The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

where do you stand on your beliefs and on such topics as the paranormal,supernatural and other worldy thing

do you look at things with logic and decern them logicaly with a sound mind or do you look at things scientificaly with the need of scientific evidence to prove them and thier existance wrong or right or do you look at things with faith,faith being that you just believe because you feel it is possible and do not need to see any evidence or proof?

and to the above please explain why you choose too look at things the way you do

and also do you thinkk it's possible or ever will be possible to look at such things as the paranormal,supernatural and other worldy things in one view that is Logical,Scientific And With Faith?

I look at things the way I do because they make sense to me, in mind. I guess this would be percieved as logical. Though the three areas can and do co-exist.

The researcher could deduce in a logical fashion that scientific evidence could support a logical conclusion. Though faith would be a sign that the individual could believe something is out there, but without the proper scientific evidence, they could still doubt what is actually out there. Such scientific evidence would need to come from physical manifestations, for the doubt to extinguish itself.

Though logic, the physical manifestation could be considered an "advanced being," "entity" or energy burst of some kind. Spacial distortions mayhaps. Though it really depends as to what area of research this thread entails. Most would base it on a metaphysical level because of the "Faith" connotation that is implimented.

I do believe in the paranormal. Paranormal and supernatural are, in essence, the same thing just different words. Both mean things are not normal and not natural.

I do look at things logically and with sound mind as well as scientifically. There are things that can be disproved but also things that cannot be disproved no matter what. I've listened to many audio clips and seen different thermals where there are disembodied voices and images on thermal that cannot be explained away.

I look at things the way I do because I've had experiences myself and I am an Impath. I may not see or hear dead people but I do feel them around me as well as able to feel what others feel when I know nothing about them.

I do thing it is possible to see paranormal in a Logical, Scientific and Faith point of view.

i belive in the supernatural with out a question i have seen proof of many times

now religion is something diffrent, its hard to belive. there are so many conderdictions in the bible and other teachings i am not sure what to do or what to belive if i do not see proff or at least not so many conderications

I think that Science can explain many things but not everything because till these days we question certain things and get no answer.

I had experiences where even skeptics would feel scared.

Faith- have none so I can't think with that.

It is evident that some have moderate faith, while others have sensational, and often pious behavior. a good site I found that the topic down" is Holy Smoke.org.

When faith steps across the belief without evidence mark, and expects nonbelievers to to share conviction to their whimsy. In lesser degrees harmless.. but with pretense. When believers want others to be as "struck
", and astaonished.. at vague "accounts" of celestial Metaphicial assumtions, and spectulation.. goes from being a rare gift to a novalty. When I find those with moderate faith pleasent company. Moderate being acceptant that the "software program finale'" is unique to the person.

While all truth cannot be perceived through Logic, alone... yet all truth must be logical.


- Upir'

Faith was created to create an illusion in the mind of many, so they can believe that after death, there is a chance for a better world. just an illusion. Paranormal activity have recorded for many century and exist, but, no too many want to recognized it as a true phenomenon. Science, is just a 2 +2 = 4.

The question of Logic Vs. Science Vs. Faith is a good one for me to explain myself.

If one does not stop and pause for a second on this one, they may speak to quickly to realize what they missed.

For our imagination makes us think the thoughts that make us feel the emotions that we act upon, our true reality is not what we experience with our senses but how they come into existence and form the world around us. Those that are connected to this, see it, and work with it are true vampires cause they have connected their selves to all things and everyone around them, thus making their energy all energy.

This is all Science! It may begin with Faith, but it can all be explained through Science.

I have taken many notes as my body went through the transition and I can now easily explain any supernatural ability or paranormal event through Science.

As seeing is believing, I like to show rather than tell. Only after examining most of the human race, I think more than 99% of humans deserve to die off so I rarely share my secrets with anyone anymore.

Humans live only to kill. Vampires (being connected to all things and everyone) need others to live so we do not kill. True Vampires are Vegetarian.

Logic is however Ignorance, for it is an assumption to what is and is always argued from a narrow minded view unwilling to look at facts. However, blind Faith can also be ignorance if never willing to see or understand from a Scientific view.

~Selective~, even though most of your notions within your post can be seen as *ss backward. No offense, to be taken here. This thread may not be concluded as a vampiric question, but a question for all of society no matter who we are. Therefore I will not nitpick at the subtle connotations you presented.

But, I will say that imagination is not a science. It is a thought process. The true reality is how it is percieved through the individuals eyes, physically.

You claim to have gone through some sort of transition, this would imply that you were "changed" into a vampire. And thus, I will be bias here and base your claim on a roleplay factor that in my mind would ask the question... How are you being turned into a vampire relate to the logic vs science vs faith aspect?

Though you have answered this question with an *ss backward approach, I think the audience needs a bit more of a profound approach rather then a roleplayers approach to the whole of the discussion.

As well, if logic is ignorance... Since in your opinion is argued with a narrow minded point of view, as well as unwilling to look at facts, even though logic is based on facts... Then how could you draw the conclusion that logic is ignorance if you are arguing with what seems to be a narrow minded point of view. Your own words decieve you.

(This is not to be deemed as a personal attack, just a conjecture based on an individuals post.)

Logic says you know what gravity is.

Logic says you can only feel with your skin.

Logic says you can only see with your eyes.

Logic says you know what thoughts are.

Logic in itself is just notions for you to cling to, self made assumptions either told to you and taken at face value or created by yourself with no curiosity to seek the truth.

No one thinks about Logical things cause they are logical. Thus no thinking makes them ignorant.

