Myths in the Making

[Ausmerican]

i·mag·i·na·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-mj-nshn)
n.

The formation of a mental image of something that is neither perceived as real nor present to the senses.
The mental image so formed.
The ability or tendency to form such images.
The ability to confront and deal with reality by using the creative power of the mind; resourcefulness: handled the problems with great imagination.
A traditional or widely held belief or opinion.
Archaic.
An unrealistic idea or notion; a fancy.
A plan or scheme.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i·magi·nation·al adj.
Synonyms: imagination, fancy, fantasy
These nouns refer to the power of the mind to form images, especially of what is not present to the senses. Imagination is the most broadly applicable: “In the world of words, the imagination is one of the forces of nature” (Wallace Stevens). Fancy especially suggests mental invention that is whimsical, capricious, or playful and that is characteristically well removed from reality: “All power of fancy over reason is a degree of insanity” (Samuel Johnson). Fantasy is applied principally to elaborate or extravagant fancy as a product of the imagination given free rein: “The poet is in command of his fantasy, while it is exactly the mark of the neurotic that he is possessed by his fantasy” (Lionel Trilling).

 

[Ausmerican]

A childs imagination tells him he is superman or batman, a teenagers imagination allows him to believe he's banging Britney Spears every night when he's alone in bed. An adults imagination is responsible for great works of fantasy and fiction and to blame for most of the woo an adult believes. And this is what you trust as a source of whats real?

 

[Pahansiri]

Then to whom am I speaking?

I have explained many times, are you not listening?

 

[Max560]

I'd have said it was a success, if what you intended was to distract from the fact that in the other thread your lack of logic was painting you into a corner.

It's a remarkable pattern: Start/hijack a thread, obfuscate/evade, get cut to ribbons, flee. Start/hijack a thread, .......

As far as getting anybody to accept what you say even grudgingly, there is one simple thing you could do. Provide evidence when you make claims. You have yet to do that in what, 2 years? [/B]

I find that watching Iacchus and his ilk operate is similar to watching that pivotal scene in The Matrix, where Neo meets Morpheus, who offers to show Neo what the Matrix is.

But instead of giving him the red pill, he just gives him a cinnamon tic tac, and nothing happens.

Also, there is less kicking.

 

[Ryokan]

I like pie. Do you like pie?

 

[Chaos Trigger]

You have the type that is denying their observations because of fundamentalism, the type that does not dare to think because of fundamentalism. That is where sciences bumps into religion.

You have the type that cedes some beliefs like the earth is flat or there is no evolution, as soon as they see that there are pictures of a globe, and the mutating AIDS virus in our present time. They still might have a belief, but it is on a retreat, because those people don't lie to themselves.

And if there might be another dimension where this all happens, again that's belief unless you have proof that it does exist, or that a possible other dimension doesn't contain God either. Then they suppose another dimension. It doesn't really matter if someone believes for his hopes of survival or continuity, it does matter if it imposes upon others and impedes development of civilization.

 

[Iacchus]

It's a remarkable pattern: Start/hijack a thread, obfuscate/evade, get cut to ribbons, flee. Start/hijack a thread, .......

I can see that we have another true believer here.

I find that watching Iacchus and his ilk operate is similar to watching that pivotal scene in The Matrix, where Neo meets Morpheus, who offers to show Neo what the Matrix is.

But instead of giving him the red pill, he just gives him a cinnamon tic tac, and nothing happens.

Also, there is less kicking.

Yeah, and it's too bad we're not just watching a movie. The movie is your life by the way which, is wholly fictional if there's nothing more to it than what we experience in this temporal fleeting world.

 

[Iacchus]

The formation of a mental image of something that is neither perceived as real nor present to the senses.

Well certainly this so-called life of yours cannot be perceived as real, nor present to the senses when you're dead. So does that mean you just believed it was real? Hey, you might as well get used to it, because you were never here ... Or, were you? You see in order for reality to be experienced as real, that quality must be maintained, and is not maintained by anything other than what we perceive through our minds. Call that your imagination if you will.

 

[Mercutio]

I can see that we have another true believer here.

Iacchus, I am certain that you could make Max560 retract that statement, simply by providing evidence that it is wrong. One need not be a "true believer" to recognise a pattern in your posting. People here are very good at examining evidence.

On the other hand, to create that pattern, it probably helps to be a "true believer".

You make yourself look foolish, Iacchus, when you accuse them of the things you yourself do.

 

[Mercutio]

Well certainly this so-called life of yours cannot be perceived as real, nor present to the senses when you're dead. So does that mean you just believed it was real?

No. Do you have any evidence that suggests your interpretation is correct? Why does the fact that one dies mean that one's life was not real? Please explain how you reach that conclusion.

Hey, you might as well get used to it, because you were never here ... Or, were you?

Again, this is quite a claim. Do you have any evidence to back this up?

You see in order for reality to be experienced as real, that quality must be maintained, and is not maintained by anything other than what we perceive through our minds. Call that your imagination if you will.

No. There is no reason to assume that something, in order to be real, must be maintained. Why do you make that assumption? What evidence do you base this belief on?

Will you provide these details? Will you answer questions as others have? Or will you paint yourself into another corner and then start yet another thread?

