A bit of seasonal philosophy for you.
:love: :love: :love:
Sex without love is unsatisfying? Not in my book, it is damn good fun.
"Love is a grave mental disease."
Plato?
Why do I love?
* Three main neurotransmitters; adrenaline, dopamine and serotonin.
* Sex hormones testosterone and oestrogen – (in both men and women.)
* Pheromones
* Axe products (shower gels, aftershaves, and colognes, skin care, shampoo, and hair styling products.)
:grin:
For those of you who don't know what Axe is:
According to the Urban Dictionary: axe: "A wicked mad smelling man perfume that in small amounts makes girls melt but in large amounts makes them die a thousand horrible deaths."
Quote from: Crow on February 11, 2016, 06:35:33 PM
Sex without love is unsatisfying? Not in my book, it is damn good fun.
Yes, there is a passage about that in The Gray Tome as well.
Quote from: Magdalena on February 11, 2016, 10:49:59 PM
Why do I love?
* Three main neurotransmitters; adrenaline, dopamine and serotonin.
* Sex hormones testosterone and oestrogen – (in both men and women.)
* Pheromones
* Axe products (shower gels, aftershaves, and colognes, skin care, shampoo, and hair styling products.)
:grin:
Also, some millions of years of evolution. That's the why behind your whys. 8)
Asmo, why does He love? :tellmemore:
Oh, wait, He doesn't, does He? :-\
Despite being the product of millions of years of supposedly mindless, directionless evolution, romantic love is truly an amazing phenomenon. Human relationships are really difficult, and the fact that there is this emotional glue that binds two people together, often for life, is nothing short of remarkable. Carry on.
Quote from: Magdalena on February 12, 2016, 02:35:10 PM
Asmo, why does He love? :tellmemore:
Oh, wait, He doesn't, does He? :-\
No, He does not. That's a bit depressing, really.
Quote from: Asmodean on February 14, 2016, 10:58:35 AM
Quote from: Magdalena on February 12, 2016, 02:35:10 PM
Asmo, why does He love? :tellmemore:
Oh, wait, He doesn't, does He? :-\
No, He does not. That's a bit depressing, really.
No, it isn't. :hug:
If not loving makes you happy and gives you peace...then there's nothing depressing about it.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sherv.net%2Fcm%2Femo%2Fkiss%2Fvalentine-kiss-smiley-emoticon.gif&hash=bce5fea029301cb5840a33649a820e21e3f2c703)
Quite the opposite of what I was talking about.
How's this for a line?
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xtp1/v/t1.0-9/12745456_1320344457986562_9070139978007046364_n.jpg?oh=80e65ddb9b8d91d8152b67303a3f5320&oe=575CFE48&__gda__=1465851758_abcfbf80b84c30973cdb7ddc6b7aaeb9)
:bigspecs:
I always thought love was 49% biology, 49% anthropocentric conceit, 3% statistics.
Zen
Every person is of two sets of characteristics. Love and caring on one side, and hate and contempt on the other. These characteristics are given or set in being by the nature of life. Love is the greatest on it's side, and hate is the greatest on it's side. The characteristics is what (depending on how they are used) creates one's personality, or, personalities. They are relationship quantities that all have and are mental life.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on February 13, 2016, 05:15:07 PM
Despite being the product of millions of years of supposedly mindless, directionless evolution, romantic love is truly an amazing phenomenon. Human relationships are really difficult, and the fact that there is this emotional glue that binds two people together, often for life, is nothing short of remarkable. Carry on.
But isn't that mostly a cultural thing? And fairly current in human history?
Quote from: Old Seer on September 08, 2016, 04:23:10 PM
Every person is of two sets of characteristics. Love and caring on one side, and hate and contempt on the other. These characteristics are given or set in being by the nature of life. Love is the greatest on it's side, and hate is the greatest on it's side. The characteristics is what (depending on how they are used) creates one's personality, or, personalities. They are relationship quantities that all have and are mental life.
Hello again, Old Seer. :wave hi:
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on September 09, 2016, 12:05:56 AM
Quote from: Old Seer on September 08, 2016, 04:23:10 PM
Every person is of two sets of characteristics. Love and caring on one side, and hate and contempt on the other. These characteristics are given or set in being by the nature of life. Love is the greatest on it's side, and hate is the greatest on it's side. The characteristics is what (depending on how they are used) creates one's personality, or, personalities. They are relationship quantities that all have and are mental life.
