immortal

I am rather disappointed with how some of the threads in the religious section are attacked and opposed and the evidence for God or a higher authority is requested first applying strict positivist rules even before willing to have an abstract meaningful metaphysical speculation on it. What is evidence for the existence of God has anything to do with discussing concepts of God and its effects on our social and political reforms. The Logic of Scientific knowledge was given by Karl Popper and it is his philosophy of science which is the most accepted one in the scientific community and therefore it is important to understand his philosophical stands, Karl Popper was a falsificationist and a post-positivist. He opposed Logical Positivism, a view which rejected metaphysics and ontology statements as meaningless. He was not a positivist either because he opposed the distinction of phenomena and the actual thing in itself in science. According to Karl Popper, falsification doesn't mean that metaphysical and ontological questions are meaningless, it just means they are unscientific but those statements might very well become scientific probably in the next century or in the future through paradigm shifts as described by Thomas Kuhn and therefore its not wrong to have a meaningful metaphysical speculation. I appreciate it when many hold this kind of Positivism because it clearly shows that philosophy and ontology are irrelevant to science and there are some questions which science cannot address and give an authoritative answer to them. I oppose the views of Scientism, the positivist approach of science doesn't give us a complete understanding of the world around us and hence other roads to reality should be open for speculation and for criticism. The argument against Gods or against religion are very weak saying they probably don't exist or its very unlikely that they exist are not enough absolute evidence for ruling out the possibility for the existence of God. My stance on this- I am a realist and to me this universe exist independent of an observer and the reality described by scientific models are very much real but they don't give answers for the questions asked about the actual physical system which we are describing, we cannot know what time and space actually is and we cannot either know what particles actually are but the paradigm shift here is that religion can provide answers to those questions. I mean that just how we cannot show australia or antarctica if we only have half of the map of earth, (i.e the northern hemisphere) in the same way we need to have a different map in order to answer those ontological questions. It means we need to observe the universe using a fourth state of consciousness apart from the three awake, sleep and dream states. The observable world of science appears when we are completely awake and the world of religion appears when we are neither in awake and dream states and nor in deep sleep state. This would mean that the actual physical system might be only made up of five elements ( i.e Water, Fire, Space, Earth and Air) and it resolves the contradictions between scientific and religious worlds. Science will be irrelevant to religion and vise versa. The method to have control over the four states of consciousness is called as Avastatreya (Avaste means states) and one can see one's own mind and intelligence in that fourth state and in this way it will be a self evidence that what we are observing is real and the one who has achieved such a state is a true philosopher because he doesn't speculate on the nature of things as it is like this or it is like that, he knows what exactly it "is" and that's the beauty of it. The method to self-realize the five elements is called as Panchbootha Sakshatkar ( Panch- means five, bootha- means elements and Sakshatkar - means self-evidence) and you can realize that those five elements including time and space actually exists as it "is" and this is the real understanding of the ontology of matter, time and space. If we do some research and search for genuine people who know that knowledge then we might learn them and observe them and it would resolve our conflicts between science and religion without in any way changing any of their claims and their model of world. I also oppose that religion is beyond the scope of science and it is wrong for science to model religion. Evolutionary psychology of Religion and Breaking the spell: Religion as a natural phenomena by Daniel Dennett. The following argument shows why the origin of religion based upon evolutionary psychology cannot account for behaviours displayed by religious people. 1. No matter how strong economically and politically a religious organisation is it will try to spread its message and their beliefs and the chances that their ideas are transmitted and accepted by other people around a wide population icreases. For example :- the church will always spread the message of the Gospel. 2. These bad religious ideas or practices don't cost much if the members of the religion as long as they don't take their religious ideas seriously but once if they start taking those religious beliefs and practices seriously then that is where the problem starts for those selfish genes who control our psychological behaviours. 3. We will have a small population of people who take those unreal beliefs and practices and their only purpose in the society will be to spread their message and make others to believe in those religious practices and make them that they too take them very seiously. 4. This will lead to more and more people following such beliefs and such people don't serve any purpose to society in any way because they don't have any interest in propagating their genes in the gene pool nor they have any interest to do something good for the society because their only goal is to have self-realization. 5. This is what we observe in the history of the world and such behavious are being displayed by people even today and more and more people are leaving their families destroying the social framework and its stability making up their mind to spend rest of their energy and life to attain salvation and deliverance and that is there only aim and don't have any interest in the affairs of the world. 6. If this is the case then religion seems to be a very bad idea and a hindarance for those selfish genes and hence evolutionary psychology cannot account for such behaviours because such behaviours doesn't in any way help in the reproductive fitness of those individuals who display those behaviours. 7. If we give an alternate explanation and say they are all suffering from a psychological problem then cultural evolution should have come in to keep a check on such ideas and prevent people to not to learn such behavious but I don't see that happening and we also have to accept the fact that it was these men with psychological problems who wrote those scriptures which later turned out to be the belief systems of many of the major religions of the world and the ultimate message that is given in those scriptures is that human beings should follow and learn to become like those men who took unreal human imaginary ideas developed by selfish genes controlling our psychological behaviours so seriously so much that they lost their reproductive fitness itself. 8. Therefore the two natural forces natural selection and cultural evolution cannot account for the origin of religion and an origin from a higher authority like God is one of a plausible explanation which we cannot rule out very easily.

