Author Topic: Delete  (Read 10690 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

February 01, 2014, 09:16:07 PM
Read 10690 times

Rayn

  • Settling In

  • Offline
  • *

  • 42
  • Karma:
    -19
    • View Profile
*******************************Deleted******************************************************8
« Last Edit: October 09, 2017, 10:48:25 AM by Rayn »

February 01, 2014, 11:01:36 PM
Reply #1

Mind_Bender

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1135
  • Karma:
    89
  • Personal Text
    Deus ex Machina
    • View Profile
It all depends on what you believe and your spiritual practices. A lot of paths I've looked into believe that emotions come from spiritual beings, or a great spiritual source, yet these beings' emotions are abstract compared to our human understanding. Spiritual beings have deeper emotions. From a pagan perspective, weather is emotion from a God/dess. Zeus is happy, the skies are clear. Zeus is upset we have a storm. Aphrodite is happy, the seas are calm.  Aphrodite is upset, the seas are harsh and dangerously unwelcoming.

From the perspective of certain Yoga schools, particularly those that worship Shakti as Divine Mother or Vishnu as Supreme Godhead, Love is a gift, or nectar, from the Divine. Without the Divine we can never trully know love as our understanding is finite, where Divine Love is boundless and eternal, thus beyond basic human comprehension. That's why we're taught to breathe deep into the abdomen and make decisions from the heart not the brain. The brain is noisy, the heart is silent. Of course, that's a theist viewpoint based on conviction, devotion, and grace.
"Spirit is in a state of grace forever.
Your reality is only spirit.
Therefore you are in a state of grace forever."

"As relfections of the Source, we are little gods."

"...part of me doesn't want to believe that auto-eroticism while crushing on a doodle (sigil) could manifest a check in the mail box, but hey, it did."

"Everybody laughs the same language."

February 02, 2014, 11:41:41 AM
Reply #2

Constructman

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 305
  • Karma:
    9
  • Personal Text
    Nothing to read here
    • View Profile
Something has been puzzling me. The reason what we physically possess emotions has to do with the fact that these emotional responses evolved as they did within a social species. Physical evolution would not happen within non-physical beings, so there would be no need for emotions since thereby be nothing to facilitate such a thing, so are emotions wholly caused by the brain? Does love as we know it really exists beyond our brain? Would beings that never had a physical body experience love?

From a purely materialist stance, emotions are wholly caused by the brain, so in that case, love doesn't really exist outside of our body. It would make sense that our emotional responses evolved as they did in the environment we were in.

(The below is purely conjecture)

If we were to account for a soul or an etheric body, however, it could be a possibility that the soul evolved concurrently or because of changes in the body. As humans evolved and their bodies changed, the nature of the human soul may have changed with their bodies.

As for non-physical entities, I personally have no idea. Other people's descriptions of them hint that they do possess emotions of some sort (hence all the warnings of not to anger the spirit one evoked). It could be that they do have a body to experience emotions in (albeit a purely etheric one) their body is of a different nature than ours.

Again though, the above is purely conjecture. I'm not in a position to say for sure, or perhaps at all.

February 02, 2014, 03:02:59 PM
Reply #3

Mars

  • A Familiar Feature

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 229
  • Karma:
    7
  • Personal Text
    Radonis
    • View Profile
Or rather our bodies evolved as such because of our soul's influence.

Just because there are chemicals firing when we experience love and hate in our brain, doesn't mean thats what always causes them, though I believe sometimes the brain does control it or influences it. It could just mean that they are side effects of whats happening on a more spiritual / subtle level.
Experience: that most brutal of teachers. But you learn, my God do you learn. -CS Lewis
Cultivation to the mind is as necessary as food to the body. - Marcus T Cicero

February 02, 2014, 03:47:19 PM
Reply #4

Mind_Bender

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1135
  • Karma:
    89
  • Personal Text
    Deus ex Machina
    • View Profile
Stepping aside from the spiritual idea, I don't see emotions, love in particular, as evolutionary but innate. Peter Kropotkin in his book 'Mutual Aid' gived a good example; you have neighbors. You may or may not know each other very well - you may not even say 'hello' on a regular basis if at all. Years go by with little to no interaction, but one day when you are out of town a burglar haphazedly tries to break in. Most likely your neighbor will call police on your behalf. He calls it 'nature vs nurture,' and claims that it is our nature to nurture when our survival is on the line.

