Steppers, who are you to say we are not figments of Conan the Barbarian's mind?

I submit that there is only one real being in the universe, and his name is Conan the Barbarian. None of us exist at all. This world is nothing but an illusion, and we are figments of His (Conan's) imagination. I have no evidence to back this up, but I have crossed far over the Bridge of Reason to the desired Shore of Faith. Also, Conan wants us all to drink and drug as much as possible, since none of it matters anyway because we don't exist in the first place. Tell me, steppers, who are you to say this is not true?

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation." - Herbert Spencer- Alcoholics Anonymous, 4th Edition, Appendice II, Spiritual Experience, pg. 568

Comments

becket's picture

I can't say it's not true. If that's what you believe after having "crossed far over the Bridge of Reason to the desired Shore of Faith" and this is the best you can do, then dig it till you take your last breath.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

Pennywise's picture

How could I do better?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

Bucket 's a knob penny, he is nasty vile creature....

Your a hairy man who has moles all over his horrible face.... Going stroke your cat.....

Pennywise's picture

Becket, do you believe science should be taught in school?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

becket's picture

"How could I do better?" Stop living in the hypothetical.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

Pennywise's picture

What makes the hypothetical inferior?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

Pennywise's picture

Indeed, what makes "the hypothetical" hypothetical?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

becket's picture

The hypothetical is neither inferior nor hypothetical compared to what you have set out to create for yourself, not until the novelty and usefulness wear off. But what you have described in your opening gambit just bores me, that's all. In my opinion it is inferior to what I would construct for myself if I had the ability. If this is what you want, you should have it. But for purposes of discussion, it's just another forum rabbit hole and time toilet.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

Pennywise's picture

To you, maybe. I take it you don't want to talk about this? Perhaps you think I am wasting your time? Would you rather discuss Danny?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

becket's picture

Should science be taught in school? Whose science? The science of the logical? The science of the religious? The science of the dreamer? The science of the atheist? Science is a fairly wide category. Can you be specific? Instead of trying to pull a Rope-A-Dope, just ask the question you mean to ask. I'll answer it as best I can.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

Pennywise's picture

Ok, something uncontraversial. Should we teach kids that fish breathe through gills and mammals breathe through lungs? Would it be acceptable to teach kids that humans are born with gills to breathe underwater?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

Science is taught in schools penny.

becket's picture

Pretty sure Pennywise knows that. His question is, should it be taught in schools?

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

Of course science should be taught in schools. As should the arts, fairy tales, folklore and fables. We all need facts and fantasy in equal measure. And we need to learn to differentiate between the two as best we can, take lessons and ideas from both sides, nurture our curiosity and form our own opinions.

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

Pennywise's picture

Gigi, what would you say it is that differentiates science from the arts?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

It's funny, Penny, that seems like it should be such an easy question to answer. I could say that science is based in fact, is proveable and exact while the arts are subjective, fantastical and fluid. But the truth is, I think there's a great deal of overlap. I'm not sure how to answer that to my own satisfaction at the moment.

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

Pennywise's picture

I like that reply.

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

And your opinion on your question, Penny?

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

Pennywise's picture

I don't know. I suppose we could start by asking what each study refers to. If we say the ocean is composed of water, what type of claim are we making about the world? If we say the ocean is beautiful, are we making a different sort of claim?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

Pennywise's picture

If there were no conscious mind in the universe, would the ocean still be made of water? If there were no conscious mind in the universe, would the ocean still be beautiful?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

If there were no conscious mind in the universe, the ocean would still be made of water. It would still be beautiful, as well. There would be no word for it or knowledge of its beauty, however.

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

Pennywise's picture

How could it be beautiful, do you think? Is beauty something more than a type of value judgement? If not, how could the ocean have the value of being beautiful in the absence of any being capable of assigning such value?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

Pennywise's picture

Remember, if you insert your own aesthetic judgements about the ocean, you are adding a conscious mind to the analysis.

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

Pennywise's picture

Let me ask you this:

Say you are looking at a beautiful painting. Does the beauty originate on the canvase, or does it originate in your own mind?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

The beauty of a painting originates in my mind
A painting is only beautiful or ugly or mediocre if there is a conscious mind making the judgement
The ocean is beautiful regardless of the presence of a mind making a value judgement
It is beautiful because of the power it wields and the life it sustains within its depths. The beauty of the ocean remains the same whether or not anyone is there to judge it.

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

Pennywise's picture

So, to you, the ocean is beautiful regardless of whether anyone exits to perceive it. I assume you would say the same thing about a forest. Now, let's say there are exactly three people in the world. One person says the forest is more beautiful than the ocean, another says the opposite, and the third says they are equally beautiful. If the forest and the ocean, because of their power and the life they sustain, have independent (objective) beauty, then presumably there would be a way to figure out which of our three friends is correct. I mean, if both the forest and the ocean are OBJECTIVLY beautiful, then we should be able to OBJECTIVLY determine whether one is more beautiful than the other, right? If so, how could we do this?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

They are all wrong in that they seem to believe that they are in the position to judge in the first place. They are also wrong in assuming that they must prove themselves right in their belief. It doesn't matter if one is more beautiful than the other or if they are equal in their beauty. They can go on arguing and none of it will matter. Trying to prove that a is better than b or a and b are equal will just start a war or fuck up an internet forum.

