Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Hellbent

Members
  • Content count

    5604
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Hellbent

  • Rank
    Forum Bellend

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Single Status Update

See all updates by Hellbent

  1. playing video games in blue jeans





    and wondering what life's for.
    in one of those moods... you know... what's it all for?
    early in the morning there'll be a brief, but intense meteor shower.
    If I stay up to watch it, I'll wonder what's it for?
    I can't see that all this science isn't watering down the experience.
    What's experience for if it's all just stardust to chemicals?
    Destiny is calling but I don't speak its language; long lost in the seas of legend.

    Why do legends have far more resonance than science will ever have?
    They say it's back to the dark ages. I say it's high time to get back in touch.



    What's the point of these powerful stories that resonate so strongly if there's no truth to them?

    1. Show previous comments  14 more
    2. Alfonzo

      Alfonzo

      Fully recognising the ornate (rather good!) though suspiciously lampooning poetry of your post, I hope you don't think that my drilling on your points does in any way suggest that that's what the post was for - staging an argument. I will respond as though it were, however, because I seek stimulant and fisticuffs. Treat it as though I am talking to a wall to better my own arguments.

      Haha, no, not that wall, silly!

      Hellbent said:

      in one of those moods... you know... what's it all for?
      early in the morning there'll be a brief, but intense meteor shower.
      If I stay up to watch it, I'll wonder what's it for?

      Oh you pattern seeking mammal, you! Many medieval persons believed that lobsters' shells were designed in order to test the ability of he who wants the meat. It was a reasonable attempt at trying to explain the unknown then, just like religion was in general before we founded better explanations, but it has like so many other things been rendered obsolete. Your meteor shower has an explination, of course, and Occam does away with all the trimmings, so let's not try and ascribe purpose to something where a designer is not proven. You'll land yourself in the rather unfortunate boat of having to explain 'why' to just about everything, from flash floods in Hampshire to deep space electrical storms well beyond our current observation, and if you're a deist (which I think you are, correct me if need be) attempting to hold down this belief that everything is purposed (designed), then either a) well, you can't be, because much of these events intervene with human affairs, or b) only some of these events are purposed - all the ones that do not take part in our every day lives - in which case such a discussion is not in any way critical, and god must be really, really shy or brooding or something. Why create all these wondrous occurrences in order for none of it to ever be noticed or have any impact on anything save for self amusement? That's its purpose?

      If you're a theist, then sure you can ascribe purpose to everything and everything. I won't stop you unless you found a cult and try to shape my children. You're almost certainly wrong to think so, yes, but it's also an insane view and there's not much point in trying to converse with someone using logic when logic was abandoned at the very first base.

      I can't see that all this science isn't watering down the experience.What's experience for if it's all just stardust to chemicals?

      The truth is more powerful and more beautiful than any argument that simply puts it all down to an infallible and criminally uninteresting deity or fairy tale. Such crafts are created by man. The nature of the universe is leagues beyond our current comprehension and so revelations there will always, pretty much unfailingly, be more inspirational and wondrous than anything mustered by the minds of homosapiens. There's your experience.

      Do not make the mistake of thinking that an understanding of science does in any way dumb one's sense of the transcendent and numinous. It simply falls shy of attributing it all to the supernatural. Literature and music offers so much in this department that you'd need a thousand lifetimes just to appreciate the thoughts and sensations and yes, experiences, that they have to offer. If there's anything that can be agreed upon then surely it is that science does not reject these spheres. Or are you prepared to suggest that everything which occurred to these great thinkers and composers was granted by a divine power, and then ask for what purpose it was realised?

      It takes a lot to make me cry, but that would be too weep-worthy.

      Why do legends have far more resonance than science will ever have?

      Not sure they do, really. Legends and myths survive in the present day because they are stories. Very interesting stories that are there to be told and passed on by everyone but the protagonist because the protagonist is dead. I suppose you mean the unknown, though, in which case it's just because people enjoy speculating over things that have yet to be proven or explained.

      Pattern seeking. People will sooner accept a conspiracy theory over no theory at all.

      They say it's back to the dark ages.
      I say it's high time to get back in touch.

      Yes! let's swathe ourselves once more in the bawling infancy of understanding. We were making such great progress, but lets all heap it back into the fires from which it sparked and watch as billions of fear stricken individuals choke on the fumes of general ignorance and offer their services to the blood god.

