“I don’t believe people are looking for the meaning of life as much as they are looking for the experience of being alive.”
Of course, we are all alive, but are we really living? Are you alive or just breathing? What makes you feel alive? What does it mean to feel alive?
We live in a world where we are constrained by walls, that ironically, we have built ourselves. It's the norm to spend 5/7 days a week working at your school or your job, and 2/7 days studying, cleaning and doing the tedious chores you were unable to do when you were at work. We go about life doing things everyday that are nearly always unnecessary. We've lost the magic of life, that you only had when you were a child. Everything important is lost in the piles of responsibility and hustle of our everyday lives.
What makes you feel alive?
So many people don't know the answer to this question. We don't know our own self. We don't know what matters.The key is appreciation. I feel alive... when I pour water in the soil of a dying flower, and hours later, like magic, see that flower revived and beautiful. I feel alive when I ride a bicycle, or poke my head out the window of a car....when the wind blows in my face ferociously. When I dance in the rain, when I laugh, when I sing, when I love. Blast my favourite song. Smile at a tree. When I watch the sun rise or set. Screaming at the top of my lungs. Spontaneity!
“Grown-ups love figures... When you tell them you've made a new friend they never ask you any questions about essential matters. They never say to you "What does his voice sound like? What games does he love best? Does he collect butterflies? " Instead they demand "How old is he? How much does he weigh? How much money does his father make? " Only from these figures do they think they have learned anything about him.”
This quote from "The Little Prince" sums up what I'm trying to say. Ask the right questions. See the beautiful. Forget, forgive. The life we've made for ourselves, it isn't real. Paint the canvas that is your life. Life is about creating yourself.
Who cares if you forgot the homework? Who cares if they don't love you? Who cares?
These things are important because we've made them important. Yes, they're partially important because that's the society we live in and those are the rules we abide by, but sometimes, FORGET. Remember nature. Society isn't real. A man-made creation that will not get the better of you.
Ignite the passion.
Monday, 10 February 2014
Monday, 3 February 2014
Beauty and Perception
There are several reasons why I feel it has become necessary for myself to write about beauty and perception. Firstly, probably the most obvious reason, that I experience the day-to-day pressures of a woman who is unwillingly and unfortunately conscious of how I look and how I am perceived physically. This is not to say that I feel physical beauty is of value in my life, just in that it is something that feels impossible to escape from. Secondly, that I am studying Feminist Literature for my A2 Coursework and these topics are frequently observed. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, that I have recently subscribed to a channel on YouTube called "Soul Pancake" that discusses all sorts of topics including religion, children's perspective of the world, love, happiness...etc. There is a particular programme called "That's What She Said", which discusses things like "Beauty and Self-image", "Perception and Confidence", or "Ageing and Death." It reminded me of how subjective beauty is, and how we are perceived, actually is.... and because this is such a subjective experience, it is often said that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder." In the videos, particularly the first two, the women discuss several things that I'd like you to think about (men and women alike).
How do you want to be perceived?
I've thought about this myself and also made a point of asking others my age, both male and female. There were all sorts of responses, for women, the most popular were "strong-willed" and "nice", amongst others such as "unique", "a mystery" and even "a teacher." What surprised me most was how most of the responses were non-physical. Although I'm sure we'd all like to be seen as "pretty", "beautiful" or "sexy", this doesn't seem to be priority when we think about how we would like others to view us. For men, there were no responses that suggested the importance of physical perception in themselves. Like women, the most popular answer was "nice", with a close second being "himself". A man wants to be viewed as he is. Perhaps in this way, men are less complicated than women, with less men trying to be something that they are not. It is undeniable that the importance of physical beauty in society is paramount, however, I get the feeling it is also unwelcome a lot more than we might think.
When do you feel most beautiful?