Hello again, Old Seer. :wave hi:
Greetings xSilverPhinx. Just came by to let off a bit of positive knowledge so you dumbasses can get a clue to---Wait---I didn't say that, the devil is hangin around again, I see most are still here. Glad to see everyone is still up and at'em. :)
Smurf!
Old Smurf always reminded me of A Beautiful Mind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film)).
Welcome back, mate. Still, peddling those schizophrenic fantasies, I see!
Russell Crowe is an absolutely awful actor. He is horrible.
Quote from: No one on September 13, 2016, 01:31:27 AM
Russell Crowe is an absolutely awful actor. He is horrible.
There are worse actors. I absolutely loathe Hugh Grant.
Quote from: Siz on September 13, 2016, 12:03:20 AM
Smurf!
Old Smurf always reminded me of A Beautiful Mind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film)).
Welcome back, mate. Still, peddling those schizophrenic fantasies, I see!
Nope, don't peddle nuttin. If I was a schizophrenic there's 3 Psycho Smurfs in our group(actually I don't think we've ever been a group)that would inform me of such. :) What particularly do you thunk is a fantasy of mine.
Quote from: Old Seer on September 14, 2016, 03:57:57 AM
Quote from: Siz on September 13, 2016, 12:03:20 AM
Smurf!
Old Smurf always reminded me of A Beautiful Mind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film)).
Welcome back, mate. Still, peddling those schizophrenic fantasies, I see!
Nope, don't peddle nuttin. If I was a schizophrenic there's 3 Psycho Smurfs in our group(actually I don't think we've ever been a group)that would inform me of such. :) What particularly do you thunk is a fantasy of mine.
Oh, I dunno... maybe the bit about a collective of high-minded thinkers spread far and wide who call themselves Smurfs, who have rediscovered the REAL secret of human existence through Bible study, and who aren't sure whether the world is ready to hear it. And you can't explain it anyway because it takes years of study to comprehend. Yeah, maybe that.
Late in the thread but I will offer:
QuoteLove:
A temporary insanity curable by marriage or by removal of the patient from the influences under which he incurred the didorder. [...] It is sometimes fatal, but more frequently to the physician than to the patient.
Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary", first published 1906 as "The Cynic's Word Book"
Quote from: Siz on September 20, 2016, 01:12:18 AM
Quote from: Old Seer on September 14, 2016, 03:57:57 AM
Quote from: Siz on September 13, 2016, 12:03:20 AM
Smurf!
Old Smurf always reminded me of A Beautiful Mind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film)).
Welcome back, mate. Still, peddling those schizophrenic fantasies, I see!
Nope, don't peddle nuttin. If I was a schizophrenic there's 3 Psycho Smurfs in our group(actually I don't think we've ever been a group)that would inform me of such. :) What particularly do you thunk is a fantasy of mine.
Oh, I dunno... maybe the bit about a collective of high-minded thinkers spread far and wide who call themselves Smurfs, who have rediscovered the REAL secret of human existence through Bible study, and who aren't sure whether the world is ready to hear it. And you can't explain it anyway because it takes years of study to comprehend. Yeah, maybe that.
Weeeell. It won't take several years for most, but it depends upon how well a thinker one is. Some see things faster then others. But, if you don't have any confidence in our thinking and knowledge, it can take time because---weeell it's knowledge of a particular state of mind that people aren't used to, so it may take time for one to see the general concept. If it took us eight years or more we suspect it will take others a bit of time also.
It took us that long because of communication methods, but it wouldn't take one that long presently because we already have it in tow. We present the information for the analysis of others and leave it to them to find true or false. BUT, if one doesn't look and study then, how can one say it's of no value. We can't prove we're right by empirical evidence as all evidence is mental. I advise giving it time because we know it will take some time. It's a mode of thinking/being that one isn't used to, so it will take time for it to absorb.
If you don't believe us that Ok with us, But how can you know unless you look. One cannot logically say we're wrong unless they look because other then that it has to be an assumption. So, if we're wrong tell us on what.
