Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Your mind renders that?
You could "believe" that is what is there, but the problem is not in the thing, it is in the eye that sees it.
Such eyes are only a detriment to themselves.
One's MIND renders WHAT is *KNOWN*
By belief in what is FILTERED** by illusion of pandas.
The human ***EYES*** filters sensory pornographic information to the ***BRAIN*** like a clockwork orange.
Thus, pandas make the average human *HORNY*.
Care for salad?
One large cobb salad please, and can you not put those fake bacon bits on it? They are gross, so I'd rather just do without.
The bacon *EMANATES* from the ***PIG***
To deny this gift is to deny **KNOWLEDGE**.
**KNOWLEDGE** is to *KNOW* and to *KNOW* is to be at one with an agricultural existence.
Thus, you *****TRANSEND***** to being Old McDonald.. E-I-E-I-O
***One's MIND renders WHAT is *KNOWN*
Wrong: it renders as it is perceived according to (the ignorance of) the being behind the mind.
LORI: can not infer an unknown from an unknown.
If you are ignorant of yourself... no chance.
***By belief in what is FILTERED** by illusion of pandas.
***The human ***EYES*** filters sensory pornographic information to the ***BRAIN*** like a clockwork orange.
***Thus, pandas make the average human *HORNY*.
Rest is ignorant rhetoric.
WRONG!
The *BRAIN* is incapable of **RENDERING** anything other than what is *BLACK & WHITE*.
Anything else is what is configured by bovine excrement fumes.
The **BRAIN** is weakened by said fumes, to a state of delirium, to whit ****AROUSAL**** by said *PANDAS*.
Furthermore, one can only *ASSUME* what is **TRUE**, this is *PIER REVIEWED* by E.J Fudd Et Al.
Stumbling across said *PHENOMENA* ala **NEWTON**, during rabbit season.
@Random
Ummmm... Is it bad that I actually understand what you are saying?... *worried look*... Oh dear.... Oh dear-oh dear-oh dear.... *anxiously wringing hands*...
Welcome to the dark side Tin-Man, we have cookies!
@Random Re: "Welcome to the dark side Tin-Man, we have cookies!"
That is a LIE! I've been on here almost two years now, and I have YET to get a cookie! And I just figured out why. It's because COG keeps giving them all away to every Hairy, Dick, and Tom troll that passes through here! Hell, I can't even bring in my OWN cookie without worrying about Cog snatching it and giving it away.
@A Gnostic Agnostic: i think I've got it!! "Belief" is the problem.
Is that what you believe?
It is what I know.
I do not "believe" in things I know: knowing is what distinguishes from "belief".
I don't "believe" I am, I know I am,
thus need not "believe" I am for already knowing I am not
needing "belief" to know I am.
However your conflation brings up the root of the problem:
I BELIEVE I KNOW...(necessarily ignorant)
vs.
I KNOW I KNOW...(known. else: belief-based ignorance)
Say HELLO to the two Edenic trees. Where is the first fundamental ignorance one can have?
Of themselves.
https://ibb.co/090gbJ2
@A Gnostic Agnostic: "Say HELLO to the two Edenic trees."
Hello Edenic trees! What to they believe? Can you prove the trees are ignorant?
You yourself prove you are eating from the one that causes your own ignorance. Again: the picture is fitting.
Hint: one tree is the antithesis of the other, which is the same as *lack of* ignorance. This would be knowledge (of ignorance) which, as with many on these so-called "atheist" forums, begins with ones own self.
Rather than focusing on the problem of hundreds of millions of people dead, billions suffering "belief"-based nonsense, ignorant (ie. to ignore) people choose to focus their faculties on trying to attack/harass a single self-admitted NOTHING.
Ignorance of ones own ignorance is an infinite regress.
What would you choose to focus on? You appear according to how you eat: for knowledge, or for lack of it.
So you are ignorant twice as much as anyone else?
@xenoview; re: So you are ignorant twice as much as anyone else?
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT? This is an error of the first order. YOu have to say "I know you are ignorant." Oh ye foolish one. DON'T RELY ON BELIEF/ You either know something to be true or you do not know something to be true. If you do not know it to be true you are ignorant. Give up your silly beliefs. Come to the world of knowledge and don't make any assertions of claims. There are no claims being made here. You choose to know or not know. I don.t care what you do. Your ignorance is not my problem Belief is ignorance. Only what you know is real. And when you state what is real it is not an assertion barbecue you know what you know/
@A Gnostic Agnostic: Yes yes, You believe you know. Of course. I believe I know as well, I believe I see the light. I believe knowing distinguishes itself from belief, We are in one hundred percent agreement.