      It's high time we abolished this nonsense.

      What's the point of these powerful stories that resonate so strongly if there's no truth to them?

      Experience. History (in context). Entertainment! Stories like these are unconcerned with matters of truth.

      Science has a tendency to 'make an argument against' "superstitious" thought. It makes a case that we don't need to have these wild and random ideas of supernatural stuff when we can explain phenomena using scientific method etc.

      Well, no tendency there: that's precisely what it does do. Any theory that is able to be proven or disproved is welcome in the realm of science, of course, and if evidence arose for the existence of Baal or any other deity I would quite readily accept the possiblity or take it fully on board.

      It's hard for me to live in a world where the supernatural doesn't exist because we have a more sober and sound explanation in science for phenomena. I have a feeling or sense that there is more to the world than meets the eye and it's very difficult for me to say that there is no higher power or purpose and that all there is to know is what we see and observe in the physical world.

      Your adrenaline glands are too big, you prefrontal lobe too small. You have opposable thumbs!

      Again, the transcendent and the numinous does not have to entail the supernatural.

      ---------------------------

      A lymeric:

      There once was a man from Bel Air,
      Who was doing his wife on the stair.
      When the banister broke, He doubled his stroke,
      And finished her off in mid-air!

    3. DuckReconMajor

      DuckReconMajor

      Hellbent said:

      Plato's The Cave allegory resonates with me and I'd like to think there is some truth to it. If you're not familiar with the allegory and its meaning, I encourage you to look it up.

      The Allegory of the Cave goes against what you are trying to say. People are trapped in a 'cave' of misunderstanding, studying the shapes of spirits and ghosts. People throughout the ages have gotten up from this life of illusion and gone outside to find out what really makes life what it is. For example, instead of believing the shadows to be living creatures, he is allowed to get up and see and learn about fire which creates them.

      You see, the cave isn't a place for people who are afraid to believe in something for which there is no evidence. It's a place for people who choose to believe in supernatural explanations and ignoring the evidence. They are the ones who never get to see things as they really are. The man who got up is the one who looked around, studied, and learned. The ones who just 'believe' are the ones content to sit and stare at shadows.

      st.alfonzo said:

      A lymeric:

      There once was a man from Bel Air,
      Who was doing his wife on the stair.
      When the banister broke, He doubled his stroke,
      And finished her off in mid-air!

      lol I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read this.

    4. Hellbent

      Hellbent

      Hellbent said:

      Why do legends have far more resonance than science will ever have?

      What I meant was that for me personally this is the case. Specifically Whale Rider and Lord of the Rings.

      I could ask another question: why are some people attracted to a more logic-based science rules approach for experiencing the world and others to an 'art and poetry' rule for experiencing the world? I'll never forget what my English teacher said once. He was saying how pointless and bland scientific explanations are--how uninteresting science is from the point of view of a field of study for the enrichment of self and that literature, art, and poetry are so much more stimulating and meaningful. I had no judgment of his point of view. What struck me about it was that it made it so clear how there really are two very different kinds of minds; those ruled by the sobriety of science and are only interested in contemplating what is provable or at least testable, with no interest in extra-occam-possibilities, and those in the experience and phenomena they feel is valid and outside the realm of science to explain. To be fair, I've just muddled the appreciation of art with spiritual leanings--I actually have no idea what my English professor's spiritual leanings were. He very well may be an athiest.

      I think the other reason why I feel the need to express the fundamental problem of having this strictly science is all you need, there is no meaning, purpose or point to life outside the scientific explanation point of view (which roughly goes like this: for some reason the Universe came into being and abstraction organized into sentient beings... the need for meaning and pattern seeking 'evolved' for the sole and only purpose of survival!) aside for the ludicrousness, and unlikeliness, of this being true, it is such an unsatisfying explanation given the day to day experience by the average (and by far vast majority) of people on Earth. So you have this extreme minority (and thus elite, since they are right and the rest of us are suffering from a necessary madness that has arisen from giving into the spirit in our genes) and then you have people like me going through life trying to reconcile the implications of scientific progress and my yearnings for purpose.

      St. Alfonzo said:

      Again, the transcendent and the numinous does not have to entail the supernatural.

      As Carl Sagan (and Jodie Foster and Bob Zemeckis) made so abundantly clear.

×