>tfw former edgelord fedora slowly drifting back to religion and spirituality
please tell me I'm not the only one
Fun fact: the more you read Buddhist trash, the more you are going to be convinced that it is your personal choice, but in reality, it is just your brain degenerating and beginning to see sense in vague ramblings. In reality, 'edgy teens' are by and large the most rational, most sober and incisive group of people.
>>26305621
people go from one high to the next. its common to give up the drug high for the religious high. but eventually that wont satisfy the emptiness inside, either.
learn to embrace the suck. it doesnt get any better, you just get used to it.
>>26305672
I don't read Buddhist books that often, I just like this pepe. Also your pseudo-psychology is dumb.
>'edgy teens' are by and large the most rational, most sober and incisive group of people.
sounds like a serious case of arrested development you got there
>its common to give up the drug high for the religious high
I didn't do drugs, and also was religious before being a fedorable atheist
>learn to embrace the suck
that's kind of the idea, I'm seeking to understand the suck. To say the suck is all there is is to accept defeat.
>>26305756
meant to quote >>26305701
original fucking post I swear to christ hiro
Just look at all the leading scientists in the world. Most of them are sane, high IQ people and don't hold any religious views.
Who do you trust more? High educated people, or some fucking illiterate buddhist monks?
>>26305756
>arrested development
Not really, just untainted brains. Teens have partly formed their intellects, and they haven't yet been poisoned with societal convictions and cliches such as 'you need to try to understand', 'there is value in letting go', 'I understood that everyone's point of view is equally valid', 'not everything has to be proven', 'don't get too lost in words', and other anti-intellectual tardation. Still naive, they're least likely to terminate discussion with those.
>>26305782
Being expert in a very specialised field of science doesn't lend one credence to be an authority on religious or philosophical views. In fact, their views on these subjects are entirely irrelevant.
I trust either to formulate things pertaining to their individual fields of knowledge, even if I don't necessarily agree with them.
Even fundamentally atheism always springs from philosophical grounds, not scientific ones. Earliest atheists had their views due to philosophical considerations, not those that stem from watching a YouTube video of some guy with scientific education dismissing creationism defended by some Christian Bible literalism, for example.
>>26305831
>societal convictions and cliches
>and other anti-intellectual tardation
you're projecting like an autistic madman, I haven't said any of these things.
It's the nature of teenagers to question authority and cliches, but it doesn't mean they're intelligent for doing so, especially since they usually can't provide solid warrants for their beliefs, it's usually just to be contrarian. Contrarianism after all is often misconstrued by the immature as intellect, it's why teens think they're smarter than everyone and talk back to teachers and parents.
>>26305897
>Being expert in a very specialised field of science doesn't lend one credence to be an authority on religious or philosophical views. In fact, their views on these subjects are entirely irrelevant.
Holy shit did you get that ass-backwards.
Only scientific views are relevant. 'Religion' and 'philosophy' are the cesspool collecting all the intellectual dregs that fail the falsifiability, relevance, application/utility, and other criteria of science. Philosophy is the catch-all, the wildcard, the asylum for all half-arsed notions everyone and their grandma's had.
I used to be such an edgelord when I was a teenager. Looking back on it, I'm disgusted. Browsed /b/ constantly, loved socially-acceptable punk music (Green Day), had a faux hawk and wore black clothes. I once came into school wearing a black Nike shirt and a red the because I thought it looked "cool". God I must have looked so retarded.
For some reason I've become the polar opposite of the person I was eight years ago. Now I'm conservative, I'm generally restrained when it comes to acting out, I dress like a regular person, I focus on school, I read books, and I've even been thinking about returning to my Christian heritage and going to church again because it might be nice to put some faith into a higher power.
Still don't have a gf though.
>>26305915
>I haven't said any of these things.
Leave 4chan and go back when you understand how imageboards work, newfaggot.
How discussion at large works, actually.
It doesn't matter what YOU said. What matters is that one makes use of opportunities to elucidate e.g. with a digression.
>>26305782
I don't think I'd trust a particle physicist to make me creme brulee if they haven't any experience in cooking.
One of the many dysfunctions in modern society is raising people like scientists to God-status, where their opinions on anything are seemingly automatically valid regardless if it's outside their discipline or they even have any experience with it.
Science is the new faith and the scientists and science speakers the new priestly caste. Just refer to the "I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE" facebook page to see what I'm talking about.