In Science, you can only prove what is, not what isn't.

In Logic, everyone is quick to say what isn't without even thinking first.

Clinging is a productive response brought on by a charade of monotonous gestures learned from childhood on. What one learns throughout their childhood is a psychological factor fo that cling to machination of the mind.

"No one thinks about Logical things cause they are logical. Thus no thinking makes them ignorant."

All of society thinks about logical things because they are logical. this would also be a characteristic of common sense. The logical approach would be to assume that if one does not use their common sense, this in part would make them ignorant.

Arguing semantics when it comes to something like this just portrays the individual as a mild mannered individual that would not think logically about the next statement they may be about to make.

We can play at this charade for as long as you wish, a battle of wit and or word if you will, it does not take from the fact that the subject matter of this thread is thrown off topic in the long run.

Please stay on topic or not post at all.

I stayed on topic, and replied to these questions from the first post of this topic.

1. where do you stand on your beliefs and on such topics as the paranormal,supernatural and other worldy thing

2. do you look at things with logic and decern them logicaly with a sound mind or do you look at things scientificaly with the need of scientific evidence to prove them and thier existance wrong or right or do you look at things with faith,faith being that you just believe because you feel it is possible and do not need to see any evidence or proof?

3. and to the above please explain why you choose too look at things the way you do

4. and also do you thinkk it's possible or ever will be possible to look at such things as the paranormal,supernatural and other worldy things in one view that is Logical,Scientific And With Faith?"



You can read my first post in this topic for my answers.

Reasoning, Logic, Critical Thinking, and Summerization., Four concepts often made trivial by fundamentalist occultist. Until they feel the need to apply them to "support" their irrational pet hypathy.

Mythos, and Pathos collide
HP Lovecraft was a "prophet"

Please keep this discussion polite or else it will be closed.

logically thought of science is deemed untill proven it does not exist or happen, yet with faith is the belief that it can and will happen,

extremes that each must see in a different for sight to expeirence all.

Not all who share a faith need (or expect) experiences, or demonstrations. These people are often moderate believers. what some would impress upon others is that experiences, and convincing demonstarations are a dime a dozen, and everyoneone should just accept that "that is the way it is". So do those who declare they have faith.. really practing faith? Or are they going by evidence they observe ( "real" or illusion).

practice faith, i go to church and in some ways are practicing it, yet the science aspect in which this life shows yet in many ways unproven to have logic. with all there is loop holes in every basic thread in which all believe to have answers.

I believe that physical laws are parallel to spiritual laws. Economics, love, and gravity are intwined in the same basic spiritual principle.

Science goes astray, it is it's nature, but it is ever more revealing of the inticate simplicity of spiritual laws. All honest search for understanding of the universe and our place in it, teaches us spiritual laws. Disobeying spiritual laws is the source of pain, and also educational.

The only wrong course is stagnation, and the universe has a tendancy to force tests on those who refuse to learn.

Faith is knowing that your perspective is highly probably inaccurate, but that it will lead you to ever greater discoveries.

I am on the "Fuzzy log ic" side of the fence when it comes to things of this nature.I feel that these "supernatural"things that occur are in fact natural,therefore science can explain most as we find ways to explore and proove them.
For instance,I dont think about ghosts as concious entities persay,but more like where does the past go?
And I have faith in nature and its processes.

The World's Greatest Spirit Medium
WAS A FRAUD!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No matter how often the confidence scammers are exposed, those who believe will happily continue to pay cold hard cash to be deceived. The believers are not victims of the miracle workers: they are willing, eager, happy participants in their own betrayal (usually in the form of cash money, real estate, jewels, and expensive works of art). That they can believe that which cannot be believed is a mark of how well so-called "psychics," palmists, spoon benders., etc., know the business of deception. The fact that not even one miracle worker has ever demonstrated, in properly controled conditions, even one "psychic" or "paranormal" ability or phenomena is lost upon true believers--- they just do not care. They would rather believe a lie.
"The true-believer syndrome merits study by science. What is it that compels a person, past all reason, to believe the unbelievable? How can an otherwise sane individual become so enamored of a fantasy, an imposture, that even after it's exposed in the bright light of day he still clings to it--- indeed, clings to it all the harder?
"The true-believer syndrome is the greatest thing phony mediums have going for them. No amount of logic can shatter a faith consciously based on a lie."

© M. Lamar Keene, the world's greatest spirit medium. Quoted from pg. 151, The Psychic Mafia, 1997, Prometheus Books 1-57392-161-0.



You would think that confidence scams would be against the law, right? Well, you would think correctly. However, in the USA such practices are protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and even more strongly protected by over two hundred years of hands-off precedent. Law enforcement in the USA has nearly always shunned bringing religious-based criminals to court to answer for their crimes: the USA government does not wish to appear to be "persecuting churches." As Lamar Keene pointed out:


"To make my renunciation of mediumship complete, I knew there were other things I yet had to do. Seeking out a Masonic friend, I poured forth to him the whole story. At my request he went with me to the authorities. I turned myself in to the Internal Revenue Service for evasion of income tax. (I eventually paid all back taxes in full.) I also visited the FBI, the county sheriffs office, and the state attorney-general. To all these I made full confession of my years of fraud.
"No police investigation of any medium was launched as a result of my action nor, to my knowledge, did the Internal Revenue Service look into the matter of mediumistic bookkeeping. One reason for official reluctance to do anything may be an exaggerated concept of religious liberty. Apparently the last thing a public official in this country wants is for some sect like the spiritualists to scream bloody murder about religious persecution. At any rate, whatever the reason, the mediums continue unmolested.