You should never reveal your weakness in an interview, if that question was directed towards me I would say that "I need to improve my soft skills", it means that you're neither too weak nor too strong in it.

Your examples account for Reciprocal Altruism in which differnt species co-operate and helps the other which increases the bond between those different species and the donor altruist waits in the long run to recieve a reciprocal from the recepient species and this invloves a selfish component and it is very well documented in biological altruism but biological altruism types or theories can not account for Real psychological Altruism. Its partly because we are highly conscious beings if we were not self aware then even we would also had to inevitably go by the decision taken by a hard-wired brain which is based on evolutionary moral standards like other animals. The reason is that we are conscious enough to choose a different moral standard and behave in a psychologically different way based on a moral standard given by a higher authority rather than blindly following a evolutionary moral standard. Being conscious means that your conscious thoughts have control over your sense organs and on your actions and Gods have complete control over your conscious thoughts and in this way God enforces his authority on man. Gods are not some super beings who exist above our sky with out interefering with human affairs, gods are beings which exist in our bodies(spiritual body) and guide our intellect and our conscious thoughts and it is through this insight we should understand the Greek plays on how Gods play with human beings.

When I use the term Altruism, I am talking about Real Altruism, actions done with a conscious non-selfish intent to help others. I very much agree that Kin selection and Inclusive fitness account for behaviours which are heritable but it can not account for Real Altruism which is explained through selfish genes acting through the psychology of humans. I am making the assertion that Real Altruistic behaviours are solely due to environmental factors and has no genetic basis. I have come to this conclusion from links provided by you. There are behaviours which are transmitted and passed on through learning and religious practices are one of them which are mainly induced by environmental and other nurture factors, you are not born religious. All teachings of religion teach humans to achieve salvation and deliverance and religious men and women spend most of their energies and time to achieve that and I don't see how the benefit of such behaviours can overcome the energy and time costs considering how difficult it is for couples to raise their children and achieve a high reproductive success. Yes true kin selection and inclusive fitness was developed to explain behaviours which evolve through and has a genetic basis and which are heritable increasing the reproductive fitness of its own and of its kins since there is high probability that they carry copies of the donor's genes. It makes perfect sense. The problem is with Real altruism or Psychological Altruism, behaviours which doesn't in any way aid in the increase of the reproductive fitness of the individual or his kin. These are the behaviours which are invoked by religion and it doesn't make any sense to me why those selfish genes would evoke psychological behaviours which hinder their own fitness potential and therefore can not account for the origin of those behaviours. No, I have accepted naturalistic explanations for behaviours which does make sense to me that they evolved for natural reasons but the Abrahamic version of God is necessary to account for Real altruistic behaviours I have no problems with biologically altruistic behaviours, the problem is with Real Altruism and observation indicates that such behaviours could not have evolved through natural selection, either it is a psychological disorder which natural selection has to act on and eliminate it or those behaviours are influenced by a higher authority.

