nyouremyperfect10

really? If you like ham pizza and your spouse/significant other likes pineapple pizza, isn't this subjective perception causing reality? if all we can ever experience is our own perceptions, then does it not stand to reality being subjective? Also, how do you know that UFO and ghosts aren't real? The BEST we can say is there is no evidence to support them, not that they categorically don't exist.

Of course morals don't exist. and? As for your block paragraph, lol.. Well, social relations don't exist, as it IS the beliefs of scientists who cite as such. Kindly prove it's not.

Why not? The point in quotes is fact. However, this does not rule out a sudden mutation. OK. I still believe it's fairly far-fetched.

For any given human being, isn't it the case that perception is reality?

OK, so people who have no tradition of meditation must take it up since doctors say so? Are doctors quasi-politicians now, simply because you say so? I don't see how your points denote a non-agenda. Who defines what normalcy is? You? And yes, psychology says that atheism is evil, based on their subjective whims. lol. Hence why they push this spirituality onto society. It's common knowledge that these "people" hate atheism and see it is "evil", despite them not realising that much of Western society is irreligious. Also, is there any inherent good in any spiritual tradition? if a person MUST like Eastern beliefs, isn't that saying one MUST like Islam or Zoroastrianism? Moreover, these "people" cite that men who like large boobs are evil and sexist. heh heh.. I admit I like a nice D/E cup, so OK, this makes me per se see women as inferior to men. ha ha ha!!

Intelligence cannot be quantified IMO. We think we're intelligent, but probably the only thing that separates us is that our abstraction is more advanced. Who is to say dogs, lions and tigers don't abstract? Maybe lions and tigers believe in a big cat god, who knows? lolol...

And? Anything goes. Morals don't exist, and are wholly subjective if they do exist. Politics is about power and governance. All the same, to assert that we are social animals is just the beliefs of scientists. Despite professing such intelligence, you've obviously been duped by the agenda of scientists. I see no evidence that humans are indeed "social".

Maybe it's me, but over the past few years, I've noticed that psychologists promote meditation and spirituality as the keys to mental wellbeing. Meditation is not a Western practice. So why are they telling everybody to do this? Somebody told me that one sect/church in Russia meditate, so it's is common. lol.. And there are some Christian demoninations who believe Jesus died on a vertical stick and not a crucifix. So what? This evidently is a minority view, and not representative of general Christian practice. Regardless of the above, is there some agenda in the vocation to turn Western culture into Tibet? Moreover, isn't the definition of mental illness a sketchy and subjective one? If people who are not "normal" are ill, then isn't this fallacious since normalcy is subejctive?

Obviously there had to have been a point in which humans became behaviourally modern. So if later homo (from homo erectus) ad advanced stone tools, growing linguistic capabilties, more human-esque social behaviour, and even basic abstract thought/feeling as such spirituality, then it stands to reason this must have culminated in modern behaviour. The notion though that this was triggered by a mutation 50,000 years ago seems weird to me. isn't it just as possible that this emerged over many millennia, perhaps before our modern morphology fully emerged (say 100,000 years ago, as the Omo remains are essentially part modern, part archaic).

I believe the fact we are social animals is something scientists say to dupe us. Doesn't a sapient individual acknowledge that a person can do as they please in life? What utility do "rules" actually bring?