"As a matter of fact, my former partner is doing better than ever[....]"

© M. Lamar Keene, the world's greatest spirit medium. Quoted from pg. 153, The Psychic Mafia, 1997, Prometheus Books 1-57392-161-0.


This dispite the fact that Keene confessed to fraud, theft, burglary, robbing the dead, picking pockets, and tax evasion ("all in a day's work," as the American saying goes, for spirit mediums).

Do you believe in "psychic phenomena?" Do you believe people can "talk to the dead?" Do you believe that some people can heal with just a touch or a shout of "Praise Jezuz!" or other incantation? Or do you think these things are silly, and yet still believe in astrology, I Ching, chiropractic, homeopathy, or spoon benders?

Alas, if you do, you are a fool. Human beings are increadably easy to deceive. Miracles performed before their very eyes by prestidigitation (i.e. "stage magic") they find entertaining; the same miracles performed by a self-professed "psychic," using the same or similar methods of the state magician, are seen by the True Believers as "evidence" of their beliefs. No amount of evidence to the contrary, including confession by the fraud who performed the tricks, is good enough to sway the True Believer. If you are among these poor souls, well, you have my sympathy, but you must admit you "had it comming to you." After all, you believe the impossible--- shouldn't you pay for such stupidity?

The "psychics," spirit mediums, spoon-benders, and all the other miracle workers believe you should. Imagine the utter contemp they hold for their gullible vistims. As "David" in the movie King of the Gypsies put it, talking about their victims:


"Dey believed 'cuz dey was ign'rant."
And that is the entire truth, in one insightful (albeit poor) sentence. I may as well be the one to tell you the brutal, cold, hard truth: genuine "psychic phenomena" do not exist. Lack of evidence for "psychic phenomena" is excellent evidence for lack of the existance of that phenomena. All a "psychic" need do to demonstrate my assertion false is to demonstrate a "psychic" ability. Not surprising, "psychics" refuse. EVERY TIME. Dowsers fail every time. Astrologers (and I've studied astrology and astrologers for 15 years) fail every time. "Psychics" fail every time. Spirit mediums produce "ectoplasm" (i.e. chiffon fabric) from their pockets and push tin trumpets around table-tops with sticks (in the dark), but they ALWAYS fail to produce any spirits.

"Super-natural phenomena?" It just doesn't happen! If you wish to believe otherwise, well, all I can say is that you're a fool. The real universe is amazing enough without believing it is a magical place where gurus leviated, ascended masters talk to people through mediums via spirit guides, the diseased and the dying get healed by prayer, and spoons get bent by merely willing them to bend. I wish the universe did work that way, but it does not.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Holy smoke.org

Physical Mediums are Frauds,
and nearly all psychics add showmanship, to an otherwise mundane ability in all of us, to feel the advance wave of Synchronic events and other inate and underused abilities, (like reading, thinking, our immune systems, self control, and a host of others)

Im on what makes sense to me, and sometimes involves all the facets mentioned above; its all about personal research and connections, for I don't intend to preach on it or rely on fixating/drowning myself in it, so there is no need to debate what for me is parallel to an authentic rationalization or what others think is 'true'. Some times science can't give you answers due to its limited approach of whatever the scenario is, as well as faith can't do so when is not properly sustained with some kind of rational approaches, It takes all the variables to reach to a conclusion that shape every individual perspective of life and convictions. You do need faith in what you do to achieve science( technology) and logistics to reach the conclusions, things don't pop out of nowhere, thats the beauty of it all, the problem is when one only care to focus on one and discard the rest.

do you look at things with logic and decern them logicaly with a sound mind or do you look at things scientificaly with the need of scientific evidence to prove them and thier existance wrong or right or do you look at things with faith,faith being that you just believe because you feel it is possible and do not need to see any evidence or proof?



Well I feel that they all work together in somem sense or another. I mean there are things that can be explained away as the government says it, with a very tuned Science and logical practice.

That covers alot of bases*reason they say it and do it, the catch is that they cannot always explain things yet, summerize it to keep it under control.

yet, myself I do look at things logically, and scientificly, But at the same time when it comes to other things I have Blind faith I feel it covers alot of things also.

Faith is believing something is possible without any proof or question... my question is isn't that the same as when you trust or love someone it is done on faith.?


I mean someone asked me what do I have to do for you to have faith in me? I honestly do not know, I mean how can you even explain faith and know how it affects someone or what they feel that they think is faith.


this can be discussed, dicected etc.. anyway you want yet, it is different for each person.and their convictions as what they think having faith is. yet, I do strongly believe that each of us do have faith in something or someone.

just my opinion..

I see everything for what it is, without trying to be overly analytical. Faith to me means, not only understanding that there is much I'll never understand or even pretend to know, that my finite mind can never comprehend the infinite, whatever it is, and I'm comfortable with that. How can anyone be otherwise? Look all you want-some things are attainable (or at least approachable), but you'll never know whats riding on that quasar 5-billion light years away from earth. I believe that if we had anything bordering on absolute knowledge then everything considered paranormal or phantasmagorical in this universe would actually be normal, because we would have the ability to perceive and classify. Its what we personally don't understand that we dub "paranormal" or call a "miracle".