The explanation given by science is not convincing enough to completely rule out the possibility of such a God and hence it is not enough evidence against the evidence of such a God. Weather patterns, lightning and thunder are complex systems with many variables and they all boil down to interactions in the atmosphere of the earth and these reactions happen at the most basic fundamental level of quantum physics and therefore Heisenberg's uncertainty principle implies that it is impossbile to simultaneously measure and extract precise information about the position and momentum of a particle with a product of uncertainty smaller than half the dirac's constant. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle doesn't arise due to any limitations on the measuring device and it is the basic rule of nature. In other words it is impossible to simultaneously determine the particle and wave properties of entities in the quantum realm and this would mean that it is impossible to determine the future behaviour of such a quantum system. The inequality of John Bell and the experiments uphelding the view of quantum physics confirms that a particle will not always have pre-determined values for position, momentum, polarisation etc. According to Copenhagen Interpretation only the possible outcomes of the quantum system which are observable through a detector are real and no element of reality should be attributed to the physical quantum system itself and such a quantum system is closed. If those particles do not have the properties of position, momentum and polarisation and such properties only appear when one wants to measure the value of such a property then what is the ontology of those physical particles?, what is its physical nature?, what are they made up of? Do physical properties exist in the objective world or are they subjective creations? Can science answer these questions? Science has to give an explanation for quantum entanglement and how a system can be treated has a single system even though its individual parts are oceans apart, this would mean that we need to impenetrate into the physical realm of the quantum system in order to explain such a phenomena and just measuring the possible outcomes of such a system will not be sufficient enough to explain such phenomena and nature has acted in ways that it is impossible to penetrate into the physical quantum realm. When Natural Sciences was first developed it was believed that the universe is comprehensible to humans and humans had the ability to model this universe. The findings of natural science and the answers it provides are perplexing, we can not predict the future behaviour of this universe and therefore the answer it gives is that we can not model this universe and we also can not know how it works at the most fundamental basic level and what we know is that as the size increases, the number of particles increases too and the quantum theory predicts that the average probabilistic distribution of such particles will produce the effects we see in the classical world that we normally live in and this is what has led to the technological advancements which are based on quantum phyical principles such as charged coupled devices, scanning tunneling microscope, superconductors and superfluids. Few computer scientists have a gut feeling that we are under a simulation and if we think about the possibility of artificial intelligent machines and extraterrestrial beings responsible for simulating our universe we can not rule out the possibility that the hand of God is behind such a simulation. The aim of this thread was to indicate that it was too soon for few scientists to say that "God is Dead". There are a lot of questions which is left and which science has not answered yet and it might never be able to answer those questions because of the basic rule of nature which is the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. We need new science here.

