Absolute Reality

[Starman]

Intelligence gives us the predisposition to question and even believe; can we say what a worm or snail believes; I think not but worms and snails, perceived as so-called lower creatures to humankind, do react to stimuli.

What is this thing which we call “intelligence” and from intelligence we acquire knowledge, or a curiosity to know. That we have something which we call DNA, and DNA contains predisposed knowledge, or the building blocks of an organism, and all organisms are closely related in DNA, gives some indication of an absolute truth, in my opinion.

That we have the ability to know, or even believe we know, is in and of itself rather amazing. Many say that it is due to the human central nervous system that we have the capacity to know, unlike other species here on earth. But the dolphin has an innate unique intelligence which human beings seem to lack, as does other creatures. Humans have a very limited perspective of intelligence.

GreenSlate, I hear what you are saying; atheism is not a monolith like most people perceive it to be. Strictly speaking “atheism” means without a thesis, translated as a disbelief in God by many, but lots of atheists do have a life thesis, or philosophy of life, and that life thesis is not based on science for all atheists. You have referenced Jesus which many might say is antithetical to atheism. But as I have said atheism is not a monolithic perspective.

Originally Posted by lemex

There can no such things as ultimate truths, agreed.

Not really! Although "ultimate" infers a limit and I tend to believe that there is no limit.

Thank you all for a thoughtful discussion.

[happy soul]

All is God, love, and perfection. That is ultimate reality imo.

Everything is happening perfectly, exactly as it should, and lack of love and 'attack' are only illusions.

It may seem absurd, but the divine plan is for us to FULLY experience life. God wants us to experience love and all that it is in all possible ways. All possibilities exist, so we can experience all good things.

Originally Posted by lemex

I wanted to mention something I found interesting and something that happened, there are cases of confirmed experience. I don't know if there is a maxim of survival of an existence after death but I have seen (knowledge) a maxim of other existence with and in life, though we are not part of it. None of us are. I just had a thought about that as we have always for 12,000 years called what others have seen paranormal or supernatural, when it just might be as normal as we are, life not life forms. In it's own self as ordinary and common as we are. There is more, reality we obviously don't (can't) see though which much be included on the scale of what reality is. I know we have always treated our form as always superior when it is merely life.

The proof of Life maxim came from my mediumship development classes, we were always told that we should provide people with proof that their Loved Ones had survived past death - or at least their perceptions of it.

Perhaps Spirituality has it completely wrong - even dangerously wrong. Today it seems that there is Spirituality, there is the mundane and never the twain shall meet. 'Back then' Spirituality was very different, it was as much a part of their everyday Lives as sitting on the toilet and it was naturally a part of them. Perhaps there was no such label as Spirituality nor religion. It meant enough to them that they'd take time away from survival to build stone circles and pyramids. What most seem to do is look through the lens of Spirituality and seem reluctant to do anything else. Einstein said that science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind, I guess he was also talking about Spirituality.

Originally Posted by lemex

As far as codify, this may not be true. The thing is I don't have to codify that which we call the paranormal. One who has never had an experience cannot know the experience of it even though it may be part of reality. Some things are really difficult to imagine but like any potential may exist. I think there might be more then one type of life. I think without realizing it much of what we think is what we have been told which equates to belief we hold on to.

Inherently in the mature of mankind there's the need to understand at the mind level. Perhaps you don't have to codify it but it is the 'norm' if you like, while some people, (you and me included) don't feel the need. What beliefs we hold onto and the reasons for them being there, well that's a Journey into the depths of the human psyche. Nasseem Harramein (a 'Spiritual scientist') said that it's easier to describe a block hole than it is to describe how a human comes to a decision. Puts a whole new slant on 'mundane', doesn't it? "This ain't Kansas any more, Dorothy."

Originally Posted by lemex

Again, this is interacting of alternate things we classify existing with life. Maybe this is where the idea of the after life came from. life we do not see normally but some have and will continue to see occasionally. That which we see sometimes are mistakenly linked with death and after life.

We all have a Soul, connection to the Divine... pick another definition because there's plenty of them. We've always had it, we've always had the need to explore or express it, understand it. What we sometimes do is make connections, again it's human nature. We try and connect to each other to find something in common - a belief or a favourite bar. We try and link to or connect to that 'unseen realm' but what we're really trying to find is something inside ourselves. While one might think a Loved One sending butterflies as messages is mistaken, there is a chain of inherent consciousness that goes far above the facile. Butterflies are symbols, and what they mean is the path of connection.

Originally Posted by Starman

GreenSlate, I hear what you are saying; atheism is not a monolith like most people perceive it to be. Strictly speaking “atheism” means without a thesis, translated as a disbelief in God by many, but lots of atheists do have a life thesis, or philosophy of life, and that life thesis is not based on science for all atheists. You have referenced Jesus which many might say is antithetical to atheism. But as I have said atheism is not a monolithic perspective.

It boils down to definition and labels, I choose not to define too tightly nor label. If I had to tick a box it would be the atheist one.

Originally Posted by Starman

Not really! Although "ultimate" infers a limit and I tend to believe that there is no limit.

Absolute is relative to relative, absolutely everything is relative. Or something./quote]

[Starman]

I was trying to find out what is the opposite of "absolute" and I could not find anything unless
I put a qualifier on absolute; like absolute zero or some other value, but absolute as a word
standing alone has no opposite.

Yet "relative" does have an opposite or at least it means in-relationship to something or other.
However we would not know absolute unless we knew relative, or vice versa, although they are
not opposites, they are not dueling concepts.

Absolute is all encompassing, and includes relative, but relative is limited. From The Kybalion;
"Everything is dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike
are the same." But in my opinion "absolute is singular and stands alone.

[Melahin]

I find that there is this imaginable place the mind can't fully grasp, so everything becomes very abstract... and whatever it is it has all these amazing qualities to it that one can participate with... unless one wants to struggle with the minds inability to fully grasp it(self)

Yes and No.
Ultimate reality to me would be the silent, static, unmovable energy from which all expression goes forth and multiplies itself. That energy is incapable of reflecting on itself and therefore isn't real..

[Starman]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

Yes and No.
Ultimate reality to me would be the silent, static, unmovable energy from which all expression goes forth and multiplies itself. That energy is incapable of reflecting on itself and therefore isn't real..

I love what you have said here and it does resonate with me but I also think that you may
be saying that ultimate reality is not real because it can not reflect on itself.

I have always thought of permanence as a standard for "reality," and impermanence as illusive and unreal.
My cosmic paradigm views all of creation as an illusive impermanent reflection, an illusion, and sees the one static,
silent, unmovable energy, which you refer to as the only reality.

But I do realize that we all have our way of looking at this and there is no right or wrong view.
Thank you for your sharing.

Originally Posted by Starman

I love what you have said here and it does resonate with me but I also think that you may
be saying that ultimate reality is not real because it can not reflect on itself.

That is exactly what I said..

With Love
Eelco

[Starman]

Originally Posted by Melahin

I find that there is this imaginable place the mind can't fully grasp, so everything becomes very abstract... and whatever it is it has all these amazing qualities to it that one can participate with... unless one wants to struggle with the minds inability to fully grasp it(self)

Thank you for sharing. It is my belief that everything is relevant; indeed, as co-creators we create in many realms, or worlds, simultaneously. What we think, or dream, does not only take place in our head, but manifests in another realm which we humans call "mental." That realm is visited by us every-time we think, dream, imagine, etc., and we may even dwell in the realm of thoughts and dreams upon our physical human death; in my opinion thoughts are things which in another realm are just as real as physical things are here on earth. Again, just my opinion.

Peace