If you haven't looked as yet, Start here. https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers
I haven't been there for a while myself and got to wondering if anything is new. Don't worry, if it's right you'll know over a bit of time. It seems to add itself together. :)
BTW, there are now 2 interpretations of the book. Our,s and theirs. You are familiar with theirs. Our,s tell us something different. :)
Quote from: Old Seer on September 21, 2016, 12:40:28 AM
Quote from: Siz on September 20, 2016, 01:12:18 AM
Quote from: Old Seer on September 14, 2016, 03:57:57 AM
Quote from: Siz on September 13, 2016, 12:03:20 AM
Smurf!
Old Smurf always reminded me of A Beautiful Mind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film)).
Welcome back, mate. Still, peddling those schizophrenic fantasies, I see!
Nope, don't peddle nuttin. If I was a schizophrenic there's 3 Psycho Smurfs in our group(actually I don't think we've ever been a group)that would inform me of such. :) What particularly do you thunk is a fantasy of mine.
Oh, I dunno... maybe the bit about a collective of high-minded thinkers spread far and wide who call themselves Smurfs, who have rediscovered the REAL secret of human existence through Bible study, and who aren't sure whether the world is ready to hear it. And you can't explain it anyway because it takes years of study to comprehend. Yeah, maybe that.
Weeeell. It won't take several years for most, but it depends upon how well a thinker one is. Some see things faster then others. But, if you don't have any confidence in our thinking and knowledge, it can take time because---weeell it's knowledge of a particular state of mind that people aren't used to, so it may take time for one to see the general concept. If it took us eight years or more we suspect it will take others a bit of time also.
It took us that long because of communication methods, but it wouldn't take one that long presently because we already have it in tow. We present the information for the analysis of others and leave it to them to find true or false. BUT, if one doesn't look and study then, how can one say it's of no value. We can't prove we're right by empirical evidence as all evidence is mental. I advise giving it time because we know it will take some time. It's a mode of thinking/being that one isn't used to, so it will take time for it to absorb.
If you don't believe us that Ok with us, But how can you know unless you look. One cannot logically say we're wrong unless they look because other then that it has to be an assumption. So, if we're wrong tell us on what.
If you haven't looked as yet, Start here. https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers
I haven't been there for a while myself and got to wondering if anything is new. Don't worry, if it's right you'll know over a bit of time. It seems to add itself together. :)
BTW, there are now 2 interpretations of the book. Our,s and theirs. You are familiar with theirs. Our,s tell us something different. :)
Only 2?
Why would I choose to invest in
your interpretation, with its arsenal of arbitrary redefinitions and leaps of reason, over that of any one of a worldful of self-described seers? Is it because only yours is correct?
666 or 616? Presumably, without our carnal mind the human race wouldn't exist, no?!
Quote from: Siz on September 21, 2016, 02:54:36 AM
Quote from: Old Seer on September 21, 2016, 12:40:28 AM
Quote from: Siz on September 20, 2016, 01:12:18 AM
Quote from: Old Seer on September 14, 2016, 03:57:57 AM
Quote from: Siz on September 13, 2016, 12:03:20 AM
Smurf!
Old Smurf always reminded me of A Beautiful Mind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film)).
Welcome back, mate. Still, peddling those schizophrenic fantasies, I see!
Nope, don't peddle nuttin. If I was a schizophrenic there's 3 Psycho Smurfs in our group(actually I don't think we've ever been a group)that would inform me of such. :) What particularly do you thunk is a fantasy of mine.
Oh, I dunno... maybe the bit about a collective of high-minded thinkers spread far and wide who call themselves Smurfs, who have rediscovered the REAL secret of human existence through Bible study, and who aren't sure whether the world is ready to hear it. And you can't explain it anyway because it takes years of study to comprehend. Yeah, maybe that.
Weeeell. It won't take several years for most, but it depends upon how well a thinker one is. Some see things faster then others. But, if you don't have any confidence in our thinking and knowledge, it can take time because---weeell it's knowledge of a particular state of mind that people aren't used to, so it may take time for one to see the general concept. If it took us eight years or more we suspect it will take others a bit of time also.
It took us that long because of communication methods, but it wouldn't take one that long presently because we already have it in tow. We present the information for the analysis of others and leave it to them to find true or false. BUT, if one doesn't look and study then, how can one say it's of no value. We can't prove we're right by empirical evidence as all evidence is mental. I advise giving it time because we know it will take some time. It's a mode of thinking/being that one isn't used to, so it will take time for it to absorb.