I read your links, it was quite informative. Thanks. However Kin selection and Inclusive fitness can only account for behaviours which are determined mainly by genetic components but it can not account for behaviours in humans due to other environmental influences. A Christian saves a Jew even though its a huge risk on his own life thinking that All humans are equals and everyone deserves such respect and care and he mainly performs such an act to please God and not because the Jews are his relatives having copies of his genes and nor because he expects anything back from the society to increase his Inclusive fitness and quite amazingly people appreciate such acts and they even try to learn those ideas and in this way such an idea will thrive in the meme pool. Most religious people perform fasting and prayers and spend most of their lives and their energy for the good of the whole and such acts in no way help to increase one's reproductive fitness nor it helps cultural evolution to resolve the selection pressures acting at various levels and prevents the need for Natural Selection to play its part. The problem with Cultural evolution is that bad ideas don't get lost and even though they are eliminated from cultures none the less they exist and its not like how natural selection ensures the wipe out of bad genes and once bad genes are lost they are lost forever. If religious ideas are bad ideas then why has cultural evolution not yet wiped out those religious practices, why they are being practiced and passed on for thousands of years in the history of mankind. More importantly if selfish genes acting through psychology of Humans were the cause of the origin of religion then why would we see such irrational acts being performed and passed on which neither give a reproductive fitness to individuals nor do they help cultural evolution to resolve the selection pressures acting at different levels. What kind of selfish genes would induce a psychological behaviour to go inside caves to gain knowledge as many of the Apostles did and come back with a scripture producing one of the major religions of the world which affect every aspect of our life and not even a single sentence from that scripture help those selfish genes to increase their chances of survival. Therefore evolutionary psychology can not account for the origin of religion. There has to be an another force which should be acting to develop moral standards which didn't came from the evolutionary tree of mankind but came directly from the God and it is this force which pushes humans to learn such moral standards given by God and it is what has helped such a moral standard to be in existent for thousands of years. The argument is that humans can overcome the moral standards set up by evolutionary animal instincts and can make a conscious choice to use a different set of moral standards set up by God or an higher authority which helps us to co-exist in the cosmos.

I set up the Bot to be a Truth machine and then I set up this Godel sentence and then I questioned whether this Godel sentence is true or False and interestingly the Bot replied as La li lu le lo, What does it mean? Does it mean it can not utter the answer?

Standards set up by God to be followed in a particular nation, place or in a region and in a particular period of time. Religion is not static, its an evolving thing and only such a proper conduct given by the God will help us to preserve our nature and to co-exist happily and peacefully in this cosmos. You won't find true theists killing innocent people either, the technology of the atheists which helps to trigger the bomb through a phone call and a misinterpretation of the scripture from any religion to justify such a brutal act are quite enough for the extremists to carry out such an act. Do scientists develop technology with the intention to blow up innocent people? No and nor do religious enlightened men write scriptures which is the word of God with such intentions. Theists don't have any problems with Atheists but they have problems with extremists who do stupid acts and justify it in the name of God. Religion says "You can not end evil through evil, you can end evil only through love". The aim is to nurture our young generations to develop tolerance to different religious views and practices and to simultaneously develop intolerance towards extremist views and we need to give this kind of education in our schools and we need to impede their minds with this kind of moral sciences. I am not afraid of those extremist groups just because they will chop off my head if I don't follow and go by their rules. Its more complicated than that and they have got genuine reasons for their hatredness towards the west. The europeans divided the muslim world which was working with harmony based on the divine law and this led to a division among the muslim world and its nations. The west has messed up with the middle-east. Osama Bin Laden was your man, an informant to the CIA, you opened up refugee camps in Afghanistan, you fed them with your weapons and after the Soviets disintegrated it was your responsibility to take back those weapons from them and give them education and a future to them and you failed and he started bombing your embassies and killed your ambassadors and he managed to flew aircrafts into the Twin towers and the Pentagon. Those uneducated men started misinterpreting the traditional Sharia law and this gave rise to radical Islamist and fundamentalist organisations. The only way to achieve peace in the middle east is to rejoin the muslim world into one Islamic state with a correct interpretation of the traditional Sharia law and to develop a Islamic society blending the secular views of the west and harmonise it with the traditional Sharia divine laws and to give them a genuine ummah community rather than a community based upon radical Islamists and their fundamentalist views.