This is the more difficult question to answer it seems. After a lot of thought on this, I decided that I feel most beautiful when I realise I am one with nature, when I smile or when I laugh...when I catch someone looking at me. The most popular answer in women was "when complimented" (be that physically or in any other way). Simply being complimented wasn't enough for some women though, they wanted to know "why he thought she was beautiful" or "why he loved her". Some women felt most beautiful when "natural" or "after a shower", and this also appeared in some men's answers. Interestingly, one male said "I feel most beautiful when it is clear that I am viewed in the way I wanted to be perceived." Another interesting response was "When I have a surge of energy or adrenalin...like a personal revelation." I honestly preferred the men's responses, because when comparing, it is clear that men feel best in a way that we could say is more "natural" and less "physical". Ironically, the man has set the criteria of beauty for women, and a woman simply aggravates this physical importance by not only accepting this idea of beauty but also encouraging it in the way she dresses and changes herself. Perhaps this is because a man's image is not as important as a woman's in society. (I am not denying that men have a tough time too)
Now I'd like to discuss a film that deals with perception and beauty. It's a comedy I watched the other day called "Shallow Hal". It's not a great film but not bad either...Jack Black stars. Hal is, as the title suggests, a shallow male who only seeks women's looks. His life contains a series of brief and meaningless relationships, until one day he is trapped in a lift with a self-help guru who hypnotises him to only look for the inner beauty in women. Soon, Hal begins to have extra-ordinary success with women, in particular a woman named Rosemary. The film plays with point of view shots to show us that Rosemary's actual weight is 140 Kg, but to Hal, all he can see is a slender woman, who is also a lovely person. The trailer prattles on about how Hal now sees only the inner beauty in women. No he doesn't. When he looks at an overweight woman and instead sees her as thin women, he's not seeing her inner beauty. What he is seeing however, is a typical tall, thin model type woman....which in some ways is more insulting than if he saw her as she really is and instantly rejected her.
Lastly, I'd just like to remind you that what we want to be seen in ourselves, many others will also want to see in themselves. Before you "judge a book by its cover", think about how that person wants to be viewed, and also think about what you think should be valued more in society. We forget that we make society, and the more people that change ideas of perception and beauty in their minds, the more likely these important things will be valued.
Until next time,
Goodbye.
How do you want to be perceived?
I've thought about this myself and also made a point of asking others my age, both male and female. There were all sorts of responses, for women, the most popular were "strong-willed" and "nice", amongst others such as "unique", "a mystery" and even "a teacher." What surprised me most was how most of the responses were non-physical. Although I'm sure we'd all like to be seen as "pretty", "beautiful" or "sexy", this doesn't seem to be priority when we think about how we would like others to view us. For men, there were no responses that suggested the importance of physical perception in themselves. Like women, the most popular answer was "nice", with a close second being "himself". A man wants to be viewed as he is. Perhaps in this way, men are less complicated than women, with less men trying to be something that they are not. It is undeniable that the importance of physical beauty in society is paramount, however, I get the feeling it is also unwelcome a lot more than we might think.
When do you feel most beautiful?
This is the more difficult question to answer it seems. After a lot of thought on this, I decided that I feel most beautiful when I realise I am one with nature, when I smile or when I laugh...when I catch someone looking at me. The most popular answer in women was "when complimented" (be that physically or in any other way). Simply being complimented wasn't enough for some women though, they wanted to know "why he thought she was beautiful" or "why he loved her". Some women felt most beautiful when "natural" or "after a shower", and this also appeared in some men's answers. Interestingly, one male said "I feel most beautiful when it is clear that I am viewed in the way I wanted to be perceived." Another interesting response was "When I have a surge of energy or adrenalin...like a personal revelation." I honestly preferred the men's responses, because when comparing, it is clear that men feel best in a way that we could say is more "natural" and less "physical". Ironically, the man has set the criteria of beauty for women, and a woman simply aggravates this physical importance by not only accepting this idea of beauty but also encouraging it in the way she dresses and changes herself. Perhaps this is because a man's image is not as important as a woman's in society. (I am not denying that men have a tough time too)
Now I'd like to discuss a film that deals with perception and beauty. It's a comedy I watched the other day called "Shallow Hal". It's not a great film but not bad either...Jack Black stars. Hal is, as the title suggests, a shallow male who only seeks women's looks. His life contains a series of brief and meaningless relationships, until one day he is trapped in a lift with a self-help guru who hypnotises him to only look for the inner beauty in women. Soon, Hal begins to have extra-ordinary success with women, in particular a woman named Rosemary. The film plays with point of view shots to show us that Rosemary's actual weight is 140 Kg, but to Hal, all he can see is a slender woman, who is also a lovely person. The trailer prattles on about how Hal now sees only the inner beauty in women. No he doesn't. When he looks at an overweight woman and instead sees her as thin women, he's not seeing her inner beauty. What he is seeing however, is a typical tall, thin model type woman....which in some ways is more insulting than if he saw her as she really is and instantly rejected her.
