Is the water live?

Fyxe wrote: I do know. but that does not mean I can tell you what is wrong. you have to figure that out for yourself in order to grow from it.

Thank you, I guess.

Erinis wrote: Please guys can you end it up? Your word´s gunfight leads nowhere
and causing lot of useless drama and emotional suffering within temple.

If you have something to topic, share it with us.
Otherwise you can continue with personal message conversation.

What are you finding dramtic or or emotionally suffering? Its a simple conversation that is civil and I think quite on topic given the unusual nature of the question?

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote: NOPE, wrong on all counts.

Believe is not a choice or a tool. You cant choose what to believe in. it just happens

Yes you can, I do it all the time...so who is 'wrong'?

You are. What you are describing is faith not belief.

How would you know? Feel free to clarify your understanding and how that applies to me!

Because it's a fact that belief is not a choice. Either you are convinced of something or you are not convinced of it. That is belief. The other, faith, is choosing to follow a doctrine based on nothing more than desire. This is even different than worldview, which is also belief, something you have no choice in.

Why can't you change something your convinced of? That's the benefit of honesty and commitment.... discovery and positive growth vs defensiveness and stagnation.

I dont believe I EVER said beliefs dont or wont or cant change. I have only ever said that you have no choice in believing a thing or not believing a thing at any point in time. It's a matter of being convinced or not convinced. That is all.

You seem to believe that belief is forced upon by circumstance only... otherwise its a faith? I think faith is the type of trust associated with belief and don't make the same semantic distinction as you... because I've not found any difference in the quantity or quality of results possible from forced or created alterations in these things. Worldview most definitely can change by circumstance, but also be design, by choice... perhaps your different perspective is to the degree of control and placement of 'authority' to/over it, in the process. Same with belief... its believed while its a belief but once no longer believed is no longer a belief and does not require faith.. ie changed, ie can be used as a tool.

Belief IS forced on you! thats what Im trying to say! faith is not though. Belief is the state of being convinced of something. faith is the choice of acceptance of something that you may or may not be convinced of and does not require proof.

Ill show you an example. Do you believe in God or not? There is absolutely no proof that a God exists and yet we can have faith that one does based on a desire to accept or other such internal processes. However belief there is no choice. for example do you believe that tigers exist in this world? There is tons of evidence they do exist. you can see them on TV or in the zoo and they are in books and sometimes in the news. people can tell you accounts of their existence as well. All this is evidence that convinces you tigers exist. Now I shall ask you, can you just stop believing they exist? And I dont mean just tell my you dont believe the exist but really just stop believing they exist?

As I suspected, for you it's more about the placement of authority (and subsequently the level of control over it) in something like its existence... for me I can deploy the same levels of faith and belief or lack of. I can easily stop believing tigers exist... but it doesn't make them disappear. As a result I can use these things as tools for effect. As you say on page 1 of this thread "Water is alive if the experience of water is that it lives. Experience not society rules. Water lives!" or have you retreated back across the divide to objective reality all of a sudden?

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote:

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote: NOPE, wrong on all counts.

Believe is not a choice or a tool. You cant choose what to believe in. it just happens

Yes you can, I do it all the time...so who is 'wrong'?

You are. What you are describing is faith not belief.

How would you know? Feel free to clarify your understanding and how that applies to me!

Because it's a fact that belief is not a choice. Either you are convinced of something or you are not convinced of it. That is belief. The other, faith, is choosing to follow a doctrine based on nothing more than desire. This is even different than worldview, which is also belief, something you have no choice in.

Why can't you change something your convinced of? That's the benefit of honesty and commitment.... discovery and positive growth vs defensiveness and stagnation.

I dont believe I EVER said beliefs dont or wont or cant change. I have only ever said that you have no choice in believing a thing or not believing a thing at any point in time. It's a matter of being convinced or not convinced. That is all.

You seem to believe that belief is forced upon by circumstance only... otherwise its a faith? I think faith is the type of trust associated with belief and don't make the same semantic distinction as you... because I've not found any difference in the quantity or quality of results possible from forced or created alterations in these things. Worldview most definitely can change by circumstance, but also be design, by choice... perhaps your different perspective is to the degree of control and placement of 'authority' to/over it, in the process. Same with belief... its believed while its a belief but once no longer believed is no longer a belief and does not require faith.. ie changed, ie can be used as a tool.

Belief IS forced on you! thats what Im trying to say! faith is not though. Belief is the state of being convinced of something. faith is the choice of acceptance of something that you may or may not be convinced of and does not require proof.

Ill show you an example. Do you believe in God or not? There is absolutely no proof that a God exists and yet we can have faith that one does based on a desire to accept or other such internal processes. However belief there is no choice. for example do you believe that tigers exist in this world? There is tons of evidence they do exist. you can see them on TV or in the zoo and they are in books and sometimes in the news. people can tell you accounts of their existence as well. All this is evidence that convinces you tigers exist. Now I shall ask you, can you just stop believing they exist? And I dont mean just tell my you dont believe the exist but really just stop believing they exist?