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

LisaMarie's picture

On Intution vs Intellect
"Fortunately, some are born with spiritual immune systems that sooner or later give rejection to the illusory worldview grafted upon them from birth through social conditioning. They begin sensing that something is amiss, and start looking for answers. Inner knowledge and anomalous outer experiences show them a side of reality others are oblivious to, and so begins their journey of awakening. Each step of the journey is made by following the heart instead of following the crowd and by choosing knowledge over the veils of ignorance." ~ Henri Bergson, On Intution vs. Intellect, 1907

http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2012/08/07/henri-bergson-on-intui...

Listen to the purity of the message in here. It is so pertinent for us in these times. Listen to your inner self. Push away the stuff piled upon you which is false.

becket's picture

Saw this on Facebook today. Too close for coincidence. I'm guessing you have an account there. And if I'm wrong, just lead me into the beautiful/not beautiful ocean, in over my head until drowned.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

Pennywise's picture

I don't go on Facebook, and just made this up as I went. Do you have a link, or would that be too private to share?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

becket's picture

I would post the piece but don't know how to add a picture my post here. It wouldn't be wise to post a link to any page on Facebook; if you want on, you need to join. Maybe I can send it to your email.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

live_free_or_die's picture

Of course, that is reality.

god does not perform daily miracles for people sitting in roomz across the globe saying the lord's prayer.

Why don't don't AA'ers use the higher power prayer?

Alcoholics Anonymous: MyNotGodHasItCovered®
http://www.expaa.org/
http://bereanresearch.com/
http://badrecovery.blogspot.com/
NOT AA:
Rational Recovery, SOS, HAMS
http://alcoholabusesolutions.com/

AA is neither science nor art. It is religion. Whole different ballgame.

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

live_free_or_die's picture

I think there is some form of art in religion

Alcoholics Anonymous: MyNotGodHasItCovered®
http://www.expaa.org/
http://bereanresearch.com/
http://badrecovery.blogspot.com/
NOT AA:
Rational Recovery, SOS, HAMS
http://alcoholabusesolutions.com/

Yes. The art in religion is in the myths themselves. The problems start when people forget that religious stories are, in fact, just the art of stoytelling.

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

Pennywise's picture

So is religion "good" art but "poor" science?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

live_free_or_die's picture

others, not so much

Alcoholics Anonymous: MyNotGodHasItCovered®
http://www.expaa.org/
http://bereanresearch.com/
http://badrecovery.blogspot.com/
NOT AA:
Rational Recovery, SOS, HAMS
http://alcoholabusesolutions.com/

Neither. Religion is the rejection of art and the denial of science

"If I forget who I am, I am myself. If I remember who I am, I am you."

becket's picture

Please explain how religion is "the rejection of art".

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

LisaMarie's picture

Religion, The Bible etc....were myths, fables, moral stories and attempts to explain the unexplainable. Who created mass, particles or dust....who....science can only go so far but can not explain the very last question, How Did This All Begin? Who or What created the Big Bang etc....

SandyB's picture
becket's picture

"Yes. The art in religion is in the myths themselves. The problems start when people forget that religious stories are, in fact, just the art of stoytelling."

If this is so, and the program of AA is considered a "religion", wouldn't it be the responsibility of each AA member to be mindful that the program is nothing but storytelling, allegory, with ample headroom to interpret according to one's own need or desire? In other words, why the rigidity in interpretation to the point of frustration and anger, when these are clearly myths (suggestions) to be incorporated as one sees fit and not as directed or demanded by some outside force?

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

becket's picture

"I think there is some form of art in religion"

You've made it abundantly clear that you only believe in the art of the con.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

live_free_or_die's picture

Religion and its success comes in the selling and packaging of the product, whether it be catholicism or billywism.

The art of the con is exactly what I meant judge bucket. Thanks.

Alcoholics Anonymous: MyNotGodHasItCovered®
http://www.expaa.org/
http://bereanresearch.com/
http://badrecovery.blogspot.com/
NOT AA:
Rational Recovery, SOS, HAMS
http://alcoholabusesolutions.com/

becket's picture

Lame attempt at a save. Do not want.

“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

Pennywise's picture

Perhaps religion is art masquerading as science?

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

live_free_or_die's picture

Is that a serious question? Another leading question pennyW?

Alcoholics Anonymous: MyNotGodHasItCovered®
http://www.expaa.org/
http://bereanresearch.com/
http://badrecovery.blogspot.com/
NOT AA:
Rational Recovery, SOS, HAMS
http://alcoholabusesolutions.com/

Pennywise's picture

Just shooting the breeze. Nothing more.

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

LisaMarie's picture

You do understand God is a mythological warrior for the good. Like ZEUS. The bible made the name of God popular, before the Bible there was ZEUS and the mythological figures associated with him.
You really give religion more credit then it deserves. You definetly have missed the boat on the amount of AA people that buy into the religion you are speaking of.

Pages