Lastly, I'd just like to remind you that what we want to be seen in ourselves, many others will also want to see in themselves. Before you "judge a book by its cover", think about how that person wants to be viewed, and also think about what you think should be valued more in society. We forget that we make society, and the more people that change ideas of perception and beauty in their minds, the more likely these important things will be valued.
Until next time,
Goodbye.
Tuesday, 21 January 2014
Life after death - A theory of dreams
Hello again friends,
Dreams. I've always been infatuated by dreams. (not only is the word lovely and perfectly explicit of its meaning).... For millennia philosophers have searched for the meaning of life far and beyond, but sometimes the answers are right there in-front of us. Could it be that dreams hold the answers we are looking for? I think so. Dreams and their meanings have become so commonplace that nobody questions why we might have a dream. And i don't mean the typical answer "Because you thought of it before bed and that's why you dreamt it" OR (another classic) "That dream is giving you a message". Both statements I feel are true, but go beyond that. Think "Why would dreams give messages?", "Why would 'someone' want to give me this message at all?", or "What do dreams care whether or not we learn this message". So in a nutshell, what is the meaning of this meaning? (I really hope you're not lost, this is a very difficult idea to convey). Part of me, that is my spiritual inclination, often makes me feel as if those dreams are given to me by some higher being that hopes to offer psychological support. So then you might ask, Why is it that we forget dreams if that is the case?
Have you ever woken up and remembered a dream vividly, and about a minute later haven't got the slightest clue what the dream was. How is that possible? How can thought be lost from memory in a matter of seconds? Again, I am inclined towards something non-empirical. Is it possible that the meaning of life is being snatched from our brains, taken away so we will never know the answer that pervades our minds (or at least my mind). So this higher being, why does "he" mock this crucial information before our minds and disappear it? Perhaps "he" doesn't. (Notice the speech marks, I don't like to refer to something out of this world as male or female, or imply this force is anything similar to what we are but i have to use a word, to make it easier I've chosen "he".)
So, I don't believe in a Devil, (evil to me is simply the definition of something "without good" or "privatio bonni" as Augustus said.) but yes i admit the devil seems to fit here. I think Devil is quite a strong word, for me it is human nature that is the devil of us, and this is what holds us back. So you could say, it is our nature or our inability to understand the meanings of life that makes us forget our dreams.
So you're probably wondering, OK, so what is the meaning of dreams and ultimately, of life. Well I'm getting to that...
P.s. Labeling myself is very difficult but If i were to say what i believe, it'd be that i'm an agnostic, and if you imagine agnosticism on a scale of one to ten, one being closer to atheism and ten being religious, well I think I'm on the high end of the scale. No that wasn't an irrelevant comment, because I want it to be clear that I might not believe my own theories, they are just thoughts to me...possibilities even.
Okay, with that in mind, life after death.
Sometimes I feel dreams our are soul, our subconscious, the inner-self that makes us all Godly...partly because just like this all-good being, we cannot understand dreams. Sometimes I think dreams will be the only thing that stay with us after death. Have you ever wondered where the dreams go? Do they just disappear, all those thoughts and knowledge in the tender capacity of our brains simply vanished? No, I don't think so. Often, we are told that life is learning game, what we learn now will aid us in the next life. Well, dreams are also a learning process for me. Life is a period where our dreams are learning, getting reading for perfection, our whole lives we have imperfect dreams, and this is finally explained and justified in a perfection. So due to our human in-capabilities, we have dreams that our dysfunctional, confusing and often irrational. How could that person be that person, but at the same time not really be that person? After death, perhaps those problems are solved. Perhaps we experience a revelation when we die, a feeling where things often "just make sense." You can't explain how or why, they just feel. This is why dreams are death become perfect. Like heaven.
So the theory is really, heaven in a dream.
For me, perhaps I'd be surrounding by books, people i love, and flowers that sing...
The lovely thing about this theory is it doesn't encounter the usual problems concerned with life after death.
1) Where is this place and how does it hold all these bodies?
2) How can so many people share the same perfection? My heaven is not necessarily your heaven.
So in this theory, My best friend could be you, even if you might not necessarily be my best friend. In your dream your perfection might be with someone else. That's okay. Nobody would know any better, I would never wake from my dream, and neither with you. Our dreams would never intercede one another.
You might think, but it's not real then. Who's to say what's real and not real though? As far as I'm concerned, a dream that is eternal, with a perfection that you feel you are living and never waking up from...may as well be real.
My perfection is conjured from my mind and experiences, something that is different for everyone.
