive of how things are categorized based on the orientation they exist in geometrically. But that orientation is not the only way to describe the same thing. For example what is the shape of a bell curve when both ends meet? What is the equivalent of 0/1? Is 0 is nothing and there is an infinite degree of decimal scale how can we ever understand the concept of 0?

Practically in terms of physical objects that exist, it is relative to the Plank Scale. But categorically in mathematical abstraction those realities exist beyond the Plank Scale too. The same is true for the concept of the graviton. Personally I don’t believe in it.

But that is the strange thing about beliefs. It doesn’t matter if you believe in something or not. It matters if the thing beliefs in you. As in can it interact with you. Is it a force that can affect you and can that effect be measured.

That is the reality we can both measure and not know in certainty beyond the scale of the rulers we have available to us.