The point of this thread is that evolutionary psychology describes moral values based only on our instincts and how our brains are hard-wired to make a selfish choice to propogate our genotypes even though the act performed was an altruistic one and these are the moral values that exist in a Godless technologically based educated society. The argument is that which is better for our society, a human conscience which is based on submission of your authority and power to a calculating and hard-wired brain? or a human conscience which is based on submission of your authority to a higher authority like God which evokes humane behaviours and gives the power to stand out and make a choice to do a daring act for the good of the whole and an act to please God and not perform a act only for personal gains? The above story shows the nature of a King and how a King should behave in order not to lose that nature because if we loses it then it is the sign that he and his province are moving towards the path of destruction and therefore he will go against God's work whose main advice to the Kings is to protect and provide happiness by making righteous choices for the people coming under his province and this is what is morally good for him in the long run as he has to answer his acts to a higher authority at some point or the other and subject himself to the judgement of God. If we have such a conscience which is based on a higher authority like God it will preserve our nature and our God fearing attitude and will help us to do noble acts rather than falling to corruption and taking one's country to the path of destruction from with in. This is the kind of conscience which evolutionary psychology will never be able to provide or aid us, it can not guide us to do noble acts and it will lead to the destruction of humanity and human values if we provide education only to develop a technologically advanced state of the art society rather than to provide education to develop a society which gives importance and preference to humane values and its universal nature first and then to use and develop technologies in the name of progressing humanity later. The argument is that technology alone can not help us for our survival and our progress and that we also need to reasses our moral values and our way of conduct in order for us to thrive and co-exist in this cosmos because in order to thrive in this cosmos we need to understand the moral standards and the nature of this cosmos and this is what some of the few Greeks, the Romans and the eastern philosophers advice us. I hope this will help the thread to go in its intended direction rather than derailing it to off topics.

Yes very true, I agree, Such a test will indeed show whether his claims have any credence or not.

He has shared his insight but we misinterpret it due to our finite senses, He is not talking about the light coming from the sun which forms the center of the solar system and revolves around the blackhole of the Milkyway Galaxy, he is talking about the light which comes from the Sun God which is existing in a supernatural realm and hence locking up in a closed room will be just fine, he is getting those energies from somewhere else definitely not from this world.

Sweet is the property of sugar. What is sweetness? Define sweetness. What properties does a property have? In the same way existence is the property of a self aware body, when you say 'I' have this property of existence, upon close introspection you'll see that the word 'I' refers to your body. Long time back I saw in National Geographic Channel that some people have Synesthesia, one form of synesthesia is the Lexical --> Gustatory Synesthesia in which the subject can experience tastes when they hear specific sounds. For example:- The sound of your name might produce an experience of a specific taste in those individuals. This shows that things like sweetness and other properties are only mental qualias, they exist only in our minds seperate from the objects to which they are associated with. Similarly Existence is a property and it exists on its own without a body to associate itself with, you can not define such a thing with any other property because what you're trying to describe is the property itself and not the object. The question is What is existence? What is it? You can not objectify existence because what you're trying to define or describe is a property by itself and it can not have any other properties and doesn't a property exist distinct and seperate from its object? Ofcourse it does and therefore such a concept of God indeed exists. The whole eastern philosophy of Non-dualism of Sankara is based on this concept of God that you can know that you're existence itself only through experience and the only thing which exists eternally is existence itself and that thinking I completely dissolves or disappears in such a state. We are ONE, We are existence, there is no I here, no individuation here. The people who developed such a concept of God weren't dumb people.

The script will display a message by default saying "Enable your javascript on this browser to see an important message" when that option is disabled, isn't it? Are you sure that we can access wiki or any other website like this when the website is blacked out by a javascript code? Does it work?