(just look at the different religions...ideas of life after death are based on the cultures in which they were brought to life) ...For example, the Koran promises Islamic martyrs 72 virgins. Is that really paradise for these virgins? I highly doubt it.
So what dreams do "evil" people get? Perhaps these people don't get good dreams?
...
Open-mind
Dreams. I've always been infatuated by dreams. (not only is the word lovely and perfectly explicit of its meaning).... For millennia philosophers have searched for the meaning of life far and beyond, but sometimes the answers are right there in-front of us. Could it be that dreams hold the answers we are looking for? I think so. Dreams and their meanings have become so commonplace that nobody questions why we might have a dream. And i don't mean the typical answer "Because you thought of it before bed and that's why you dreamt it" OR (another classic) "That dream is giving you a message". Both statements I feel are true, but go beyond that. Think "Why would dreams give messages?", "Why would 'someone' want to give me this message at all?", or "What do dreams care whether or not we learn this message". So in a nutshell, what is the meaning of this meaning? (I really hope you're not lost, this is a very difficult idea to convey). Part of me, that is my spiritual inclination, often makes me feel as if those dreams are given to me by some higher being that hopes to offer psychological support. So then you might ask, Why is it that we forget dreams if that is the case?
Have you ever woken up and remembered a dream vividly, and about a minute later haven't got the slightest clue what the dream was. How is that possible? How can thought be lost from memory in a matter of seconds? Again, I am inclined towards something non-empirical. Is it possible that the meaning of life is being snatched from our brains, taken away so we will never know the answer that pervades our minds (or at least my mind). So this higher being, why does "he" mock this crucial information before our minds and disappear it? Perhaps "he" doesn't. (Notice the speech marks, I don't like to refer to something out of this world as male or female, or imply this force is anything similar to what we are but i have to use a word, to make it easier I've chosen "he".)
So, I don't believe in a Devil, (evil to me is simply the definition of something "without good" or "privatio bonni" as Augustus said.) but yes i admit the devil seems to fit here. I think Devil is quite a strong word, for me it is human nature that is the devil of us, and this is what holds us back. So you could say, it is our nature or our inability to understand the meanings of life that makes us forget our dreams.
So you're probably wondering, OK, so what is the meaning of dreams and ultimately, of life. Well I'm getting to that...
P.s. Labeling myself is very difficult but If i were to say what i believe, it'd be that i'm an agnostic, and if you imagine agnosticism on a scale of one to ten, one being closer to atheism and ten being religious, well I think I'm on the high end of the scale. No that wasn't an irrelevant comment, because I want it to be clear that I might not believe my own theories, they are just thoughts to me...possibilities even.
Okay, with that in mind, life after death.
Sometimes I feel dreams our are soul, our subconscious, the inner-self that makes us all Godly...partly because just like this all-good being, we cannot understand dreams. Sometimes I think dreams will be the only thing that stay with us after death. Have you ever wondered where the dreams go? Do they just disappear, all those thoughts and knowledge in the tender capacity of our brains simply vanished? No, I don't think so. Often, we are told that life is learning game, what we learn now will aid us in the next life. Well, dreams are also a learning process for me. Life is a period where our dreams are learning, getting reading for perfection, our whole lives we have imperfect dreams, and this is finally explained and justified in a perfection. So due to our human in-capabilities, we have dreams that our dysfunctional, confusing and often irrational. How could that person be that person, but at the same time not really be that person? After death, perhaps those problems are solved. Perhaps we experience a revelation when we die, a feeling where things often "just make sense." You can't explain how or why, they just feel. This is why dreams are death become perfect. Like heaven.
So the theory is really, heaven in a dream.
For me, perhaps I'd be surrounding by books, people i love, and flowers that sing...
The lovely thing about this theory is it doesn't encounter the usual problems concerned with life after death.
1) Where is this place and how does it hold all these bodies?
2) How can so many people share the same perfection? My heaven is not necessarily your heaven.
So in this theory, My best friend could be you, even if you might not necessarily be my best friend. In your dream your perfection might be with someone else. That's okay. Nobody would know any better, I would never wake from my dream, and neither with you. Our dreams would never intercede one another.
You might think, but it's not real then. Who's to say what's real and not real though? As far as I'm concerned, a dream that is eternal, with a perfection that you feel you are living and never waking up from...may as well be real.
My perfection is conjured from my mind and experiences, something that is different for everyone.
(just look at the different religions...ideas of life after death are based on the cultures in which they were brought to life) ...For example, the Koran promises Islamic martyrs 72 virgins. Is that really paradise for these virgins? I highly doubt it.