I don't believe I am. I believe I know I am. It;s not the same thing, Knowledge is all there is and it is not a subset of belief but totally separate. You don;t have to believe knowledge is true you just believe it. Knowledge is always true because it comes from inside yourself. I know I know... exactly what you should believe. I believe I know I know as well. In fact, I know I know I know I know... So I really know I know I know I know as well as I know I know I know, Know what I mean?
Yes of course. the endemic trees know ignorance of themselves,. Yes yes. I know that I know that I know this to be true based on what I know,.
OH YE FOOLS OF AR. GIVE UP YOUR STUPID IGNORANT BELIEFS. STOP BEING LIKE THE ENDEMIC TREES. JUST KNOW THAT YOU KNOW WHAT YOU KNOW. GIVE UP YOUR FUNDAMENTAL IGNORANCE!
This image depiction clarifies the LORI aspect of the theorem.
https://ibb.co/090gbJ2
It is based on the same 'structure' as the universe is.
0. If one knows at least themselves *NOT*, they can not infer anything with true accuracy.
1. If one knows a fixed (ie. truly immutable) characteristic of any (possible) dichotomy,
2. they can consciously try/test for its relative inverse (found in/by the question itself), which
3. if found, can be tried/tested to
4. infer the antithesis of the fixed known (found in/by the question itself).
1/3 are yields,
2/4 are conscious sowing (ie. trying and testing)
which perpetually "graduates" any/all "belief"-based ignorance(s) into knowledge(s) ad infinitum.
Problem: each being is relatively their own limitation, according to their "believing" to be something they are not.
The irony in saying "you know" and don't "believe" in things... you cannot prove anything, even with the greatest possible scientific research behind it.
You just get to 99.9% probably of something being a fact and that'll do.
Furthermore, everything any human 'knows' is from what they've been taught... be that right or wrong.
So to say that you know, is total and utter bollocks.
We constantly learn and improve, that's what humans do! We take information and improve upon it.
That's what makes science great, it's always working, always improving.
**RE: he irony in saying "you know" and don't "believe" in things... you cannot prove anything, even with the greatest possible scientific research behind it.
__________________________________________
Correct: I can not prove anything to anyone who doesn't themselves do step 0: understand they are their own limitation as defined by their own "belief"-based ignorance. The "belief"-based ignorance itself may prevent one from understanding what is true, which might render them to "believe" it can not be proven, without consciously trying. You/any else are the proof, not me. I know the problem is "belief"-based ignorance because I was (ie. am) a witness to it. I acknowledge all of my previous ignorance(s) were due to "belief" and that began with myself. Now, I know I am nothing, was, will be, and else is ignorance.
But this is also how I can infer the structure of creation: I infer it because I am now known to myself to be nothing. If other people "believe" themselves to be something they are not, they can not infer the creation just as I could not before when I was ignorant. Therefor, even giving the method, if people "believe" it is not proof, it is not proof relative to them because they "believe", which is the problem itself. The solution is conscious knowledge of ignorance, which is in the first post.
__________________________________________
**RE: You just get to 99.9% probably of something being a fact and that'll do.
Certainly false. Negation is certain: certainly false. It can be known to a certainty if any "belief" is not true. If the principle of negation itself were employed as a global model, it would indefinitely tend towards whatever is definitely true, which negates any/all "belief"-based ignorance, by necessity, which are not true. The problem is "belief" being required by "belief"-based ideologies, and they are willing to spill blood over their "beliefs" (ie. books/idols as in bible/quran/jesus/muhammad) which is itself the ignorance playing out. These people know not what they are doing: eating from the tree THEIR OWN BOOK told them not to. I could explain this to them, but I can't even get past so-called ATHEISTS who attack me instead of focusing on the bigger problem.
__________________________________________
**RE: Furthermore, everything any human 'knows' is from what they've been taught... be that right or wrong.
I BELIEVE... ignorance <-*tree of knowledge of good/evil
I KNOW... *inverse of* ignorance. <-*tree of living
That 'knows' should be a "knows" as in: "believed" to know.
__________________________________________
**RE: So to say that you know, it total and utter bollocks.
It is your own "belief"-based designation.
__________________________________________
**RE: We constantly learn and improve, that's what humans do! We take information and improve upon it.
Not all humans do this.