>>26305621
Have fun giving into "voluntary" poverty.
Enjoy your cu*k religion, hare faggot.
>>26305981
>Science is the new faith
...religious people have been saying since forever.
>>26305621
I wouldn't call it me being religious, but I pretty much accepted being agnostic. I used to be pretty edgy about religion, but now just don't give a shit.
>>26306013
>I used to be pretty edgy about religion
Correction: about monotheism. Bet you found Eastern crap 'perfectly rational'. Like everyone. Buddhism always getting a free pass.
>>26306011
>...religious people have been saying since forever.
It's partly because it's true, partly because they're salty that their precious religion is no longer the dominating worldview.
>>26305984
I don't intend to become poor
>>26305950
Science is literally an extension of philosophy. If you think that philosophy is overly sentimental musings made by people who had too much time on their hands, you are not particularly literate in the field of philosophy.
The nature of verifiability itself is very much unverifiable.
Anyways, I bet you'd love analytics.
>>26306042
>Buddhism always getting a free pass.
it's because it's mostly secular but still provides a religious practice. Ritual and whatnot provide stability and structure to ones life, religion is just one way of providing this. But I'd argue the western interpretation is pretty warped, most people view it as a philosophy which supports all of their hippy new age bullshit.
Yup, I became an atheist at 15, never as militant as some but still relatively edgy with my parents.
Now I legitimately believe there is more to the world than meets the eye. I don't believe in god and won't ever go to church or pray, but I believe in an afterlife of some sort.
>>26306098
>you are not particularly literate in the field of philosophy
I've been enough on plato.stanford to tell that 98% of shit called 'philosophy' had zero thought behind it.
>>26306112
>mostly secular
Tip: 'we're rational!' doesn't make a faith rational. Buddhism has never grown out of shit like I gave in >>26305831 at best (and schizophrenic rants about the nature of duality at worst) and never will.
Also.
>>26306098
>I bet you'd love analytics
I analyzed 4chan's (and CloudFlare's) HTTP cookies with respect to their domains and age with respect to possibility of poster tracking by Hiro a couple of days ago (and did it all by myself over the course of an hour or so because no other poster gave a fuck), but I know that's not what you meant.
>>26306157
So you dismissed a whole field without actually studying it first hand. That's like dismissing mathematics entirely because glancing over overly difficult mathematics didn't make any sense at first sight.
>>26306198
Analytic school of philosophy. Bertrand Russell, Wittgenstein etc.
>>26306241
>Bertrand Russell, Wittgenstein
Former a mathematician of sorts at least, latter an engineer I recall? Yes, that's promising.
>dismissing mathematics
Mathematics is symbolic, which is my rule of thumb whether something is worth reading. If a 'philosophical' piece uses no symbolic notation -- Greek letters, parentheses, fucking arrows -- into the trash because it's probably religious.
>>26306290
Well analytics actually like notation a lot. I'm not very well versed on Wittgenstein, but iirc, philosophy implies that all philosophical problems stem from semantics and what not.
Still, how can you notate problems pertaining to aesthetics and ethics? I mean, even you have some notions of aesthetics.
>>26306399
His philosophy*
>>26305950
Some philosophers' work seems obvious to you only because it's become so integrated in our society that you know it without even reading it. We've let it shape our entire modern worldview. And that just goes to show you the importance of philosophy, it changes our whole outlook on the question of what humanity is here to do. A question which shapes our entire existence.
>>26306399
>how can you notate problems pertaining to aesthetics and ethics?
What kind of question this even is?
Aesthetics and desires is just the simplest f(x) determining my steps in terms of non-existence of free will, in terms of how much I want to see/to do something. My own desires are particular to myself and to my exact situation, but essentially, human morality is not unlike physical forces. At any time, gravity is exerted upon every single physical body -- and similarly, desires/morality (desirability of a future choice) are exerted upon every single mind. Physics is notatable, and so is behaviour.
>>26306488
(Well, aesthetics and morality crosses the subject of evolution, but evolution, whether of living organisms or of ideas such as designs of objects, also easily notatable: a population A, a set of gene/meme carriers B, a set of evolutionary selectors C, or whatever.)
>>26305831
This anon is literally trying to tell us that teens are the most rational human beings.
>tfw rampant drug use
>tfw I witnessed more cruel and (literally) retarded tendencies during hs than at any other point in my life
>tfw this anon is undoubtedly and completely false in his argument.
