|
After we die
|
|
Topic Started: Nov 29 2017, 12:44 AM (5,374 Views)
|
|
Sam
|
Feb 8 2018, 01:25 PM
Post #46
|
It takes a mere second for treasure to turn to trash.
- Posts:
- 24,391
- Group:
- Community Admin
- Member
- #415
- Joined:
- April 21, 2005
- Gender
- Male
- Country
- United States
- Favourite Anime
- Dragonball/Z/Super, Hellsing Ultimate, Naruto/Shippuden, Death Note, Hunter x Hunter, FMA:B
- What Browser do you use?
- Mozilla Firefox
- Favourite Manga
- Dragonball/Z/Super, Naruto/Shippuden, One Piece, Hellsing, Death Note
|
- halfbloodprince
- Feb 7 2018, 02:23 PM
- Bad User
- Feb 7 2018, 06:40 AM
- halfbloodprince
- Feb 6 2018, 08:33 PM
fire is light, passion, fuel, energy = life.
water is dark, cool, and translucent = death
Nah. Fire is just oxidation of stuff. Water is 2 molecules of Hydrogen mixed with 1 of Oxygen. And usually it has a whole culture of microorganisms inside. Still don't know how that proves that there's life after death.
im talking about polarity 2 extreme opposites, yin and yang forces of positive and negative dont insult yourself by acting like you cant understand these simple concepts. The #1 rule of this forum is respect. This is your only verbal warning. Please don't be condescending or rude when trying to get your point across or you will be warned in the future. Further reported posts containing condescending or rude content will lead to further warnings and even eventually suspension. If you cannot get your point across without making the implication that the person you're debating is unintelligent, then, do not respond to them at all.
|
|
WoW Legion Ending - Thank you Darker for making this into one, big incredible gif! <3 Brother! Your crusade IS OVER!!
 NO...!!
|
| |
|
+ Ginyu
|
Feb 8 2018, 01:45 PM
Post #47
|
Leve Feyenoord 1!
- Posts:
- 4,490
- Group:
- Elite Member
- Member
- #9,685
- Joined:
- June 30, 2013
- Gender
- Female
- Country
- Netherlands
- Favourite Anime
- NJPW
- What Browser do you use?
- Chrome
- Favourite Manga
- Reading is for nerds, yo!
|
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 07:30 AM
I don't see why anyone is still mentioning scientific views in those things when we all know there are none just like stuff like time,morality etc...the point is we already know there is no scientific proof for any of those especially afterlife so why mention science here?since we already know there are no scientific proof for it.so don't put science in those things as it won't be fair.instead we should take a philosophical stance on it, as if we keep repeating our argument on it based on science we won't get anywhere.no sides wins a debate.I mean no scientist is able to discover afterlife yet so how the hell are we supposed to get anywhere on this.so the point is we take a philosophical approach to it Oh, the old classic "Science can't prove it so let's completely throw it out of the window and make up our own stuff that is backed by even less evidence"
Science may not have the definite complete one true answer, but it can give us ideas. Science is literally designed to not be wrong. It's based on cold hard observable facts and logical and rational thinking. It may not know exactly what happens after you die, but it knows what happens to your body and that can give us ideas. Your philosophical thinking is what won't get us anywhere. You talk about winning debates as if that's the point of the entire discussion. No amount of debates are going to unravel what happens after you die. Science can give you an actual idea, even if there is no 100% proof. Please treat your own ideas with the same amount of skepticism as you do with science.
