Sadly for those who seek to attain intellectual status (possibly unobtainable in itself) the ability to question one's own beliefs in order to find out further truths that may make life easier means that attempting to believe certain things because they feel nice or bring comfort has to be discarded.

For those who seek only a happy life where everything is as simple as a hand to mouth existance, may they find peace in thier own perceptions of the world and God forbid they come into contact with anything that questions thier views. Almost every time this has happened it has led to pain and suffering as the 'evil' people who bring unwanted knowledge are burnt at the stake.

Here at least is proof that you have not ears to hear what you do not wish to hear. It has already been said that science does not provide absolutisms, science is aware that no matter how much you may think you know about the 'truth' you have only obtained the barest glimpse of the full process.

The fact that I could produce the bones of your ancestors and follow thier journey as thier civilisations progressed to become what they are today through archealogical, geneological and historical means and still have my evidense dissmissed on the grounds that "I don't think so!" only makes this whole 'philosophical' arguement a sham...you can't philosophise if your ideas are incapable of evolving themselves.

BUUURN the witch... BUURRRNN

and how do you know she's a witch?

she turned me into a NEWT... ... ... i got better.

Monty Python! now there's the Truth!

decarte expected the spanish inquisition, hence why he didn't publish his revolutionary works.

Sadly for those who seek to attain intellectual status (possibly unobtainable in itself) the ability to question one's own beliefs in order to find out further truths that may make life easier means that attempting to believe certain things because they feel nice or bring comfort has to be discarded.

Why do you believe things that feel nice and have comfort hold no relevance? If truth is only what can be proven then there are very few truths. Faith is as natural as breathing so how can it be deemed irrelevant if it's innate. It must be there for a reason. Our benefit.

Faith is not as natural as breathing because only humans do it whereas all life must respire...Why do you presume that science brings no comfort? To you maybe it doesn't but to me and many thousands more it does..Faith need not be there for a reason..it is part of our evolution and as such is random and may destroy us as much as aid us. I didn't say that things that feel nice are irrelevent should be discarded, I said they should not be clung to against all reason just because they feel nice..if that nice thing is true then so be it but i'm not going to limit myself to only thoughts that are soft and fluffy.

For those who seek only a happy life where everything is as simple as a hand to mouth existance, may they find peace in thier own perceptions of the world and God forbid they come into contact with anything that questions thier views. Almost every time this has happened it has led to pain and suffering as the 'evil' people who bring unwanted knowledge are burnt at the stake.

The most enlightened people I've ever aspired to have lived the most simple, basic existence. I'm sure I don't need to elaborate.....or do I?

I was being literal when I said God forbid they find evidence against simplicity because if you can happily attain simplicity and live an uncomplicated life then good for you. But don't confuse enlightenment for the bliss of ignorance. Bhuddism and Taoism are very nice concepts but they are founded on knowledge of the self and being happy with knowing very little...an example being the Bhuddist nuns who wear face masks so as not to harm the bacteria in the air..they obviosly have no knowledge of bacteria or they'd realise how pointless this is but if it makes them happy...so be it.

Because we can identify and label certain feelings and beliefs doesn't mean we are the only creatures to have them.

I have not heard of the specific nuns of which you speak however I would assume, knowing as much as I do, that it is for awareness that a cloth would be worn. If you are aware and respectful of something as seemingly miniscule as bacterium then your connection to the whole becomes infinitely pronounced.

To what end is scientific proof sought? To what end is spiritual awareness sought? I believe a wholistic approach has 'proven' the most beneficial for humankind.

i can't answer the science aspect, while i respect and admire their noble endeavors, science i find will often destroy more in trying to discover it, than discover it for being what it is...however in my opinion spiritual awareness should be sought to improve your life...to be aware of life, is to be aware of the intricate webs woven to make the world...there's the cycle of life, the cycle of death, the food cycle...everything has a time and place, and rather than spend my life trying to scientifically disect, catelogue and destroy the natural beauty of the unexplained, i choose to view it from a natural point...whatever created me, created it to...and who am i to question creation? I would perceive that as questioning the creator, and i have not yet achieved the wisdom to do that...

I assume you would believe someone with a similar perspective would be intelligent? Is book learning needed to follow these pursuits? Why are people with this form of intelligence given so little credibility in our society? Would this cross the lines of State and Religion in our scientifically motivated western democracy? Can the brilliant minds of the scientific community have faith? Are the two concepts totally contradictory?....sorry for the cavalcade of questions your thoughts invoked.

i've stated before there are many types of intelligence...what happens is people often times focus their intelligence in one realm and are oblivious to the fact that there are other intelligences out there...even people who can't read, can be highly intelligent...and teach a lot of lessons that no matter how many books a person has read, they can not know except through experience...

My ancestors have been tracked to poland and the Norther Isles...i have none from africa...*shrugs*

you say that i have no ears to hear? I hear exactly what your saying about evolution(another thread) and i understand it completely, i am willing to accept it as a possibility...it's just not something i can comprehend in a realistic aspect...it seems you are the one that refuses to accept there being any other possibilities beyond your realm of knowledge...you've produced nothing that i haven't found on the internet...asd just makes it more palatable than you do...are you suggesting science is the only truth and they know it all? My ideas do evolve, ask anyone on the board...but yours are still a question...can you move beyond your own realm of thought, discovery and be open that there is more that science hasn't even discovered...and may never discover in our lifetime...how is science aware of anything that they have not discovered...that includes me...

Hey, pretty Miss Jordyn..eh..

What's going on in here? I've never looked in here I do believe..

me wanting to discuss intelligence in all it's forms and methods, you know how i love a good brain(especially mine)

oooh, and i forgot to add...and those that think they are, yet fail to realize there is so much more than books and science fact.

There is an incapability of presenting(I had present..ew) all known information into a book, or anything else for that matter, due to the fact(haha) that the mind itself is incapable of retaining all things perfectly. Even then, we see things from different perspectives, and so that forces Humans to think along different lines, to have different forms of intelligence, and to never be able to present all the facts correctly.

It is far easier to see than to read.

this i can accept as fact

Well, on the other side I can argue that without written data, without written facts, there'd be no way to really gauge how intelligent someone is, mainly because of the fact that without a large collection of information how can you really guess how well you know a certain subject? Without the written information there'd just be..an utter lack of intelligence. I've learned everything from books.

You didn't learn how to think from a book.

Just a thought,........the phrase 'mob mentality' would infer, the intelligence level of the individual deteriorating in a crowd, ergo, solitude enhances intellect? (or any number of psychoses)

Science is about living your life by questions and not answeres..There is room for anything in my mind..I have many beliefs that run counter to my scientific understanding..Reincarnation for one..but until I can provide more than my blind faith for these I will never stand and say "I know it to be true" because I know that self delusion is too easily done.

What makes you think that science claims to know everything? It is the structured quest for knowledge not the finished answere to all things...that is why many are dissatisfied with it as the answeres they seek may not be discovered till long after they have gone....and by then they will know the answere to at least one of lifes biggest questions.

i never said science thinks it knows it all, you leave me with the impression that it does...

i've read a lot of science related information, and the ones i'm most impressed with are the ones that do mention that there are questions, still unanswered dilemas and that there are aspects that they may not know...there aren't many, but i've seen them out there...

my frustration does not lay with science, my frustration lays with those that think science can explain it all...even science was considered magick at one point in history...many great discoverers were dismissed as heretics and treated as any common witch...