I try to discern things logically, but I'm open-minded enough to accept that I have no right to be skeptical of what others claim to have witnessed, or what they believe in personally. If you tell me you've seen a ghost, I give you the benefit of the doubt, barring psychological probabilities like hallucinations due to some mental malady, and if you tell me you vehemently believe in this god or that, I would never conceive of arguing with you.

not all science is logical
i say that as a physics teacher. there is still much in quantum mechanics that have people scratching their heads at the illogic of it all.
string theory is sometimes closer to religion than science.

i do use logic often...but just have to admit some things i take on faith.
will some things be measured someday that cannot yet be quantified? certainly?
but perhaps not all things.

why do i just hold some things in faith?
honestly...just because it feels right to me.

thats all
~W~

Why all the conflict?

Experience has taught me when two intelligent arguments, both with their own reasonable albeit subjective evidence come to different conclusions.

Then the chances are both have elements of truth.Hence the "I am right" monkey behaviour...

Do not divide science from the supernatural, take an over view extracted from the wisdom we are all but fools.

Be not ready to discount that which is beyond your own spectrum.For only a fool believes they can see all.

well said alien, well said indeed.

if we are counting the number of rocks in a sack, that is objective...easily checked.
but if we are discussing beliefs, then we must all just hold to those things that we feel within our own psyches.
~W~

Alien nation,

Why so hostlile against science?

Ide be willing to bet that if science catered to your beliefs, you would exault science.

You may consider this as well.

we can reason that their are those who believe in vampires, are you not
upset that they have not provided any substancial research?

The way I see it, my beliefs are just that- MY beliefs.
I don't need some book to tell me what to believe in.

If it doesn't make sense, that is my problem. But it makes sense to me. That is all that matters.

So why the crusade to lead people to accept your unsupported beliefs? Beliefs you admit to be based on nothing more then how you feel.

See how irrational it is to expect people to subscribe to something you would never have been convinced of without what you claim to be personal feeling?

As with most established beliefs, and fringe beliefs there is no significance for society to subscribe to your personal convictions.

To not subscribe has no consequence, and to subscribe generates nothing significant.

Now bigotry toward you, for your beliefs is another matter.

However, those that irrationally conclude that just because you are not embraced for your belief, and personal convictions, that you are being pursucuted.. that is reverse bigotry!

Creating a " us vs them", and " them" is anyone who is not compelled to subscribe to your personal convictions, and beliefs.

Especially when those beliefs, or convinctions have no merit.

Please read the thread on what Vampires bring to society~Dab will see I lean toward conventional science~

On some threads I believe faith has the answers for I have seen both sides.

In my experience neither has a convincing explanation for all so I choose a blend of the two...it works for me.

I merely present both arguments for the enlightened to choose or blend as I have. Your choice, why fight it?

By 'blending' the two you are actually in doubt.

A rather simple deduction.

You lack true faith, and your personal convictions are faulty.

yet blending of all create a form of logic which we consider truth as we are taught, yet in some balance of thought these identies fight among top spots that they feel to be right in their own thinking.

The way Alien nation presents it, it is internally conflicted. The impliction is that it is ' unique' to the individual.

How very telling are people who seek not to be received as exceptional for their personal beliefs, and convictions. Especially when they intentionally
imply that others are to ' ignorant' to grasp their unfounded ideals.

basic thought of skepitsism is to take in the information we hear and than use or discard on the basis of what it is good for us. These three realms have alot of influence on the humanity in societies, so we take and give on what we consider to valuable to us in our lives.

Yet in cases were people just fabricate beliefs then desperately seek to be
considered exception it is just ridiculous behaviour.

It is evident in their implication that society is just so ignorant of what they believe/convinced makes them exceptional.

It is not the belief they want excepted, it is their desperate attempt for people to cater to their fragile fabricated ideaism.

Frankly they hide in the midst of people with moderate faith, and beliefs.

They lack personality, so they attempt to compansate by adopting ( and ' blending') various beliefs, not for beliefs sake, but to elevate themselves above their insecurities. Anyone who is indifferent to their beliefs is ( in their reasoning) ignorant, and oblivious. Yet they sherk at the fact that their is no merit to their belief.

Frankly AlienNation even if I did subscribe to a " vampire" model, I would consider you too personally lack any merit.

You saturate yourself with extraordinary claims, and repeat them enough that you appear to be hoping to actually convince yourself.

human subjectivity playes alot on how people see science and what they beleive or is taught is reall.if somebody who has a degree tell people something they assume hes telling the truth.they wont understand his thesis anyway if they read it.a good example is the myth of global warming.

Exactly Catseye,

The term for that is " Appeal to authority" it is a Fallecy of Logic.

Fallecies of logic make up the bulk of idealistic believers .

fallicis of logic like that term , met many in college this quarter that fullfills that term. Idealistic persona of knowing nothing.

A battle of wits, with unarmed people.

If you believe something, fine.

Don't expect everyone to embrace you for your beliefs.

Just because someone doesn't receive your beliefs as enthusiastical as you, and fellow adherants do, does not mean they are " against you".

Belief is personal, abstaining from beliefs is just as personal.

The arrogant believer assumes that just because a person currently doesn't subscribe to a belief means they never subscribed to a belief. See some have " been there done that", and found it lacking in sustainability, every belief is rampant with subdivision, so even believers are resistant by degree.

As I said it is not rational to expect a person to believe everything.

Any belief is just that one more belief to occupy an individuals need for something greater, piety is when a person claims something tangent, material, or greater then faith.

I believe I have a healthy balance of all three.

I am a logical person, I look around and like to see the relationship between elements, objects and people.

I am scientific, in that I don't take things on face value, I like to delve in deeper and learn all I possibly can, to prove things happen and exist.