Just look at the animal kingdom. The lion is fierce and unforgiving in battle when it comes to territory, but why? He has a lioness and cubs to protect. The wolf is another prime example, yet they also show compassion and understanding. They bury their kill like leftovers for a latter time. When another predator happens upon the supply the alpha attacks and kills the intruder, but when an animal or prey comes upon the supply the wolf simply observes and lets the prey take the free meal. If we didn't naturally have love I doubt we as humans would have made it this far in a our evolution. Maybe love grows and emotions deepen as we evolve, but I think they were always there from the beginning of homo erectus to modern homo sapiens.
"Spirit is in a state of grace forever.
Your reality is only spirit.
Therefore you are in a state of grace forever."

"As relfections of the Source, we are little gods."

"...part of me doesn't want to believe that auto-eroticism while crushing on a doodle (sigil) could manifest a check in the mail box, but hey, it did."

"Everybody laughs the same language."

February 02, 2014, 07:25:58 PM
Reply #5

Constructman

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 305
  • Karma:
    9
  • Personal Text
    Nothing to read here
    • View Profile
Stepping aside from the spiritual idea, I don't see emotions, love in particular, as evolutionary but innate. Peter Kropotkin in his book 'Mutual Aid' gived a good example; you have neighbors. You may or may not know each other very well - you may not even say 'hello' on a regular basis if at all. Years go by with little to no interaction, but one day when you are out of town a burglar haphazedly tries to break in. Most likely your neighbor will call police on your behalf. He calls it 'nature vs nurture,' and claims that it is our nature to nurture when our survival is on the line.

Just look at the animal kingdom. The lion is fierce and unforgiving in battle when it comes to territory, but why? He has a lioness and cubs to protect. The wolf is another prime example, yet they also show compassion and understanding. They bury their kill like leftovers for a latter time. When another predator happens upon the supply the alpha attacks and kills the intruder, but when an animal or prey comes upon the supply the wolf simply observes and lets the prey take the free meal. If we didn't naturally have love I doubt we as humans would have made it this far in a our evolution. Maybe love grows and emotions deepen as we evolve, but I think they were always there from the beginning of homo erectus to modern homo sapiens.

Well perhaps, that does make sense. However the nature of said love may have changed over time, or new types of love developed, even with the old one remaining. I mean, there is a difference between "Mama bear", "True Companions", and "OMGIWUVU4EVAR". All of them could be classified as love, but they are different types and of different complexities.

February 02, 2014, 11:20:10 PM
Reply #6

Mind_Bender

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1135
  • Karma:
    89
  • Personal Text
    Deus ex Machina
    • View Profile
Rocks and minerals not feeling love, from an analytical viewpoint, is irrelevent because they are not a species or sub-species of the animal kingdom, scientifically, they are inanimate objects, not animate and conscious like humans and other animals. Rocks, minerals, protozoa, and insects lack a brain, so maybe love does stem from the brain, since humans and animals do have such a machine in their heads. On the other hand, I never kill flies or insects that roam in my house and always gently plac them outside and talk kindly to them and have noticed there are nowhere near as many spiders in my house nor spider bites as there used to be. They are either feeling the love I emit for them or respect my privacy, either way, they stay outside or hidden from my view.

According to Buddhists and Native American spirituality the more we react lovingly toward the Earth and her creatures the more love and affection they show us. I've noticed this for myself. If they react to love that means it is inherent in them. Plants also feel, or at least react, to love and kind positive vibrations like classical music and being talked to like a loved sentient being. The same goes for water. In that case, love doesn't stem from the brain but is inherent in all life yet love is, as I stated in my first post, beyond human comprehension in its truest form. Even when it comes to rocks and minerals, if you pay close enough attention they will tell you a story that will guide you toward higher realizations for the Earth and your own spiritual evolution because they are from the same Great Spirit; at least according to Buddhist mysticism and Shamanism. And it is feasible because predators protecting their own is an act of primal love, which is survival, and it is not an opinion, but an observable fact, much like how lobsters only stay with one mate throughout their lives. Love is everywhere in the natural world if you open your heart to it.
"Spirit is in a state of grace forever.
Your reality is only spirit.
Therefore you are in a state of grace forever."

"As relfections of the Source, we are little gods."

"...part of me doesn't want to believe that auto-eroticism while crushing on a doodle (sigil) could manifest a check in the mail box, but hey, it did."

"Everybody laughs the same language."

February 03, 2014, 11:42:13 AM
Reply #7

Mars

  • A Familiar Feature

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 229
  • Karma:
    7
  • Personal Text
    Radonis
    • View Profile

That is not very feasible in that evolution happens per an interaction among organisms and their environments, so the way our bodies evolved would be due to environmental pressure. While it is feasible to think that a soul plays a role in manipulation of the brain, it is not feasible to state that souls are responsible for evolution in that there is not enough evidence to support that. Not only that, anesthesia demonstrates that it is possible to disrupt consciousness in the brain where it is possible for someone to have experiences beyond their brain; however, the capability to have experiences within the brain is disrupted which means that "chemicals" play a causal role in that sense. If you inhibit neural pathways, the person's brain will not still have an emotion in that you have inhibited that which causes it within the brain though a person can have a sense of consciousness beyond their brain.