 

[Iacchus]

You have the type that is denying their observations because of fundamentalism, the type that does not dare to think because of fundamentalism. That is where sciences bumps into religion.

You have the type that cedes some beliefs like the earth is flat or there is no evolution, as soon as they see that there are pictures of a globe, and the mutating AIDS virus in our present time. They still might have a belief, but it is on a retreat, because those people don't lie to themselves.

Ah, but where is the physical reality without the mental reality to describe it? What is truth, without the mental image to coincide? What exactly are we interfacing with, if it wasn't already contained in our minds?

And if there might be another dimension where this all happens, again that's belief unless you have proof that it does exist, or that a possible other dimension doesn't contain God either. Then they suppose another dimension. It doesn't really matter if someone believes for his hopes of survival or continuity, it does matter if it imposes upon others and impedes development of civilization.

It all depends on whether you're interested in the truth or not too. If in fact this other dimension does exist, why would you bar yourself from knowing it?

 

[Iacchus]

You make yourself look foolish, Iacchus, when you accuse them of the things you yourself do.

He who laughs last, laughs the longest ...

 

[jmercer]

Ah, but where is the physical reality without the mental reality to describe it? What is truth, without the mental image to coincide? What exactly are we interfacing with, if it wasn't already contained in our minds?

Exactly backwards. You're trying stuff the universe (reality) into a dust mote (the human mind) Try this:

Modified by jmercer
Ah, but where is the mental reality without the physical reality to be perceived? What is a mental image, without the truth to coincide with it? What exactly would we be interfacing with, if our minds weren't already contained within a physical reality?

The answer is simple - a hallucination.

It all depends on whether you're interested in the truth or not too. If in fact this other dimension does exist, why would you bar yourself from knowing it?

"If in fact this other dimension does exist" is the crucial issue. There is no evidence that it does. Linking that phrase with "whether you're interested in the truth or not" is erroneous, because the first truth to be established is "Is there evidence or not?"

 

[Iacchus]

A childs imagination tells him he is superman or batman, a teenagers imagination allows him to believe he's banging Britney Spears every night when he's alone in bed. An adults imagination is responsible for great works of fantasy and fiction and to blame for most of the woo an adult believes. And this is what you trust as a source of whats real?

So, we all go through different stages of development. Does that make any of it less real? The only way it would seem real is if we had the imagination to back it up. The same goes for this puny little existence of ours, which only seems real, because there's nothing there to acknowledge it is real after all. Unless of course the experience of reality, which is all in our minds of course supersedes death.

 

[Mercutio]

He who laughs last, laughs the longest ...

I used to laugh at your posts. Until it occurred to me that you actually were serious. And were not 15 years old.

Now, would you care to address any of the substantive portions of my previous post? This post, in particular, challenged you to dispute Max560's recognition of a pattern in your posting style. Are you going to deny it?

 

[Mercutio]

So, we all go through different stages of development. Does that make any of it less real? The only way it would seem real is if we had the imagination to back it up. The same goes for this puny little existence of ours, which only seems real, because there's nothing there to acknowledge it is real after all. Unless of course the experience of reality, which is all in our minds of course supersedes death.

Strange...this is a re-assertion of exactly the same claim that was questioned above. With the exact same lack of any supporting logic or evidence. You need to learn some new tricks, Iacchus.

 

[Iacchus]

No. Do you have any evidence that suggests your interpretation is correct? Why does the fact that one dies mean that one's life was not real? Please explain how you reach that conclusion.

Do you believe that you're real? Then how can you not believe you were real when you die? Obviously you must not have been real, because there is nothing (allegedly) there to believe that it was ... Or, was there? Where was the record of this alleged reality -- of you -- kept? And if you refer to a dead corpse, then you refer to a reality which doesn't persist. Where did this animating force go?

Again, this is quite a claim. Do you have any evidence to back this up?

Why have people continued to make these claims for thousands of years? ... Because it's inherent with our nature?

No. There is no reason to assume that something, in order to be real, must be maintained. Why do you make that assumption? What evidence do you base this belief on?

Well then, what holds reality together? The same thing that holds our perception of it together perhaps?

Will you provide these details? Will you answer questions as others have? Or will you paint yourself into another corner and then start yet another thread?

I didn't start the "other thread" by the way, so I don't know what you mean by this? ... Unless of course you're referring to some of my other threads which, have been few and far between (as of late).

 

[Iacchus]

The answer is simple - a hallucination.

Welcome to your life!

"If in fact this other dimension does exist" is the crucial issue. There is no evidence that it does. Linking that phrase with "whether you're interested in the truth or not" is erroneous, because the first truth to be established is "Is there evidence or not?"

No, the evidence is not to be found within your belief system.

 

[Iacchus]

I used to laugh at your posts. Until it occurred to me that you actually were serious. And were not 15 years old.

What is there to take seriously, in a reality that doesn't persist? At least for those who are incapable of believing that they were ever here ...

Now, would you care to address any of the substantive portions of my previous post? This post, in particular, challenged you to dispute Max560's recognition of a pattern in your posting style. Are you going to deny it?

The answer to that is quite easy. Max560 is subject to the beliefs of Max560.

 

[Pahansiri]

Hello Iacchus, have you found something that is 'self" yet?