I have faith, in the unseen and the unknown. I know I can't prove or reason out everything in life. I know that there are mysteries that will never be unsolved and just because I haven't experienced something doesn't mean its not real or doesn't exist.

I can't know it all, I can't believe in it all but, I will try given the right circumstances and opportunities.

Real Faith comes from the Holy Bible .....the rest is scientific bs!

Not everyone believes the same, or promotes beliefs on to others. My structure and belief is based on my accounts and not others. i do not dwell on getting others to follow my belief or do i taunt them with my ideals. I take in what i learn and what i use for my belief the rest is like garbage in -Garbage out scenerio.

There is no logic in faith.

There are reasons why people adopt faiths, and reasons why people renounce their faith.

Logic is consistent, and weither or not you "believe" in logic makes no difference.

Religion is based on spectulation.

Careful dabbler, some may see other aspects of science or such the same and thats dwells on other faith in belief of purpose of ones self.

Logic and science are different context and can not be differentiated coz they are not like science and belief.

I'm not sure that that answers my question, or if it did I didn't follow what you were trying to say.

There are no absolutes
Even vaunted Science and logic break down in a Singularity.

Science is not a "thing" that can break down. Our understanding of physics may break down, but it is only our understanding of it at this point that is breaking down.

faith is personal spectulation.

Physics is certainties.

Sounds remarkably like Faith to me TRoof.

i think that a personal blend of all three is more suited to how i view things. for example, my environment, my culture and my heritage determine who i am. all these influences determine what i think and how i act.

logic tells me after reasoning why something is so, science confirms or denies it or has yet to do either, and faith makes me believe what i cannot reason or prove to be true.

in my opinion,none of these things stand alone because everything is in relation to everything else and not otherwise

Faith is belief in which dreams can be seen and built.

science is number in ones mind that tell a story in that persons way.

I believe everyone has a belief system in which they mold with experience, right now someone is atheist, but deep down inside has a trajectory of ideology, they don't know, but they are sure that is not the other, if you don't know that the other one is misguided by logic how you are sure it cannot be something true? because is nowhere near a natural explanation?( what if it is wrong on the interpretation rather than subjectivity); easily explained, they do believe in something but they are scare to project something that is not substantiated by their self created limitations, they think something is like somehow but is always on a cloud of exchange instead of steady fundamentalism. The mere idea that you answer: "I don't know" is actually screaming "I have an idea"(prediction/hypothesis) but is not proven for me to argumentate- ebcause is against the naturalism, pretty much like believers of something without knowledge of it other than speculation, they create predictions and their own walls/limitations on things that are pretty much idealistic(I don't know widely deranged on a paradise or something on a afterlife). Scientist do have something, they just adjust it on their convenience- there is no laws or ethics to follow naturalism, just a constant change how it should be for all under an specific logical path. The problem with both is that one is too closed and the other one is to open for their interpretational field of life and its mechanics. Sometimes there should be a balance for the answers to flow rather than limiting on something unproved or closing until finding the answers, both lead a pretty distressful and confusing experience of life. There should be a new paradigm one which involves spirituality with limitless expansion (understanding and respecting the space between everything in nature by studying the nature).

"I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is." —Albert Einstein

“Those who look for the laws of Nature as a support for their new works collaborate with the creator.”

“...Because of this, originality consists in returning to the origin.” 
-Antonio Gaudi 

“He who experiences the unity of life sees his own Self in all beings, and all beings in his own Self, and looks on everything with an impartial eye.” 
-Siddhartha Gautama

“So long as a man imagines that he cannot do this or that, so long as he is determined not to do it; and consequently so long as it is impossible to him that he should do it.”
Baruch Spinoza

“Whatsoever is contrary to nature is contrary to reason, and whatsoever is contrary to reason is absurd.”
Baruch Spinoza

"Although nature commences with reason and ends in experience it is necessary for us to do the opposite, that is to commence with experience and from this to proceed to investigate the reason."      
-Leonardo da Vinci

"Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game."
-Voltaire

I will agree with the study of nature, it gives us endless example. The essence of life and or existence I believe to be a form of Iteration with all differential caused by Initial Values. an ever expanding repetition of a single concept. Take a look at our dna.
Some may choose to call it god and some science, but it does not change the pattern before us. We arrogantly blather on about our beliefs from our tiny speck out here in the vast cosmos.

Dabbler- to respond to your post from further up...

I should have explained more, I apoligize. It is more than just what I feel... it also has to do with personal expierences and certain people not keeping promises.

Yes, it is complicated. But I beg someone- name one belief that is not

belief in one's self??

Science was certain.
Science said.
All life needs sunlight for 100 years. Not so!
Science was stupid, below in the dark.
Six foot worms and crabs with heamagloblin blood around lava tubes 1 mile or more in the deep sea.
For us to go there we need 5 inch thick perspex glass.
So science was totally incorrect, it was just a one off.
Laughs!

Green Knight,

"?"

what happens if you beleive in all three? there is science is out there,faith is also out there if you beleive in it,same with logic it is out there but you have to beleive in it just like faith

That was a rather off the wall response since no one in this entire thread has debated whether or not science has ever been wrong (obviously it has MANY times, and will continue to be wrong often).