So what dreams do "evil" people get? Perhaps these people don't get good dreams?
...
Open-mind
Tuesday, 14 January 2014
Religious experience
Hello fellow bloggers!
Had a lot to think about today, thought i'd get it down for all to think about if they please.
SO it's about religious experience. (that's a turn away for most i'm sure) Well for those philosophy lovers,
First a few questions to think about...
Do you believe your eyes? You probably aren't sure what I mean by this, but Yes you do . We all believe our eyes, although perception can often be wrong, we generally don't question day-to-day experience. For example, when crossing the road, we are trusting our eyes.
Secondly, do you trust people?
Most people would say no but it's surprising how much trust we place on strangers. Think about when you go travelling, you are placing trust in the hope that the pilot is qualified enough, that the air traffic control is efficient, that the fuel supplier and moderator has checked and RE-checked the amount of fuel...that there is not too much or too little. And ironically we don't even think about these things much, we have enough trust to not even THINK about it, but when it comes to non life and death situations, like trusting a person with our money, or our secrets...we are unable or unwilling to do that right, with that in mind, I will now take you to a short summary of Mr Richard Swinburne's "The existence of God"
Swinburne believed that although he had never had a religious experience himself, he thought that religious experience was a credible way of proving the existence of God for the individual (generally)
He felt that religion needed to be assessed just as fairly and as similarly as anything else we might assess in our day-to-day lives. For this he came up with two principles known as Credulity, and Testimony. Credulity goes back to the first question i brought up at the beginning of this discussion, "do you believe your eyes?" The term focuses on the idea of trusting your senses. "If it seems to subject that X is present, then probably X is actually present, what one perceives is usually so." (unless of course you are taking drugs, or are very ill)
The principle of testimony is about trusting others. The assumption here is that people usually tell the truth. For example, in court, a lot of evidence is based on peoples perceptions which seems to be just fine and enough evidence for that but when it comes to religious experience SUDDENLY (and coincidentally) our perception becomes "faulty". (Compare RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE to a persons perception of a crime, a person who has a religious experience is less likely to have an ulterior motive for telling the story....when somebody shares something about a religious experience, they are unlikely to gain anything - it's more likely people will think they are nuts,- you could say they have more to lose) P.s he does concede that you don't always take somebody's religious testimony at face value (depends on the persons character...presumably you know what their track record is...) You know best!
SO...why should we not believe in a religious experience? Fair enough if you can't trust other people but surely you can trust yourself? Perception is extremely subjective, however, we seem to be doing a bit of a pick and choose game. We trust completely at moments and at others we ignore! Strange...think about it.
Right now to Mr William James. (a lovely thoughtful psychologist...supposedly)
He believed religious experience had to have a special criteria to regard as true or not, I quite like this way to remember his criteria...think PINT. Yes, Pint. P for Passive. I for Ineffable. N for Noetic. T for Transient. I know what you're thinking "I only know a quarter of that terminology" No fear!
Passive.
Mr James believed religious experience is more credible when
1) you were not expecting that experience
2) You don't have an ulterior motive for sharing that experience
3) You are preferably an agnostic/atheist. (He didn't say that exactly, apologies for my additions)
Ineffable.
An experience too great or too extreme or intense to be expressed with the human language. Language is so so limited...it's hardly going to do much when describing God or a religious experience that NOBODY else has had (not exactly the same anyway)
Noetic.
I love that word ^^ Anyway...this means that the experience has to lead to some sort of revelation. The person has learnt something about God, preferably sees life in a clear and simple light. (the way it IS and should be)
Transiet.
This means temporary...the religious experience doesn't last forever. It is after all an experience, this could mean a few minutes, hours, days or months (GASP) even...just not anywhere near a lifetime.
Well this certainly convinced me a wee bit more about religious experiences, couldn't say I've had one myself, but often I do "feel" somethings presence...not in a freaky spooky sort of way, just a happy fulfilling feeling. (a break through for the philosopher i think!) Not sure that counts.
One last thing....Imagine yourself in God's situation.
If he doesn't give any of us a religious experience, people question why anyone would want to believe in a God that isn't personal and doesn't try to involve himself with humans to help them believe. (certainly religious experience must be the best way to do so!) although there is that whole argument about just having faith and all...well. Anyway...if we are given a religious experience, we immediately question the reliability of this and assume that we are hallucinating, ill....or simply ready for a mental hospital. Who's to say you wouldn't have believed if you had the religious experience of another?