Yeah its really sad, before we used to think that such a problem was something which existed only in the middle east but I think now every country is facing such a problem, extremists are everywhere and they can come from any religious foundation. Its disappointing to hear that occasionally a bomb had blew off in other states and while you think that some terrorist organisation outside the country is responsible for such a brutal act you'll shocked to hear that it would be done by some extremist religious organisation with in the country and the enemy lies with in the country. This is the reason why I don't associate myself with any religion or any other fundamental views, I don't claim that I am religious, I don't pray daily and I don't follow any religious practices however I take all the good wisdom which God gives us through religion and conduct myself properly. I am very much aware of what's happening in the USA though I don't update myself enough with politics but you're not the only one, this is a problem in our country too, they are few extremist groups who have thrown stones on churches and the government stays absolutely mum on such attacks and it doesn't even show any will to arrest those individuals because if they arrest them then they'll lose their vote banks because most of the politicians win their elections only based on their background religious profile and as long as we don't educate our society and make our younger generations aware of this at a very young age this won't change and it might bring the fall down of a super economic powerful country. The problem doesn't lie in religion, the problem lies with ignorant people who don't have any knowledge about religion and join extremist groups which are supported and funded by political parties to win their own battles and therefore our education system has to change and we need to educate students at a very young age about the philosophy behind those religions of the world if not I'll not be surprised to see our nations with my own eyes turning into nations like Iran and Afghanistan and who wouldn't get scared to live in such nations, so I think we need to act now and as long as the political parties like democrats are in power you can consider yourself to be safe. I will not be surprised if those extremist people force their own religion to be introduced in the school curriculum and make students to study only their religion, so before they do such a thing its important that we introduce all religions and philosophy into the minds of students at a very young age and educate the society so that such extremist groups don't creep up quite often gaining human resource and money power.

Oh this guy, his name is Prahlad Jani, I was there watching the TV when this news broke out, this was some long time back, perhaps it might have took a while to spread this news across in the west. This experiment and tests was conducted by the Ahmedabad storling hospital and their doctors and the argument from other doctors is that the hospital might have made a huge scam just to increase the fame and name of the hospital and I really don't know how much truth there is behind all this. One funny thing is that he claimed to produce and pass more urine everytime on request by doctors even though he didn't took any food or water for Ten days. LoL In India you'll find many people like that if you try really hard high up in the himalayas and I don't think it would be a bad idea to start a project to analyse those individuals but its ridiculous to think that such a project will help the military because those people have adapted their bodies to such hostile environments and conditions by doing yoga and enhancing energy from the supernatural realm and it can not be stimulated in any other way and you can't expect the militants to go and sit hiding in a cave doing yoga for 20 to 30 years while the country is under a missile attack from above and the bad thing is by the time they get that power of surviving without food or water they would have turned into something else(spiritual beings) and they definitely wouldn't like to go on for a war because they'll bow down and say "Buddha bless you" when you try to give AK 47's to them.

I think its definitely possible, there are websites like way2sms.com, mGinger.com and other websites which process and send sms however they are sent by humans but if you want the website to automatically reply to a sms then you can program a bot to do that job for you.

Though this might sound more like preaching I have to intervene here. God does help the true theists who have surrendered themselves to him. Theists by saying that this world is yours, this body is yours, associate themselves with something infinite, they think they are infinite beings and they don't worry too much even if their bodies are suffering with diseases and all sorts of pain (for example :- Jesus) because whatever has to happen it has to happen. God doesn't want to change the plan and turn this earth into heaven for the desires of those 7 billion people because according to Saint Augustine when god created this universe and saw the end outcome of his creation he saw that it was good and therefore whatever is happening on earth or whatever is about to happen in the future is for the good of the earth and therefore he cannot change his plans however he gives us a way to escape from that suffering and attain infinite bliss if one believes in him and he is kind, all merciful, loves and cares for us unconditionally and he is very much concerned about us. Everything is the play of Gods and just because we don't understand their play and the reason why they have set up a world which contradicts their very existence doesn't mean they don't exist and their existence cannot be disproved untill we have a model to accurately describe this universe from the point of origin or bigbang to the present state without involving the activity of the gods.

I was shocked for the former as well as for the latter reasons.