Why is that so unfeasible ? Our souls may have been capable of micro-pk and manipulating the environment we were to come around in, which in turn controlled the external environments of our evolution. Maybe it was all predestined. Maybe we are only in human beings because we are the only animals on earth that have the mental capacity to hold our souls.
Experience: that most brutal of teachers. But you learn, my God do you learn. -CS Lewis
Cultivation to the mind is as necessary as food to the body. - Marcus T Cicero

February 03, 2014, 02:32:26 PM
Reply #8

Constructman

  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 305
  • Karma:
    9
  • Personal Text
    Nothing to read here
    • View Profile

That is not very feasible in that evolution happens per an interaction among organisms and their environments, so the way our bodies evolved would be due to environmental pressure. While it is feasible to think that a soul plays a role in manipulation of the brain, it is not feasible to state that souls are responsible for evolution in that there is not enough evidence to support that. Not only that, anesthesia demonstrates that it is possible to disrupt consciousness in the brain where it is possible for someone to have experiences beyond their brain; however, the capability to have experiences within the brain is disrupted which means that "chemicals" play a causal role in that sense. If you inhibit neural pathways, the person's brain will not still have an emotion in that you have inhibited that which causes it within the brain though a person can have a sense of consciousness beyond their brain.

Why is that so unfeasible ? Our souls may have been capable of micro-pk and manipulating the environment we were to come around in, which in turn controlled the external environments of our evolution. Maybe it was all predestined. Maybe we are only in human beings because we are the only animals on earth that have the mental capacity to hold our souls.

So you're saying that the souls of humans before they were humans were able to influence the genetic mutations and external conditions of humans to such a precise degree that we are able to have this debate right now? While they might be able to do that, they would have to know how evolution worked to do so in order to prevent a big screw up.

It would seem that the inverse-soul changes to fit the container-makes more sense though, especially if you believe that people can reincarnate as animals or as spirits. It presupposes less.

February 03, 2014, 04:25:45 PM
Reply #9

Mars

  • A Familiar Feature

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 229
  • Karma:
    7
  • Personal Text
    Radonis
    • View Profile

That is not very feasible in that evolution happens per an interaction among organisms and their environments, so the way our bodies evolved would be due to environmental pressure. While it is feasible to think that a soul plays a role in manipulation of the brain, it is not feasible to state that souls are responsible for evolution in that there is not enough evidence to support that. Not only that, anesthesia demonstrates that it is possible to disrupt consciousness in the brain where it is possible for someone to have experiences beyond their brain; however, the capability to have experiences within the brain is disrupted which means that "chemicals" play a causal role in that sense. If you inhibit neural pathways, the person's brain will not still have an emotion in that you have inhibited that which causes it within the brain though a person can have a sense of consciousness beyond their brain.

Why is that so unfeasible ? Our souls may have been capable of micro-pk and manipulating the environment we were to come around in, which in turn controlled the external environments of our evolution. Maybe it was all predestined. Maybe we are only in human beings because we are the only animals on earth that have the mental capacity to hold our souls.

So you're saying that the souls of humans before they were humans were able to influence the genetic mutations and external conditions of humans to such a precise degree that we are able to have this debate right now? While they might be able to do that, they would have to know how evolution worked to do so in order to prevent a big screw up.

It would seem that the inverse-soul changes to fit the container-makes more sense though, especially if you believe that people can reincarnate as animals or as spirits. It presupposes less.

I know I'm just throwing round speculation, but I was talking about the soul as a collective macrocosm, that required vessels for itself. But I did mention the inverse of this argument that we are only here because humans evolved to the point being capable to hold our souls.
Experience: that most brutal of teachers. But you learn, my God do you learn. -CS Lewis
Cultivation to the mind is as necessary as food to the body. - Marcus T Cicero

February 03, 2014, 05:52:36 PM
Reply #10

Major Hermann

  • Settling In

  • Offline
  • *

  • 44
  • Karma:
    -11
    • View Profile
The universe. Omnipresences.....sees you.....everything you do for everyone....watching your every move.....out of pure alll blissfulll love.....
Everything you are you did it through the Source....because everyone has its own personal relationship with Her......all we need is to keep silent and be aware....llet the energy flow through you.....this is love....live.....stars....jupitar and mars