As I suspected, for you it's more about the placement of authority (and subsequently the level of control over it) in something like its existence... for me I can deploy the same levels of faith and belief or lack of. I can easily stop believing tigers exist... but it doesn't make them disappear. As a result I can use these things as tools for effect. As you say on page 1 of this thread "Water is alive if the experience of water is that it lives. Experience not society rules. Water lives!" or have you retreated back across the divide to objective reality all of a sudden?

What? you dont make any sense? what is this authority thing your talking about? there is no authority control over wheter a tiger exists or not? that is experience of evidence thats all. and I dont believe you for a second that you can just stop believing in tigers. your just being disingenuous now and if you cant carry the conversation in an honest manner I see no reason to contineuy.

Fyxe wrote: what is this authority thing your talking about? there is no authority control over wheter a tiger exists or not?

You answered your own question. The fact you cannot control that a Tiger exists means you have no authority over its existence. See you'd already done the work, just need to trust yourself, drop the defensive shields and get into the actual game.
Understanding what others mean requires you to leave your own point of view for a moment. Exercising that flexability might be the same mechanism needed to alter faith and even belief (by your definitions no less).

Fyxe wrote: that is experience of evidence thats all. and I dont believe you for a second that you can just stop believing in tigers.

Where do you draw the line for evidence, objective reality? That is what I meant by retreating to it to defend your view. You had been promoting subjective reality quite a bit hadn't you.... and I agree to a certain extent. Why should I believe my eyes and the eyes of others, what if my belief is of a different type of reality. That water is alive perhaps hehe. All these things speak to engineering real belief. just because you don't believe something doesn't mean it's impossible for someone else to believe it or not believe it, so why not about belief itself.

Adder wrote:

Fyxe wrote: what is this authority thing your talking about? there is no authority control over wheter a tiger exists or not?

You answered your own question. The fact you cannot control that a Tiger exists means you have no authority over its existence. See you'd already done the work, just need to trust yourself, drop the defensive shields and get into the actual game.
Understanding what others mean requires you to leave your own point of view for a moment. Exercising that flexability might be the same mechanism needed to alter faith and even belief (by your definitions no less).

Fyxe wrote: that is experience of evidence thats all. and I dont believe you for a second that you can just stop believing in tigers.

Where do you draw the line for evidence, objective reality? That is what I meant by retreating to it to defend your view. You had been promoting subjective reality quite a bit hadn't you.... and I agree to a certain extent. Why should I believe my eyes and the eyes of others, what if my belief is of a different type of reality. That water is alive perhaps hehe. All these things speak to engineering real belief. just because you don't believe something doesn't mean it's impossible for someone else to believe it or not believe it, so why not about belief itself.

I never said I had control over a tiger existing? why would I have authority over its existing? I didnt create it, someone or something else might have but not me. I have left that, Im telling you that other realities can exist where water could be alove. every thought we have goes somewhere, even the seemingly crazy ones. they go to absolute reality which is a place we cant naturally get to without ascension.

I retreated nowhere? objective reality is that which is tangeable. subjective reality is that which is not. absolute is that which houses all. lack of ability to accept that a tiger exists objectively when you can see it, smell it, touch it and interact with it would be a problem. If you cant accept objective reality that we live in you would be considered insane.

but you have gotten way off track of the conversation we were having by throughing all this other stuff into it. I have never said that beliefs dont change or can be modified. I said that belief is a binary state. its either on or off for any specific thing and you dont have the ability to just flip that switch unless your physically broken. see a tiger, believe a tiger exists - no choice but to believe. get told the story of God, make the choice to believe he exists - that is the choice of faith.

Fyxe wrote: I retreated nowhere? objective reality is that which is tangeable. subjective reality is that which is not.

So heat is subjective reality then? EM radiation is subjective? Actually, anything comprised of bosons, let's face it. Arguably most non-baryonic matter except the electron, too. Not tangible. So by your definition - subjective.

Gisteron wrote:

Fyxe wrote: I retreated nowhere? objective reality is that which is tangeable. subjective reality is that which is not.

So heat is subjective reality then? EM radiation is subjective? Actually, anything comprised of bosons, let's face it. Arguably most non-baryonic matter except the electron, too. Not tangible. So by your definition - subjective.

Can you put your hand on a hot stove and get a burn? can you show that burn to others? can others put their hand close to the hot stove and feel warmth? does the grate there turn to the color of red? If you put a piece of plastic on the hot stove and it melts and smells bad can you see and smell that reaction. YES. heat is tangeable energy.

The stove is tangible. The heat is not. Smelling is not touching. Sensing heat is also not the same as touching. Tangible literally means touchable. Heat is not tangible.

Gisteron wrote: The stove is tangible. The heat is not.

wrong. Look up the definition of tangeable. It says perceptible by touch. Can you perceive heat by touch, yes, therefore its tangeable.