There is a way to come out of that paradox, God has two properties one is called as Saguna(means having divine qualities) and this may be the one which is called as Allah, Yahweh, Savithru, Abrahamic God and other personal gods and the other one is called as Nirguna(means without having any properties or qualities). Since some school of philosophical thought argue that a substance having no properties or qualities would itself mean that it is unique and has a property and therefore normally it is wrong to speak or say anything about it. You can call it Non-dual, Unity or whatever. Both properties are eternal and ever existing, so NO, God doesn't have a begining or an end.

What the hell is going on? Imagine a World Without Free KnowledgeFor over a decade, we have spent millions of hours building the largest encyclopedia in human history. Right now, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open Internet. For 24 hours, to raise awareness, we are blacking out Wikipedia. Learn more. Make your voice heard Facebook Google+ Twitter

Perhaps you should read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius on how he led a simple life even being in a palace. There ought to be a behaviourial difference between a man who believes in Providence and raises above others to do something good for the whole from individuals who don't believe in providence.

Well there is a difference, scientists have a method and experiments are currently conducted to test whether such a particle exists or not and scientists are very much prepared that if they find unexpected results out of those experiments to either wipe out the entire standard model or change it with some refinements where as theologians don't have a method and their argument is a rational one and unless they don't come up with a method they are living on a constructive fantasy.

Does that mean science is closed on speculating new possible ideas and theories? How can you allow to open a religious and philosophy subforum in a mainstream science forum and expect people not to assert their religious views its just doesn't seem to add up. The Philosophy and religion forums rules are laid out and it works quite fine to have a reasonable debate in these forums and there have been many good threads on those forums. Some do come here with good intentions because the common man is not interested in those philosophical questions and they expect the scientific community to give them directions on what science can answer and what it can't and isn't it the responsibility of those few intellectual people who belong to the scientific community to educate the society however I do know that some people are quite annoying and hold on to their beliefs even when evidence is shown against those beliefs. Don't you realize that there are few theists here who work with in their boundaries and who are open to debate and to put their belief systems for others to critcize and test their assertions. There is very much a possibility that the reality modeled by science is not the only reality that exists in this universe. Does science absolutely assert that there is no scope for any other philosophical doctrines capable of perfection other than the doctrines what it has laid out? I don't think science says that, atheists do and I find nothing wrong in people coming here with their religious views because we are the only bunch of people who are interested in the quest for truth.

All who have extensively studied the aryan school of philosophy will agree on this if not then he has not understood their philosophy at all. It is because human beings can solve problems for which no algorithm exists what so ever, we are more than just machines, we can do things which machines will never be able to do and I don't like the idea that we do trial and error guesses to find solutions to those problems for which no algorithm exists, I think we are able to access hidden truths which exists already in a different realm and that's how we get intuition and mathematical insight. We'll see. Yes true the opposite of it doesn't mean he exists. I apologize, it was a opinion, I know it doesn't add any support to my case. Says the mystics who have observed it and their literature is available. Moontanman, as you know the most often criticism for religion is that it doesn't have a method to test and look for real truths. All I was trying to do was to look for an universal method to prove religious beliefs for all instances. As ydops mentioned if anyone ever has to take a religion seriously then it has to be a new science just like how natural sciences is a perfection of philosophy. I have to admit that I don't have a strong case to make here until I come up with some real knowledge, I agree, I don't want to be a troll. I shared this because further research is needed and I can not do it all alone and I am already experiencing complex focal seizures and as qsa suggested it seems better to let it go and perhaps someone who is interested in it might go on and do research on it.

I never said it was science, its definitely not science because those things belong to the supernatural realm. There are only two ways to prove it one way is to go and interact with the supernatural realm and see it for yourself and the other way is to see the effects of the supernatural on the natural realm. If those things aren't real then we need to give a natural cause and a natural explanation for why in subjects who perform yoga the metabolic rate increases, oxygen consumption and heart rate decreases and provides other health benefits. If it doesn't provide any health benefits then why so many people in this world perform yoga and rely on it. How do you explain it.