February 03, 2014, 11:41:57 PM
Reply #11

Mind_Bender

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1135
  • Karma:
    89
  • Personal Text
    Deus ex Machina
    • View Profile
I see it as the physical being evolves to meet with the vibration of the soul. The soul is us in our highest and best non-physical self, thus beyond human conceptions and ideals. Saying the soul evolves to fit our human bodies and understanding makes the soul less than a spiritual force and more of a mechanical force, like the brain and human genome, which wouldn't make sense if we believe metaphysical ability stems from the soul. If metaphysical ability stems from the soul yet evolves to fit it's 'container,' from psychokinesis to unconditional loving kindness, than our physical aspect should be able to perform the same abilities and the soul would not need to exist. If the soul is less and needs to evolve we can discard it since all its potential is already within the human brain and genome.

We do not reincarnate as animals or plants but are the evolved aspect of those past experiences of ourselves. Unless we come from a Druid perception then we will incarnate into the next life as the Oak, the physical representation of spiritual fortitude and wisdom or if we stem from shaman beliefs we will reincarnate as an animal since they are the links between us and the Great Spirit, making Oak and Animal higher vibrational beings than humans. This is to say intelligence and progress do not make us more evolved as many humans believe, but our connection to Mother Earth, Father Sky, and Grandfather Time.
"Spirit is in a state of grace forever.
Your reality is only spirit.
Therefore you are in a state of grace forever."

"As relfections of the Source, we are little gods."

"...part of me doesn't want to believe that auto-eroticism while crushing on a doodle (sigil) could manifest a check in the mail box, but hey, it did."

"Everybody laughs the same language."

February 16, 2014, 08:39:17 AM
Reply #12

Messiaen

  • Settling In

  • Offline
  • *

  • 21
  • Karma:
    -2
    • View Profile
Something has been puzzling me. The reason what we physically possess emotions has to do with the fact that these emotional responses evolved as they did within a social species. Physical evolution would not happen within non-physical beings, so there would be no need for emotions since thereby be nothing to facilitate such a thing, so are emotions wholly caused by the brain? Does love as we know it really exists beyond our brain? Would beings that never had a physical body experience love?

This are always the same questions, which can, unfortunately, not really be answered. It depends on your philosophy of your world. Everyone may be right, or everyone may be wrong. So, I.

I personally say, "Yes" on non-physicality. But I can't prove it to you with any interesting facts. It's simply out of my experience. I may be hallucinating and it's actually all physical at the end, but I don't care. I live in the here and now and that's what I always experience, just right now. So, it's still standing for me that emotions are non-physical and generally I believe on non-physical stuff. But this doesn't mean, that a non-physical influence is not being "converted" into a physical effect. I remember it like this: Non-physical beings/things have to act physically and have to adhere to the physical laws, or else they can't exist physically and have to exist on their very own plane with their very own rules.

Greetings,
Messiaen.

February 17, 2014, 06:40:15 AM
Reply #13

EllyEve

  • A Familiar Feature

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 121
  • Karma:
    16
    • View Profile
I don't consider the physical and metaphysical in terms of "sphere of cause/effect" anymore. They're more like two notes in harmony, but on different frequencies. (I mean, that's a duh if you're into music theory. But I mean, as a concept, instead of drawing a line and putting the material and spiritual at contrary or contradicting points...they're the same thing in different aspects.)

February 18, 2014, 05:24:38 PM
Reply #14

kobok

  • Tech Team
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Veritas Council

  • 4985
  • Karma:
    171
  • Personal Text
    Veritas Council
    • View Profile
Something has been puzzling me. The reason what we physically possess emotions has to do with the fact that these emotional responses evolved as they did within a social species. Physical evolution would not happen within non-physical beings, so there would be no need for emotions since thereby be nothing to facilitate such a thing, so are emotions wholly caused by the brain?

The range and patterns of emotions we are accustomed to do indeed have a physical evolutionary origin.  So how do we have this sort of response non-physically as well?  The answer is that the soul developed based on long succession of experiences attached to the physical brain, and thus it has essentially "learned" these reactions and states of mind.  So while they originated via physical evolutionary methods, one can no longer say that they are "wholly caused by the brain" because the soul can also assert and re-experience the emotional states it has learned.

Does love as we know it really exists beyond our brain? Would beings that never had a physical body experience love?

Now this is a more complicated question.  There are emotional aspects which are frequently called "love", including attachment, affection, and even infatuation.  But true love as I would define it is a more transcendent experience which goes beyond any and all physical emotions.  I would instead state that love does not really exist in the brain at all.  Only echoes of love do.
Latest article:  Construct Dynamics

Want to learn psi?  Check out our collection of psi articles.