|
    
 Ask GinyuTokusentai
|
| |
|
jason vorhees
|
Feb 8 2018, 03:28 PM
Post #48
|
- Posts:
- 642
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #14,111
- Joined:
- October 19, 2017
- Gender
- Male
- Favourite Anime
- dragonball ,jjba,yugioh
|
- GinyuTokusentai
- Feb 8 2018, 01:45 PM
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 07:30 AM
I don't see why anyone is still mentioning scientific views in those things when we all know there are none just like stuff like time,morality etc...the point is we already know there is no scientific proof for any of those especially afterlife so why mention science here?since we already know there are no scientific proof for it.so don't put science in those things as it won't be fair.instead we should take a philosophical stance on it, as if we keep repeating our argument on it based on science we won't get anywhere.no sides wins a debate.I mean no scientist is able to discover afterlife yet so how the hell are we supposed to get anywhere on this.so the point is we take a philosophical approach to it
Oh, the old classic "Science can't prove it so let's completely throw it out of the window and make up our own stuff that is backed by even less evidence" Science may not have the definite complete one true answer, but it can give us ideas. Science is literally designed to not be wrong. It's based on cold hard observable facts and logical and rational thinking. It may not know exactly what happens after you die, but it knows what happens to your body and that can give us ideas. Your philosophical thinking is what won't get us anywhere. You talk about winning debates as if that's the point of the entire discussion. No amount of debates are going to unravel what happens after you die. Science can give you an actual idea, even if there is no 100% proof. Please treat your own ideas with the same amount of skepticism as you do with science. did you understand what I meant?obviously not.or else you wouldn't reply ignorantly.please maybe read again what I meant.I honestly don't understand what you are talking about "skeptism",all these are irrelevant to what I said,well you didn't understand my comment so you wouldn't know.my point is science hasn't discovered it(afterlife) yet so its impossible to use science in a debate.and all those are 100% fact so what did i say wrong?when science discovers it then we can use science.if scientist hasn't discovered it yet then yes I am am absolutely right to say we should take a philosophical approach to it and cone to your own conclusion.there is no proof for morality in a science point of view either but we take a philosophy view to it.I honesly don't see whats so hard to understand what I said on my previous reply?how old are you may I ask?
|
|
|
| |
|
+ Ginyu
|
Feb 8 2018, 03:37 PM
Post #49
|
Leve Feyenoord 1!
- Posts:
- 4,490
- Group:
- Elite Member
- Member
- #9,685
- Joined:
- June 30, 2013
- Gender
- Female
- Country
- Netherlands
- Favourite Anime
- NJPW
- What Browser do you use?
- Chrome
- Favourite Manga
- Reading is for nerds, yo!
|
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 03:28 PM
- GinyuTokusentai
- Feb 8 2018, 01:45 PM
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 07:30 AM
I don't see why anyone is still mentioning scientific views in those things when we all know there are none just like stuff like time,morality etc...the point is we already know there is no scientific proof for any of those especially afterlife so why mention science here?since we already know there are no scientific proof for it.so don't put science in those things as it won't be fair.instead we should take a philosophical stance on it, as if we keep repeating our argument on it based on science we won't get anywhere.no sides wins a debate.I mean no scientist is able to discover afterlife yet so how the hell are we supposed to get anywhere on this.so the point is we take a philosophical approach to it
Oh, the old classic "Science can't prove it so let's completely throw it out of the window and make up our own stuff that is backed by even less evidence" Science may not have the definite complete one true answer, but it can give us ideas. Science is literally designed to not be wrong. It's based on cold hard observable facts and logical and rational thinking. It may not know exactly what happens after you die, but it knows what happens to your body and that can give us ideas. Your philosophical thinking is what won't get us anywhere. You talk about winning debates as if that's the point of the entire discussion. No amount of debates are going to unravel what happens after you die. Science can give you an actual idea, even if there is no 100% proof. Please treat your own ideas with the same amount of skepticism as you do with science.
did you understand what I meant?obviously not.or else you wouldn't reply ignorantly.please maybe read again what I meant.I honestly don't understand what you are talking about "skeptism",all these are irrelevant to what I said,well you didn't understand my comment so you wouldn't know.my point is science hasn't discovered it(afterlife) yet so its impossible to use science in a debate.and all those are 100% fact so what did i say wrong?when science discovers it then we can use science.if scientist hasn't discovered it yet then yes I am am absolutely right to say we should take a philosophical approach to it and cone to your own conclusion.there is no proof for morality in a science point of view either btw.I honesly don't see whats so hard to understand what I said on my previous reply?how old are you may I ask? You're not making yourself look any better by asking me for my age and calling me ignorant. I'm 21, not that such information will help you with your debate, the fact that you even care makes you look bad.