>>26305621
Buddhism is edgy as hell. It builds off of the premise that life is crap and the path to spiritual enlightenment is to have as little consciousness as possible.
>>26306600
>the path to spiritual enlightenment is to have as little consciousness as possible
WHAAAAAAAAA HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT YOU MISUNDERSTOOD SO HARD LMAO BUDDHIST CONSCIOUSNESS IS THE TRUE REAL ULTIMATE VERITABLE CONSCIOUSNESS
>>26306600
>It builds off of the premise that life is crap and the path to spiritual enlightenment is to have as little consciousness as possible.
Holy fuck, you've never actually studied it have you?
>>26306623
haha lol dude you got me haha nice one
>eastern shit
>not becoming a catholic
Science with a proper analytical/experimental philosophy at the frontier is all you really need.
There are no boundaries(we are one with the universe) this is a factual statement buddhist happen to believe.
No free will, no conciousness really that is not just the result of factors and interactions mostly beyond our awareness.
To live well you need to practice ego destruction not because its religious but because it is useful and happens to be true. I find it easier to believe things that are backed by science than otherwise.
>>26306702
I haven't studied it but I have become familiarized with it from untainted sources. I didn't learn about it from some hippy slinging crystals
>>26306574
Then he continues to expound his thoughts to say that all we can confide in is that which is mathematically quantifiable. Truly the epitome of the patrician Autiste!
>>26306702
>you've never actually studied it have you?
Shut up, useful idiot.
Buddhism is a Rorschach test (nearly literally, knowing Buddhist 'teachers'' inclination for flashy gestural metaphors such as emptying cups of tea onto the floor). It's being kept intentionally vague so that leaders of the individual cults can point to an ambiguous piece of shitty scripture so to claim whatever would present them in the light needed at the moment (to a student caught in the cult: 'think less, be less critical, it's all about not thinking'; to an external scrutinizer: 'think more, Buddhism is all about thinking rationally, Buddhism embraces critical thought').
>>26306716
Catholicism failed to assess the criticism presented to it in an honest matter, but I haven't disregarded it.
>>26306749
>untainted sources
wat
>I didn't learn about it from some hippy slinging crystals
same
>>26306732
>(we are one with the universe) this is a factual statement
>>26306732
>ego destruction [...] happens to be true
Tip: your definitions of 'factual' and 'true' are trash.
That my body exerts a certain force and friction and tension and whatever upon the bed I'm sitting on is true and factual.
'Ego blah blah blah' is neither.
>>26305672
This. Buddhism is a load of trash. I think Buddhists are so much more obnoxious than "edgy teens."
>>26306783
>spergy ramblings
If you have a specific issue within the religion you want to talk about I could elaborate it for you.
>>26306140
Same man. I wouldn't say I believe in the afterlife, and I wouldn't even call myself spiritual. But I definitely think there's more to the world than the particles we're made of and the physical laws that govern their motion.
>>26306889
>If you have a specific issue within the religion you want to talk about I could elaborate it for you.
Some time that I saw this one.
You can't discuss with a religion. You can just contrast it with meaningful discussion, e.g. mathematical/logical/empirical/evolutionary/..., and trust that intelligent people will see the difference. Just like there is no way to convince a person out of a belief that there's a causation behind a correlation, there is no way to keep a brain from seeing relevance of claims that 'the ego doesn't exist' as if 'ego' were a meaningful term in the first place.
>>26306901
>I definitely think there's more to the world than the particles we're made of and the physical laws that govern their motion.
You two just believe in free will/spirit/soul/consciousness. That's nothing new. Just an artifact of a brain too self-important to accept the truth ('what? *I* can't be just dead matter!').
>>26306823
Pro-til: no sonny. True is not what you can empirically feel. True is an approximation of the the real model of nature. Truth is anchored by theory, experiment, explanatory power and predictivity. Thats it.
The most predictive, experimentslly proven and explanatory model we have is the standard model of particle physics and it absolutely obliterates any notion of fundamental boundaries between the self and the universe or any macro lever structure for that matter.
Ego destruction is the practice that is now not only useful as it were in the past but intellectually comfortable. Because it is not contradictory to science but merely our own perception of what is true
>>26306935
>'the ego doesn't exist
That's not true; see, this is what I mean. You should ask me things you take contention with if you want to have a discussion.
Being a vitriolic autismo isn't going to get you anywhere, friend.