By the way, they've now found organisms at those hydrothermal vents that actually photosynthesize from the faint light that comes from the vents.

it just depends on what you beleive in or you can trust all of them until you find out that there is something wrong

most of my dicisons are based on logic but stuff like the paranormal i base on faith. just because i can't see it doesn't mean it's not there

that makes perfect sense. I mean logic and rational thought only works when the circumstance is rational.

logic vs. science.vs faith?
heh i thought logic and science go hand in hand since they both about things that are real and explainable and within the laws of nature etc and all that crap and faith is just blind belief in something.well thats my view anyway.
while i am open minded,i'm more of a logical person and i accept this pathetic world as it is...godless and natural.
i don't believe in gods but maybe i do have a little faith,i have a little faith that there may be psychic and supernatural abilities out there,heh i myself have had dreams that sort of came true. i really hate deja vu.

I look at the world and its wonders in various manners. Faith, scientifically, and also with logic when I am out for an experience. Personally I believe they all play a small part with each other. I am spiritual, thus I believe in angels, demons, and spirits. I believe in looking for a logical reason for things happening. And also I look at the science aspects of the world. I enjoy looking for the paranormal, EVP’s, pictures, and EMF readings. If I experience something unusual I start with the scientific side of things. I like to look at all options on the table at the time. For instance doing security I have spent many nights on power conversion stations. We always tend to see shadow people moving around, or other unusual ideals throughout the night. EMF fields at a high rate can cause the human mind to hallucinate. So logically we dismiss activity around high electrical fields. In dismissing them you always wonder if you are really being affected by the electrical field or if perhaps it simply heightens your senses being exposed to them. To look at the world with but one aspect is to close of to other possibilities and makes one have tunnel vision. To truly explore the world, one must accept all ideals and possibilities even if we can’t explain them through science, faith, or even logic. It keeps life interesting and research expanding.

Logic and Science do go hand in hand. Science and scientific discovery applies logic to explain the unknown. Faith uses... neither to explain the unknown.

No one ever said science knows everything. I highly doubt faith had any idea or explanation for life existing at the bottom of the ocean in volcanic columns of hot sulfur.

science only explains things in nature... because it can be explained via the scientific method.... personally I don't believe when it comes to supernatural forces someone should ever use science to try to explain it.... as for logic... some people are more logical than others

The video was interesting... kinda long... but they didn't really go into faith or something not of the natural... just someone taking science and deeming it as truth...so that was a bit disappointing

but i suppose it does go over logic and science pretty clearly.

the clip was great it puts science and the (only) logical interpretation of it into perspective in my opinion.

i disagree that it dosnt touch on religion - it gives a good account of why folk find it so difficult to follow religion because many of us need concrete proof before we can believe in things that may or may not exist but cannot be proved as such.

thanks Dabbler for that but the soundtrack, well it was shocking lol

i mean faith as in belief in paranormal or super natural things... religion is something that people can be turned of to, even if they do believe in the paranormal and supernatural, just because of the way religion is shared amongst people... like it's a requirement and how things can never be outside of this little box of rules and such... I don't consider faith and religion one in the same, figuring you can have one, but not the other.

true, faith and religion are not the same.
religion are groups of believers etc while faith can be a belief in everything but religion does require faith.
faith in yourself, faith in money lol etc

just corrected something thats all.

One hears people that subscribe to paranormal ideals imply they have faith. I see it as conviction, because it often involves having witnessed something personally, or having a personal experience. Faith is when a person admits to not having seen something, yet being sufficiently convinced by a testimony.

So the faith is often in the accounts one receives.

Out of X number of testimonies, a number of them are fabricated, and a percentage are based on perceived anomalies. I would like to think that even the most "open minded' person is not naive enough to place full faith in every account.

Another question I have (to those with paranormal convictions) whats the significance of others accepting your conviction? what does the person gain by subscribing to your professed experience?

If it took an extraordinary experience to convince you, then how can you rationally expect others to take your account at face value?

Why would they place faith in your testimony? Why Believe you personally?

why would any of this be without the other, in some terms of logic and personal growth we would assume much of these three traits are intertwined in some aspect.

The whole concept of faith is based on alleged illogical occurrences.

Events that allegedly defy the laws of physics, the common denominator is no witnesses, or data.

To attempt to say one has faith, when one claims to have seen personally something is a contradiction. The word faith is stripped to worthlessness, and made a blanket term. As if opinion is validated because a person claims faith.

this thread is getting more confusing as times goes and getting farther and father from the point, so I'll jump back on

I do believe in the paranormal and supernatural...
and I do because of pure faith, knowing that I am not all knowing, so I have faith that there are many things in and outside of this world that I do not... and might not ever understand. I don't believe science can ever explain these things however so to people who only trust in science, They won't believe in it.... but I personally do.

It is not about trust in science, it is that science is practical to me. Applicable, while faith is not practical, or applicable.

Logic has practical application as well. faith only serves emotion.

science ignores paranormal conjecture, it lacks data, and is mostly reliant on analogy. Psuedo science sure hooks more interest by catering to believers.

on logic aspect I see they evaluate all realms and apply science to deem factual orbelief or faith to its conclusion so this is why we must accept all relams of theory and idealogy to strucutre.

faith, is belief, Without Evidence.

It has no legit field in science, it declares itself outside of science, and logic. So for those adherants to declare science to be about belief, and faith is ludicrous, and grossly highjacks the words, logic, and science.

Why so desperate to bring science to the level of belief?

Just present one practical applicable contribution belief, and faith have made in advancing civilization.

Toward the end of his 1977 book on cosmology, “The First Three Minutes,” the Nobel Laureate, Dr. Steven Weinberg, wrote “Anything that we scientists can do to weakening the hold of religion should be done and may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization” .