Open-mind.
Goodbye
Had a lot to think about today, thought i'd get it down for all to think about if they please.
SO it's about religious experience. (that's a turn away for most i'm sure) Well for those philosophy lovers,
First a few questions to think about...
Do you believe your eyes? You probably aren't sure what I mean by this, but Yes you do . We all believe our eyes, although perception can often be wrong, we generally don't question day-to-day experience. For example, when crossing the road, we are trusting our eyes.
Secondly, do you trust people?
Most people would say no but it's surprising how much trust we place on strangers. Think about when you go travelling, you are placing trust in the hope that the pilot is qualified enough, that the air traffic control is efficient, that the fuel supplier and moderator has checked and RE-checked the amount of fuel...that there is not too much or too little. And ironically we don't even think about these things much, we have enough trust to not even THINK about it, but when it comes to non life and death situations, like trusting a person with our money, or our secrets...we are unable or unwilling to do that right, with that in mind, I will now take you to a short summary of Mr Richard Swinburne's "The existence of God"
Swinburne believed that although he had never had a religious experience himself, he thought that religious experience was a credible way of proving the existence of God for the individual (generally)
He felt that religion needed to be assessed just as fairly and as similarly as anything else we might assess in our day-to-day lives. For this he came up with two principles known as Credulity, and Testimony. Credulity goes back to the first question i brought up at the beginning of this discussion, "do you believe your eyes?" The term focuses on the idea of trusting your senses. "If it seems to subject that X is present, then probably X is actually present, what one perceives is usually so." (unless of course you are taking drugs, or are very ill)
The principle of testimony is about trusting others. The assumption here is that people usually tell the truth. For example, in court, a lot of evidence is based on peoples perceptions which seems to be just fine and enough evidence for that but when it comes to religious experience SUDDENLY (and coincidentally) our perception becomes "faulty". (Compare RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE to a persons perception of a crime, a person who has a religious experience is less likely to have an ulterior motive for telling the story....when somebody shares something about a religious experience, they are unlikely to gain anything - it's more likely people will think they are nuts,- you could say they have more to lose) P.s he does concede that you don't always take somebody's religious testimony at face value (depends on the persons character...presumably you know what their track record is...) You know best!
SO...why should we not believe in a religious experience? Fair enough if you can't trust other people but surely you can trust yourself? Perception is extremely subjective, however, we seem to be doing a bit of a pick and choose game. We trust completely at moments and at others we ignore! Strange...think about it.
Right now to Mr William James. (a lovely thoughtful psychologist...supposedly)
He believed religious experience had to have a special criteria to regard as true or not, I quite like this way to remember his criteria...think PINT. Yes, Pint. P for Passive. I for Ineffable. N for Noetic. T for Transient. I know what you're thinking "I only know a quarter of that terminology" No fear!
Passive.
Mr James believed religious experience is more credible when
1) you were not expecting that experience
2) You don't have an ulterior motive for sharing that experience
3) You are preferably an agnostic/atheist. (He didn't say that exactly, apologies for my additions)
Ineffable.
An experience too great or too extreme or intense to be expressed with the human language. Language is so so limited...it's hardly going to do much when describing God or a religious experience that NOBODY else has had (not exactly the same anyway)
Noetic.
I love that word ^^ Anyway...this means that the experience has to lead to some sort of revelation. The person has learnt something about God, preferably sees life in a clear and simple light. (the way it IS and should be)
Transiet.
This means temporary...the religious experience doesn't last forever. It is after all an experience, this could mean a few minutes, hours, days or months (GASP) even...just not anywhere near a lifetime.
Well this certainly convinced me a wee bit more about religious experiences, couldn't say I've had one myself, but often I do "feel" somethings presence...not in a freaky spooky sort of way, just a happy fulfilling feeling. (a break through for the philosopher i think!) Not sure that counts.
One last thing....Imagine yourself in God's situation.
If he doesn't give any of us a religious experience, people question why anyone would want to believe in a God that isn't personal and doesn't try to involve himself with humans to help them believe. (certainly religious experience must be the best way to do so!) although there is that whole argument about just having faith and all...well. Anyway...if we are given a religious experience, we immediately question the reliability of this and assume that we are hallucinating, ill....or simply ready for a mental hospital. Who's to say you wouldn't have believed if you had the religious experience of another?
Open-mind.
Goodbye
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)