If you don't believe us that Ok with us, But how can you know unless you look. One cannot logically say we're wrong unless they look because other then that it has to be an assumption. So, if we're wrong tell us on what.
If you haven't looked as yet, Start here. https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers
I haven't been there for a while myself and got to wondering if anything is new. Don't worry, if it's right you'll know over a bit of time. It seems to add itself together. :)
BTW, there are now 2 interpretations of the book. Our,s and theirs. You are familiar with theirs. Our,s tell us something different. :)
Only 2?
Why would I choose to invest in your interpretation, with its arsenal of arbitrary redefinitions and leaps of reason, over that of any one of a worldful of self-described seers? Is it because only yours is correct?
666 or 616? Presumably, without our carnal mind the human race wouldn't exist, no?!
Well, I see you looked. OK. Yes, only 2. One is based on what you are used to. The other is not. The one you are used to has different interpretations but remain within the carnal mind. The other, is our's, based on the spiritual mind.
Here;s the difference. Their interpretation has Creation as the making of the material universe, and this of course has many interpretations. Our,s is based on creation being of spiritual nature, IOW, the making of a person. These amount to 2 different stories. From the study of the Psycho Smurfs this is about psychiatry, which according to them, each person is a psychological fact, or also, a set of psychological facts. Thats creation, the telling of a specific state of mind found by a people existing before the the book was written.
There can be by certain individuals, different interpretations made from the spiritual one also, but not as yet because no on at this time that we know of has made any attempt. Spiritual and mind are the same to us and just different words meaning person. I being a physicist and also one other encountered the observation---there are only 2 things that exist in the universe, one of course is material, and the other is the mental. That's all. The book as anything else, can only be interpreted from these two items. That's to say, the basis of anything or any interpretation has to deal with either one of these, but only one of them. . Thus then, this gave the Psycho Smurfs quite a bit more to go on.
If I'm talking about a material thing I can only refer to it in a material reference. If I'm talking about a mental thing I cannot refer ti it in a mental reference and not material because mental isn't material, it is thought. Thought isn't considered material at least from what is known. ( that can be debatable of course but hard to prove, but not necessary has to be proven.)
So, there is only these two things that we deal with in life. If it's mental we deal with people, would that not be correct. This then is our basis for understanding the book, which brings about a different story altogether. If Biblical creation is mental---then that's a very different book then people know about, and has very different conclusions. If you go back to the website you'll see how we interpret creation.
From this interpretation we find that there were floks a long time ago who knew something we didn't know today. We are saying that we know what they knew, and from that we know why the world is the way it is, and what is needed to change it, because they knew what would happen if people think the way they do today. One of our observations is, history is a record of how people think and it's results. But history deals with the superficial mind and cannot see or understand that it's the way man thinks that creates our life the way it is. The world looks at the material and it's results rather then at the mind and it's results, because the value of material is put over the mental, that's to say, the body is more important to people then the mind. The book in our interpretation has it the other way.
In one case there is an interpretation that has many variations and from a material base, and now there is another from a mental base. The reason the book doesn't make sense in it's present interpretation is because according to us) it's the wrong one. But in order to find that out one has to look at it and give it a study. That's what we're trying to do. is get others to look at it and determine for themselves if it's true. But the material oriented mind finds it hard for one to see, because the material fixture is in the way and that's why it takes time to get a grasp of it.
Then there's the problem of things being the way they are and people can't imagine there,s another---because they don't know about it. And, that's what we are about, we're trying to let floks know about it. The difference of interpretation brings about a different result.
The last time and possible only time I can say I was in love is when someone was openly, unequally, and unconditionally nice to me, even when I didn't deserve it.
I don't know, but boy do I wish I would stop.
Could it be the same reason some birds and other animals bond for life? We call it love but, from my ecperience, its platonic aspect has little difference in emotional effect whether it is a bond with a member of my gender or a woman. I cried as much over the loss of a close male friend as I did with a clise female friend and with my sister's death.
The urge to procreate is, perhaps, wholly separate from bonding love - it can happen, consensually and thoroughly enjoyably, where no bonding love is involved.
Biologists are getting closer, as the article eluded; it's an evolutionary trait that facilitates survival. It's an adaptation from our reptilian brain (neo-cortex). Chemicals released to ensure procreation.