This statement is, very simply, the horrible and glorious truth of cultural evolution and it alludes to the larger evolutionary program in which all people on earth are currently embedded, largely without their thinking and knowing about it. The scientific, i.e., human view of the world has completely changed during the 20th century, at the expense of religion and just in time for the 3rd millennium .

Post-Einstein science and natural philosophy can now provide an entirely new world view, a world view based exclusively on human values and human knowledge, a world view embracing human theology and Life on the whole. This, of course, requires looking at the world in new and larger ways. We are left, conceptually and really, with one earth, one people, and one God.

When acted upon, this new world view will transform cultural evolution into human evolution on a global basis. For the first time, the people on this planet will be on the path to God and Heaven on Earth. With this new world view in hand, religion is no longer useful to human comprehension and control, no longer relevant to human purpose and destiny.

Religion is No Longer Useful to the Comprehension of Our World

This failure of religion has been true since Copernicus and Newton and the emergence of deductive thought. Newton and his generation of scientists pointed out that the Sun is at the center of our solar system, not the earth as Ptolemy had believed and the Roman church had adopted and imposed upon the western world. For the world of science, the church was adequately wrong on this subject to be challenged on every other subject.

This failure of religion has been entirely true since Einstein and the emergence of reductive thought. Einstein and his generation of scientists left religion entirely out of the program in pointing out that the Universe is one, that everything in the Universe is made out of the same stuff, that there is no "outside" to the Universe and no external causation. Material information runs the Universe from the inside out. The earth orbits the sun because it is the easiest, most natural thing for it to do, given its material characteristics and location in space and time.

Religion is No Longer Useful to the Comprehension of Our Origins

This failure of religion has been true since Darwin, the emergence of deductive thought in biology and the emergence of evolutionary biology. We now know that life evolved from the molecules of the earth, that life was born of the water and emerged onto the land, into the air and back into the water. We now know that all humans are related to each other and to all other living things on earth. All life is of the earth. All people are of the earth.

This failure of religion has been entirely true since the emergence of reductive thought in biology and the emergence of molecular biology and molecular genetics since WWII. The living genome is the source of biological creativity. Comprehension of biological evolution has been reduced to comprehension at the molecular and genomic levels of organization in a grand confirmation of evolutionary theory. The biological genome is the creative source of life on earth .

Religion is no Longer Useful to the Comprehension of Disease Origins

This failure of religion has been true since Henle, Koch and Pasteur, the emergence of deductive thought in medicine and the emergence of the Germ Theory of Infectious Disease. Disease causation had nothing whatsoever to do with the vengeance and vindictiveness of the gods. The causes of infectious disease were right here on earth, and that knowledge of causation left infectious disease readily preventable and ultimately curable with antibiotics and antivirals.

This failure of religion has been entirely true since the emergence of reductive thought in medicine and the emergence of the Mutagen Theory of Neoplastic Disease. The frameworks of Germ Theory have merely been extended from the cellular to the molecular level of organization so as to embrace mutagens and diseases caused by mutational damage to the cellular genome, e.g., the human cancers. Disease causation has nothing whatsoever to do with the gods. The causes of neoplastic disease are right here on earth, and that knowledge of causation will leave these diseases readily preventable and ultimately curable with gene therapy.

Religion is No Longer Useful to the Comprehension of Ourselves

This failure of religion has been true since Freud and the emergence of psychoanalysis. We now know that our world view is what drives us as individuals, whether we can define and defend that world view or not. The human mind is the source of cultural creativity. We can only be defined with human knowledge. We cannot be defined by the marketplace and by the ancient cultural "isms".

This failure of religion has been entirely true since the emergence of the Information Revolution, the post-Einstein extension of the Newtonian Industrial Revolution. From the mechanical world we have evolved into the electronic world of computers and cell phones and the Internet, all defined with post-Einstein knowledge . We now deal in the informational currency of a potentially omnipresent, omniscient God located in the "head and heart" of the people.

Religion is No Longer Useful to the Comprehension of God

This failure of religion is true because religion is no longer useful to the comprehension of what it means to be human and why we are here on earth. We are not here to compete and war among ourselves over money, political power and religious ideologies. We are not here to waste the earth under capitalism's self-indulgent dominion.

In Jefferson's eyes, only "fools and charlatans" could see Life that way, and that would pretty well define those in charge of religion as justification for capitalism in the world. We are here to care for the earth and each other. We are here to live in peace as we continue to learn and mature on the path to humankind and God on Earth.

Why do the religious believe what amounts to empirical and logical nonsense? Staying away from knowledge and embracing supernatural explanations allows them to remain children in human eyes, constantly bickering and fighting over who gets to play with what. Religious people are simply unable to find common ground within Abraham's divisive, vengeful religions. The reason for this outcome is that their religions allow them to avoid accountability because of their claims to infallibility. Their religions allow the religious to validate themselves in their own eyes while remaining blind to their self-righteous and selfish actions in the world.

The notion that the world ought become Jewish or Roman or Islamic or Hindu or Confucian is ludicrous, given a nascent global economy created by greed-driven corporate capitalism and given current global requests for democracy. The ancient cultural "isms" remain the only obstacles to the only viable human option, i.e., for the people of the world to choose a human rights-based global democracy.

To put it factually, the supernatural Abrahamic religions have everything backwards and upside down. The supernatural religions that have been divined and defined in the name of Abraham's god are no longer useful to the recognition of human potential and the realization of human destiny. They are, in fact, detrimental to these objectives, being designed to maintain fear, ignorance and prejudice in their justification of social despotism and rule by the rich and powerful.