>>26307009
Religious and unaware of it. How I wish that were new to me.
Tip in return, retard: your religiosity is the fact that you spend your time talking about unattainability of truth and not about empirical findings. (Of course, as I said numerous times, I am a religious person myself.)
Also seeing correspondence between physics and Buddhist rants about nonexistence of the self is schizophrenic, superfluous apophenia. All that particle physics says anything about is particles. Not the mind. Not the self. Not reality. Particles. End of fucking stury.
>>26305672
This
Edgelord who segued into Buddhism, is regretting it, and reemerging back into edgelord-dom here
You're just overriding your true self out of desperation, don't lie. People who push this shit are pathetic and disgusting, and watching people be eroded into drones by it is nothing short of tragic
>>26307037
>misunderstanding discussion on an imageboard thinking it's about addressing each other's claims
>being sarcastic
I would give the YouTube URL of a nice song for a new fallacy from Buddhist retards, but it's always the same couple.
>>26305672
>In reality, 'edgy teens' are by and large the most rational, most sober and incisive group of people.
don't forget most depressed and suicidal.
>>26307117
True, but consequences of a belief have no bearing on its accuracy. Even if, like the misconception has it, rejection of free will for instance made people depressed (which it doesn't), it would still be the accurate and moral acknowledgement.
orgingigngialai
>>26307114
>misunderstanding discussion on an imageboard thinking it's about addressing each other's claims
This is the only way to have a discussion of the kind.
>>26307141
fuck off randy bobandy, you dick
>>26307186
thank mr bok
:OO
>>26307158
No.
As I explained many times, the way to spot a newfag (or rather, a rare oldfag) is that the newfag thinks that it matters to correctly attribute/distribute claims made in a thread to particular people behind the Anonymous. In reality, in mature discussion this matters fuck all. We're all free to paraphrase the shit out of each other and address those paraphrases, and only new idiots complain 'what, no, I didn't say that, what I said is...' as if their identities mattered, and as if everybody didn't have every moot-given right to construct a 'strawman' out of each other's post and attack it. We can do this. We should do this. We should build 'strawmen' (a Buddhist's favourite insult BTW) as soon as they offer an opportunity to develop a meaningful digression.
You're welcome.
>>26307141
I'll pay you 100 dollars to fuck off.
>>26306488
Literally fucking autistic
>>26307088
empiricism is an outdated term and its just what philosophy teens grab on when they think they know anything about it. There is no correspondence between buddhism and physics just coincidence. Buddhism is just curiously correct about certain things while christianity is just wrong about most things. Any religion is equally false in the sense that all religions are failed systems for truth-findind.
Particle physics is not just about particles... Thats like saying that the science behind a combustion engine is about combustion engins alone as if they had no implication to what a car is.
I predict you are 16 years old and poorly read. Pro-pro-tip be more humble if you want to learn more
>>26307141
What are you saying exactly being faithless is the only way to live?
>>26307229
Ah, well then I commend you for your abhorrent shitposting.
>>26306796
there are actually many counter-reformation thinkers who adressed the problem very well
>>26305672
>In reality, 'edgy teens' are by and large the most rational, most sober and incisive group of people.
TOP FUCKING KEK
>>26307471
>yfw that shithead Henry VIII btfo'd Martin Luther and was called the defender of the faith
Fucker
The US could be Catholic now if he'd just stayed with his wife
>>26307418
what he says has no import because in his Universe, the faithful are a set of adaptations which lead to greater reproduction and thus will be propagated no matter.
It also means that some are predestined to be faithful and his blabbering is as impactful as shouting at a wall.
>>26307251
I need cash at the moment, so, sure, deal.
Let me get a temporary trip as I set up the Bitcoin wallet.
In lieu of objective identity verification, let me say that I am being referred to as 'the Anti-Buddha' here on /r9k/ and I boast a minor command of English which has more than once provoked a comment, which I try in this sentence to, overstated, recreate -- hopefully commonly recognizably.
Fucking computer died on me two times as I was writing this post.
>>26307670
>>26307251
All right:
1M4iccX7W9cSZTxXkrRPDEVmwj8PFH1LZ3
(This took some.)
Thank you.