__________________________________________
**RE: That's what makes science great, it's always working, always improving.
The first fundamental science is conscience - science of ones own self. Else: ignorance.
A Gnostic Agnostic might just be ProgrammingGodJordan.
100% Chimp!
Absolutely reeks of a faux intellectual, who desperately wants to build his own sex robot, but is stuck for now with sticking his dick in a Henry Hoover.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
I am chaste, actually.
The sexual energy can be used in one of two ways:
i. Squandered (ie. put towards self-indulgence)
ii. Transmuted (ie. put towards creation)
It is the serpent in the garden.
If the lower organ commands/controls the higher organ, this is the fall. <-* why it began with Eve, which is the lower organ
If the higher organ commands/controls the lower organ, this is the rise. <-* why it gets passed to Adam, which is the higher organ
I discovered this when testing the claim of Jesus "no fornicator or adulterer can possibly inherit the kingdom of heaven."
I so far can not falsify it: to the contrary, it proves itself true over and over and over again, thus I remain chaste.
This does not mean I do not have sex: that is abstinence, which is not healthy.
The ego is contained in the "spasm" thus elimination of ego negates it. This allows for uninterrupted exchange.
I don't talk about this element much because most people can not handle it (ie. shame is a root of evil) and start whining and squealing.
PS.
Fidelity: as true to the original (ie. Adam and Eve) as possible.
Exodus 20:12 “Honor your father and your mother,
that your days may be long upon the land which
YHWH elwoa'im is giving you."
Infidelity: anything less than fidelity.
1:1 ratio.
Else: infidel.
Apply to "belief"-based religion(s).
Query: what do you suppose "taking the kingdom of heaven by force" means?
Anything to do with men taking women as war spoils?
Apply to "belief"-based religion(s).
Does it take a "believer" to "believe" evil is good?
PAHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Yeah, ohhh crikey, yeah... I can imagine... err hmmm..
PAHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
Ermmmm.. ok... cool!
For the love of Carl Sagan man... MANSCAPE, for crying out loud!
Does that include Henry Hoover? Ahhh shit man, that's harsh!
Definitely, you may have it on too high a setting...
Then it'll suck like a girl from Dundee.
Orrrr... and I'm just spit-balling here... it may mean, taking by physical force.
I dunno though, It could mean any old bollocks that some crackpot makes up.
It takes a **BELIEVER** to *BELIEVE* in the *BELIEFS* are simply *BELIEFS* that are *BELIEVED* by ****BELIEVERS**** that are in state of *BELIEF* due to their ***BELIEVING*** that *BELIEFS* are not just *BELIEFS* but in actuality, ***BELIEVABLE*** and just *BELIEFS*
Sorry I can not interact with triggered people who do nothing but whine and squeal.
@A Gnostic Agnostic
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
@A Gnostic Agnostic:
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
I admit: your own subconscious knows better than you do to choose the picture that best describes yourself.
Shit for brains monkey is just too perfect: I know you will "believe" this of another, but you mistake the straw of my words stirring you for the sediment that is already within yourself.
This is the same as the mark of Cain: enmity, focus on others, attack others, slander others, never caring so much a particular sediment for those who are suffering the dogmas of theism.
What is more important: slandering me, or women being religiously abused by men every minute of every day?
Your actions can be inferred back to your choices, your choices back to your focus, your focus being: men, men, men.
Love or hate: idol worship is binding.
They seem to enjoy the same inane verbose BS.
Again: when you have a formal logical proof for this (which you don't, and never will), it will be a theorem. Until then it is at best a conjecture.
**RE: Again: when you have a formal logical proof for this (which you don't, and never will), it will be a theorem. Until then it is at best a conjecture.
___
I already do. I sent it to my local university (not the whole thing) which derives the modification of:
"All knowing is belief, but not all belief is knowing."
to:
"All knowing is (by way of) trying belief, but
not all believe is (by way of) trying to know all."
I did not give them the method to derive this, and they don't know what is contained in it (unless they read this thread): the infallibility of trying/testing/falsifying ad infinitum and/all "belief"-based assertions. Example:
Torah/Bible is man-made (can be proven).
Qur'an is man-made (can be proven).
The assertion defeats Judaism/Christianity/Islam, which is probably why I am being attacked on here. All they do is whine and squeal and squeal and whine, despite my being arguing *against* theism. It makes no sense, right?
This place is full of non-atheist shills that worship dead men like Jesus and Muhammad, and they do not like me demonstrating their "belief" to be absolute ignorance.
Pages