Religion has served its evolutionary purpose on earth in unifying humankind from the tribal to the national to the global levels of organization via imperialism, colonialism and capitalism. Religion has served its purpose on earth in motivating the sciences to explain reality in terms of human knowledge applicable to all people, from inductive to deductive to reductive thought, from Socrates' descriptive (What) to Newton's mechanistic (How) to Einstein's systematic (Why) knowledge.

Accordingly, for the first time, religious prophecies of the end of times can be taken seriously and considered realistically on the global front. The notion that the religions of Abraham's god (Judaism, Romanism and Islamism) will come to a mutual peace of their own making is simply the height of folly after millennia of tit-for-tat tribal bloodletting and bloodshedding.

These three religions, infallible by self-declaration and self-delusion, will not die at the hands of scientific and natural philosophic knowledge. In that sense, religion has been dead for decades even as religious capitalism in America has achieved political dominion. These religions will die at their own hands. They will uniformly pursue their own ends until they have blindly achieved their own end of times, prophecy fulfilled. Amen.

The explanatory vacuum created by the rejection of religion and religious despotism from the global political arena will be filled with explanations from post-Einstein natural philosophy. Operationally, everything will be built upon human values and human knowledge and human rights.

The Post-Einstein World View

Post-Einstein natural philosophy is bottom-lined in the same intuitive axioms as are the oriental ethical systems. All is One. All is Interconnected. All is Consciousness. Natural philosophy adds one more axiom, i.e., All is Conceptual. It does so because creative thought is entirely conceptual and, when looking at life as a conceptual whole, the mind sees with only one eye.

Post-Einstein natural philosophy recognizes that there is only one earth, only one evolutionary program with clear direction, only one people, and only one God located on the inside of life. It recognizes that there is no external god, no external causation, that Life comes of itself, right here on earth. The living God is in the information beneath life on earth, material information beneath physical evolution, genomic information beneath biological evolution and ideological information (human knowledge) beneath cultural evolution.

Science has been going global at an exponential rate since Newton's deductive revolution, spurred on by the emergence of democracy and the Industrial Revolution. By now, thoughtful and caring people from China to Ukraine to Venezuela to Iran and all points beyond have let their voices be heard in the name of human rights and democracy. Uniformly, the greatest obstacles to peace on earth are the despotic socioeconomic systems inherent in the ancient cultural "isms". The stage is set for a global human revolution.

The values of post-Einstein natural philosophy are the dialectic human values that, in defining middle human ground, transcend eastern and western cultural values . In doing so, they provide the values and intellectual basis for a global Declaration of Human Rights, a Global Constitution and a direct Global Democracy based on fairness and equality in the eyes of God, that God being accurately defined by Jefferson as "the will of the people, substantially declared"

To use ancient terminology, we will have evolved from "Man in the image of God" to "God in the image of Man". Actually, in the human evolutionary program, we will have evolved from "Human in the image of God" to "God in the image of Human." Even Abraham could see the likeness. The larger human evolutionary program goes from God to God with all of life in between .

It is all a matter of faith, is it not?
Whether you have faith in the certainty of logic, the security of scientific evidence, or blind faith in whatever you chose to believe.
Our realities are very exclusive and what one sees as proof may give others a reason to be sceptical.
For instance, one may think themselves to be a "real vampire" because they are attracted to the mere sight of blood. To them, this proves that they are a true vampire and therefore other vampires must exist.
However, someone else may say that because said indivdual does not actually take part in a certain other activity that would qualify them to be a full-fledged vampire that this proves them to be a phony, therefore disproving the existance of vampires altogether.
(I am just using this as an example.)

So one person's evidence is another's seed of doubt.

Well, my Hee-Hawing friend.

I believe in the things I can see with my own eyes. When someone tells me on here that they can see Demons or Ghosts and such, I admit I want to tell them that they're full of shit.

Do I believe that Vampires exists? Not exactly. I believe that there is potential, yeah, but I don't really believe in their existence with faith. It is scientificially impossible for men and women to fly, not be able to cross running water, and etc.

Just like I'm 100% sure that every member of this website is, in fact, quite human.


I believe in what I see with my own eyes, what I can touch, taste, smell, and etc. I need evidence before I can put faith into anything, otherwise I either look for the more logical or scientific explanation.


So someone claims they need blood to survive. Sounds like you have a case of Porphyria. Someone tells me they can fly. Which airplane company do you use? Someone tells me they are demons and descended from Lilith. Which medications are you on?

Watching the forums I see a common practice of people claiming to have witnessed, or personally experienced (first person), so they are not "goinging it on faith", yet their apparent goal is for others to take them on faith.

So my question is..

What next? So lets say (IF) if a person says.. "Oh I guess you may be different after all." What then.. does the person making the claim get an upgrade from a silver star, to a gold star?

all I hear is people insist they are what ever, and then in venues.. complain about how people are so not getting it, as if it is so glaring ly obvious. Evert option to educate others is dodged..

I wonder why.. perhaps people what Logic to be even keel with faith, because they know how lacking faith is. I really sincerely doubt (with rare exception) that those who declare the most are genuine in their conviction.. it is all about the satisfation they get over "reasoning their ideals", and when they don't thats fine, they just mop about how they gotta stick together because it is "us" against "them" if thats faith.. Then keep it.

I look at things with logic and faith. Yes i am a Christian vampire. Ironic or whatever you wanna call it, but its true and i dont trust science.

i also use logic and faith
im a heathen vampire, and while i may follow different gods, i still do have my faith.


oddly perhaps since i also study physics, faith and logic sometimes do intersect
~W~

This thread has been automatically closed for length.