>>26305621
I'm gonna post my story here
>used to be atheist/agnostic all of my life
>not one of those preachy atheist, but still atheist
>used to mock (never to their face) my cousin's family
>when they were little their mother converted to some weird form of christianity (I don't know the actual name)
>they stopped coming and playing on the weekends because they had to go do church activities
>they hated it at first but little by little they converted
>I always thought they were miserable
>fast forward
>I'm currently a wizard, no friends, no job, nothing going on
>cousins got qt 10/10 gfs (not even kidding they're smoking hot, fuck, I get angry every time I think about them), almost certainly virgin since that's what they believe in
>both are happily married with one kid each
>good job, lots of church friends
>I'm a lump of shit
>I wish my mom had converted instead of my aunt
I know deep in my heart I can't believe in those things, but sometimes I wish I had been indoctrinated or brainwashed, I really do.
>>26307471
Like who?
Also I wasn't just talking about Protestant critiques, I also meant more modern secularist critiques.
>>26307960
>I also meant more modern secularist critiques.
R O B E R T B A R R O N
O
B
E
R
T
B
A
R
R
O
N
>>26305621
Turn to Christ brother
He loves you
>>26307929
>I know deep in my heart I can't believe in those things
This is essentially where I am, I appreciate the ritual and allegory of religion, but I can't believe that Jesus literally died and rose again then ascended into heaven. I can't go to church because of this, just knowing I'm surrounded by literalists and being preached to by a literalist, it just feels like I don't fit in.
>>26307990
There are many other religions, you don't have to believe in Jesus (he is such a comfy concept though). With me, I think I can't believe in god for the same reason I don't want to try drugs. They're something that makes you loose control, and I don't want that. I want to cling to something, even when that something is actually nothing and has led me to nothing.
Maybe it's just autism.
Spiritual bump
>>26305621
I wish I could get spiritual again but after going full edgelord it's a bit hard to go back. I mean, the more you learn about science and the universe the less it seems to need a god or gods to create or run it.
>>26308476
I recognize there's other religions, but I almost feel this odd sense of duty to the church, just because it represents MY culture and MY people. I'll feel like a poseur adopting the religious traditions of another people, although I've contemplated it.
>>26309347
Are you white? European descent? How does practising a desert religion represent your culture?
I don't get how so many people, especially fucking white people can worship a brown desert god from a brown desert religion. You aren't being true to shit.
>>26309323
>I mean, the more you learn about science and the universe the less it seems to need a god or gods to create or run it.
understandable, which is why my idea of God changed from this personal, metaphysical sky man to a more abstract creative force that gives existence to the universe.
>>26309391
Yes I'm white, the church represents my culture because Christianity as I used to practice it (Roman Catholicism) is profoundly unique to the European peoples and is largely impacted by European cultural and ideological elements. I think what was preached by Jesus of Nazareth is more or less lost or deep, deep underground, practiced within the mysteries.
>>26309323
>I wish I could get spiritual again but after going full edgelord it's a bit hard to go back. I mean, the more you learn about science and the universe the less it seems to need a god or gods to create or run it.
But it isn't that, since there are lots of religious, scientific people. It's something else. I disagree however with
>the less it seems to need a god or gods to create or run it.
The more I've learned, the more... fucking crazy everything seems, it's almost a sane notion to believe that there is some invisible hand or plan behind it all.
>>26305621
Look into The Perennial Philosophy.
Also read The Passion of the Western Mind for a good overview of the past two millenia of Western religion/science.
>>26305672
>In reality, 'edgy teens' are by and large the most rational, most sober and incisive group of people.
Teens are not rational. WTF are you talking about?
>>26305782
Most of the well-known scientists of the past held religious views.
Besides, if the universe is just random shit, why think that humans can ever really know anything about it?
>>26305831
Teens don't have "untainted brains."
Have you ever seen the quotes they post on Instagram?
Nearly all their sayings are delusional.
>>26305950
Science used to be called natural philosophy.
Can you use science to justify scientism, the view that science is the only path to truth?
Besides, tons of scientists believe in theories that are not actually falsifiable, like abiogenesis being the origin of life on Earth. Or various theories related to the Standard Model of physics.
And you have your own perceptions before you ever heard of science. But what makes you think you can trust those perceptions? Even all science has to be interpreted by the human brain.
Besides, religious people have more children than scientists and atheists. You get caught up in the truth/falsity of religion, without observing the actual effect it has on human life.
>>26305621
Same, senpai
Just original my shit
yeah. I wasn't an edgelord of a fedora, but I've found myself going from "god doesn't exist" to watered down deism
>>26306290
>Mathematics is symbolic, which is my rule of thumb whether something is worth reading.
