The Obtaining of Knowledge

SoulSeeker wrote:

Let's rewind a bit.
You: "I believe in the Force."
Me: "Why do you believe in it? Where's the evidence?"
You: "Well evidence is subjective and can be interpreted in many ways."
Me: "Alright, but where's the evidence?"
You: "Well put it this way. (procedes to talk about two men eating salt) so you see it's impossible for one man to describe to the other what it is. The same with the Force."
Me: "Er, okay. I didn't ask for a description, I just wanted to know what evidence there is for it, seeing as you believe it exists. What *evidence* is there that can be interpreted? And yes, I'm careful to remember that 'evidence can be interpreted in many ways', just like you said, but haven't given me any evidence whatsoever. So where's the evidence that can be interpreted please?"
You: "YOU'RE TROLLING! Lolololololol can't explain anything to someone who's HEADless lololololol"

Do you understand where I'm coming from now, and how moronic this is actually starting to look?
So for you trolling = asking for evidence for what you claim exists? Alright, fair enough. I won't bother arguing with that. But I wil say that if anything, wouldn't you be the one trolling for claiming something exists without providing evidence for it? You can make excuses about how "it can't be described unless you've felt it but it's definitly there" but I could just as easily say "the tooth-fairy exists, but you don't know what she really looks like or how she does it or why unless you see her." The tooth-fairy might well exist, but without evidence beyond spoken word, no reasonable man would believe it. If you want to say that's "trolling", fine, but it's not an unreasonable question so I just think you don't want to admit it on this one.

Now let's get something straight, firstly, many people view the Force as being something different, some agree, some don't. Secondly, I have tried to explain to you, in a round-about way, that I believe that the Force is something that cannot be experienced empirically and I know that you know this, yet you persist in asking for evidence, even though I explained to you that I believe that I, on a personal level, have evidence for it. Hence, the analogy.
Therefore, I believe that it is something that can only be understood, once it has been experienced by the individual. You want 'hard' evidence, I don't believe that there is any. Though I do believe that, if you were to experience it, it would be evidence enough.
Lastly, talking of the existence of fairies is something completely different, I also suspect that you know that too. You are speaking of something that would have to be proven to physically exist, something that lives and dies - which is what 'existence' means. The Force on the other hand is something much more abstract, and to describe it as existing, having a beginning and an end, is folly. If it did exist, on these terms, there would be empirical evidence for it. But you as an intelligent human being will understand this perfectly, of course?

Does that make sense? or am I going to have to break it down into even more simple terms in order for you to understand it?

1.
The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name
The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth
The named is the mother of myriad things

Thus,constantly without desire,one observes its essence
Constantly with desire,one observes its manifestations
These two emerge together but differ in name
The unity is said to be the mystery
Mystery of mysteries,the door to all wonders

The idea of summarizing any belief that doesn't rely on physical evidence into a neat package is silly at best.

Ask one hundred people to describe the way they feel about parents or siblings and you'll see twenty or more radically different responses. Why? Because regardless of the universality of 'parents' the day to day reality for each person is going to be different.

You want evidence for the force? Here is what I can give you.

1) I stopped at a green light today for no reason and someone whipped through the intersection where I would have been.

2) I thought of a close friend I hadn't heard from in a long time yesterday and then ran into them and spoke for a while.

3) When I stop trying to force events in my life they tend to fall into place much better then when I micromanage the details.

4) Ever since I started meditating and pondering the mysteries of religion and spirituality I feel a much deeper connection to everything around me.

5) Every since I got more in contact with my Christian faith and Jedi Beliefs I have gained keen insight into the workings of the world, and I now feel this physical life is transitionary more then I ever did before.

6) Ever since I opened my mind to these ideas I can often times get a feeling for someone mood and thoughts before they even enter the room.

7) Meditation has improved my Wing Chun a lot.

The list goes on. I doubt any of that satisfies you. Why? Its all personal and subjective. Had you been here experiencing this with me it would mean something to you. You weren't, so its just words on your screen. Understand?

Plus what Jestor said. If we had words to describe timeless love, unity, and understanding don't you think we would have solved all of the worlds problems by now?

Experience is the only way to understand these concepts in any meaningful way. This requires work, dedication, and a willingness to find the answers your looking for.

(Although I bet the answers you find eventually aren't the ones you were looking for.)

Proof denies faith, apparently.

My favourite quote on this subject is from CTRL-ALT-DEL, a gamer webcomic. "Prove that his god doesn't exist without using an argument that can't be used to disprove yours."

Barrera wrote:
If you are honestly expecting someone to hand you a folder labeled, 'Evidence',

1) You're an idiot.

2) You're a troll.

So anyone who asks for evidence is either "a retard or a troll"? That's honestly your answer?

Sheuthem wrote: Now let's get something straight, firstly, many people view the Force as being something different, some agree, some don't. Secondly, I have tried to explain to you, in a round-about way, that I believe that the Force is something that cannot be experienced empirically and I know that you know this, yet you persist in asking for evidence, even though I explained to you that I believe that I, on a personal level, have evidence for it. Hence, the analogy.

Alright. But I didn't mean on a "personal level", I meant on a level where people could reasonably say they believe in it. Like the sky, or the sun, or water.

However, there's one thing you wrote that stood out to me.

Sheuthem wrote: The Force on the other hand is something much more abstract, and to describe it as existing, having a beginning and an end, is folly.

Right. So the Force, after all, does *not* exist. I hope you realise that's what you've just said to me. You believe in the Force, but the Force does not exist, therefore, you have admitted to believing in something that does not exist. And yet you still choose to believe in it. Personally I had hoped for something more than that, coming from a Jedi, but... oh well. Whatever.

Sheuthem wrote: Does that make sense? or am I going to have to break it down into even more simple terms in order for you to understand it?

Make sense? Well, after what you've showed me, yes, it makes sense perfectly now. Thanks for your time.

Take from it whatever you will SoulSeeker. If that is your conclusion, then so be it!

SoulSeeker wrote:

Sheuthem wrote: The Force on the other hand is something much more abstract, and to describe it as existing, having a beginning and an end, is folly.

Right. So the Force, after all, does *not* exist. I hope you realise that's what you've just said to me. You believe in the Force, but the Force does not exist, therefore, you have admitted to believing in something that does not exist. And yet you still choose to believe in it.

I believe that Libertarianism is the ideal to strive for

Libertarianism however doesn't 'exist' does it? It is not something I can hold up to you and say "this thing I'm holding is libertarianism"... libertarianism is an abstract idea that doesn't 'exist' in the conventional sense...

Just because something can't be held up and shown to you does not mean that it does not exist. It just doesn't 'exist' in the conventional meaning of the word

Look bud. You are only addressing the things you can refute. You have yet to address half of what we said to you in response to this thread because:

1)Mumble mumble mumble.

Yes. I know its wrong to point it out, but Jedi believe in honesty. Oh look! Honesty, something else you can't prove exists.

On that note, I'm out.

Keep the personal attacks out of here please.

(thanks for the edit barrera)