Why? Numbers are man-made symbols. Symbolic thought is a man-made invention.
To even suggest that there are "two" of a thing suggests that anything is truly identical and not superficially similar.
>>26306823
Your body exists in the universe, but you cannot separate your body from the universe.
The same laws of physics that gave rise to stars and planets, etc, are the same laws of physics inside your brain.
Have you ever consumed DMT? You have, since it's an endogenous psychoactive chemical naturally produced in the human brain, molecularly similar to melatonin.
But have you ever consumed DMT in extremely large doses?
The question of "who" are you, your identity, your ego, is very interesting.
The universe created your brain. So is it really your brain? Or the universe's? Does your brain belong to you?
>>26305621
>if I convince myself the thoughts of another person are mine, I don't feel pain
go fuck yourself
>>26309899
But you're saying you know more about the universe than they are! They're saying they don't know what the fuck is out there but you're saying you know it's god.
>all these anions doing these mental gymnastics just to convince themselves that agnosticism isn't the correct answer
We're like specs in the cosmos, there's no way we can really know what's really out there so who gives a shit? Find your own meaning in life instead of latching onto dogma for it.
>>26311138
I'm not the guy arguing with you but:
I have smoked DMT about 8-10 times
Trusting your hallucinations 100% is arrogant af
This life is temporary and should be treated as such
>>26311138
How do you hippies never realize that hallucinations are just that, hallucinations?
>>26305831
>'not everything has to be proven'
Well yeah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma
At a certain age you just learn to be more open minded to the world in general, at least most do. In the end, the meaning of life is your decision. Believe what makes you happy.
>my life was ruined when I believed a thing
>now I believe a different thing and it's better
What the hell? Atheist or Christian it doesn't matter fuck all, it's about what you do with your life, quietly held beliefs in the afterlife have 0 impact on the waking world.
>>26305831
Their brains are literally not done forming! Wouldn't that make them more susceptible to societal influences?
Everyone just needs to listen to some Alan Watts
>>26311506
>quietly held beliefs in the afterlife have 0 impact on the waking world
There's no reason to suppose that that's the case.
Beliefs that you hold are held in your subconscious when you're not thinking about them. The beliefs in your subconscious affect your daily life.
This is a foundational principle of psychology.
>>26305984
You tell yourself that while you horde jew currency and play right into their hands. kek
>>26311203
What if God is the universe? What's if it's the same thing?
And I'm not saying I know more about the universe than atheist scientists (or religious scientists).
But if there is no God, why should this universe make sense at all?
Religous people have faith in unseen things. But scientists also have faith that unseen things exist, that they will find what they're looking for, that questions have answers.
Both of them are digging, looking for something. But why think there's anything to be found?
>>26311303
Is trusting sober reality also arrogant? Why do you trust any of your perceptions, sober or not?
If there is no God, why should certain molecules exist in this universe that some people believe brings them closer to God?
And God could exist but life could still be temporary. The existence of God does not require an afterlife.
>>26311330
If you define a "hallucination" as an experience that nobody else has, wouldn't that also apply to your entire life?
Nobody who has ever lived has had the "life experience" you have. Your brain is a locked box.
Yet I bet you still trust your senses, you still trust your perceptions, you still trust your memories, you still trust your experiences, you still view your experiences as having some kind of value. You trust that you have not been deceived throughout sober waking reality.
Sure, someone could say "every drug only leads to hallucinations." But then how would you explain two different people, taking the same drug, and having a similar experience, or shared experience?
But even a hallucination, even that kind of experience, is still an experience, it's something people can experience, the experience was real. I mean, some of the thoughts someone has during the experience may not hold up later on, but still, in that moment, it's "as if", the experience is true.
And the question is, can someone ever have a "false" experience? Nobody else might agree with whatever narrative the person gives, but that's just a story after the fact. Stories can be false. Experiences are lived.
In a Godless universe, why should experiences even happen? The universe could have stayed dead for 13 billion years. Rocks smashing into each other. There's no reason for anything to make sense. Why should questions emerge from a dead universe?
>>26311286
>We're like specs in the cosmos
Specks with eyes.
>there's no way we can really know what's really out there so who gives a shit?
Well I do think it's a better use of time to search for intelligent life on Earth, instead of off Earth.