It's wrong of you to imply that science has no value in this debate simply because science hasn't 'discovered' afterlife yet. What do you even mean by that? Why are you even assuming that an afterlife even exists? How would it even be possible to discover it if it existed. Science can tell us how our bodies work, it gives us an understanding of how conscience works. We know we're just a heap of cells trying to survive. If you die it stops. No more neurons being activated. No more electrical and chemicals signals being sent throughout your brain. Your entire conscience simply ceases to exist if you ask me. Hard to fathom? Yes, impossible even. But it's the most logical answer. You can talk about philosophy and morality all you want, but it does not make your answer any more true. In fact, only less likely to be true. It's not based on anything except your own beliefs and perhaps desires. There's no logical step backed with evidence that an afterlife even exists. I did understand your comment. Perhaps read again and think about whether or not you understood mine.
|
    
 Ask GinyuTokusentai
|
| |
|
Bad User
|
Feb 8 2018, 03:45 PM
Post #50
|
- Posts:
- 630
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #13,968
- Joined:
- July 23, 2017
- Gender
- Other
|
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 07:30 AM
I don't see why anyone is still mentioning scientific views in those things when we all know there are none just like stuff like time,morality etc...the point is we already know there is no scientific proof for any of those especially afterlife so why mention science here?since we already know there are no scientific proof for it.so don't put science in those things as it won't be fair.instead we should take a philosophical stance on it, as if we keep repeating our argument on it based on science we won't get anywhere.no sides wins a debate.I mean no scientist is able to discover afterlife yet so how the hell are we supposed to get anywhere on this.so the point is we take a philosophical approach to it Because there is a difference between knowing that there is no proof and you can as much as phrase an opinion (which usually starts with 'I believe that...') and claiming that your opinion must be true because...stuff.
You posted this after I lectured halfbloodprince I see, about why we are using scientific facts. It's that simple. Let me give you an oversimplified example. If there's an envelope on a carpet and we all come to a debate to conclude if there is an envelope on a carpet or not, then it's pretty simple. By our universal socially accepted common sense (because it would be a bit too much to use science here), yes, we can agree there's an envelope on a carpet. But if the supposed 'envelope' is under the carpet, can we all agree? No, because unless humankind provides us methods to lift that carpet up and find out, it's common sense to agree that we can't really know. But then you (not you, ya get the point) come and say: oh, because the carpet has the color white which means the essence of all the dairy in the universe, and it also has circles on it, which circles represent the essence of everything that's round and has no edges and blabla blabla => yes, there must be an envelope under the carpet. And even represent them as concepts, which is funny, because there is no evidence, context, nothing provided to us whatsoever to back up all that explanation, it's merely a product of your imagination. And then I come and tell you: no, white is a non-color, circles are geometrical shapes and this doesn't prove anything; and then you can't come and tell me I'm stupid, because that only makes you... pick whatever adjective you find suitable.
So yes, science and common knowledge are utterly important when you're trying to convince someone that your opinion is true. Child fairy tales are not.
Edited by Bad User, Feb 8 2018, 03:52 PM.
|
|
| |
|
jason vorhees
|
Feb 8 2018, 03:47 PM
Post #51
|
- Posts:
- 642
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #14,111
- Joined:
- October 19, 2017
- Gender
- Male
- Favourite Anime
- dragonball ,jjba,yugioh
|
- GinyuTokusentai
- Feb 8 2018, 03:37 PM
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 03:28 PM
- GinyuTokusentai
- Feb 8 2018, 01:45 PM
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 07:30 AM
I don't see why anyone is still mentioning scientific views in those things when we all know there are none just like stuff like time,morality etc...the point is we already know there is no scientific proof for any of those especially afterlife so why mention science here?since we already know there are no scientific proof for it.so don't put science in those things as it won't be fair.instead we should take a philosophical stance on it, as if we keep repeating our argument on it based on science we won't get anywhere.no sides wins a debate.I mean no scientist is able to discover afterlife yet so how the hell are we supposed to get anywhere on this.so the point is we take a philosophical approach to it
Oh, the old classic "Science can't prove it so let's completely throw it out of the window and make up our own stuff that is backed by even less evidence" Science may not have the definite complete one true answer, but it can give us ideas. Science is literally designed to not be wrong. It's based on cold hard observable facts and logical and rational thinking. It may not know exactly what happens after you die, but it knows what happens to your body and that can give us ideas. Your philosophical thinking is what won't get us anywhere. You talk about winning debates as if that's the point of the entire discussion. No amount of debates are going to unravel what happens after you die. Science can give you an actual idea, even if there is no 100% proof. Please treat your own ideas with the same amount of skepticism as you do with science.
did you understand what I meant?obviously not.or else you wouldn't reply ignorantly.please maybe read again what I meant.I honestly don't understand what you are talking about "skeptism",all these are irrelevant to what I said,well you didn't understand my comment so you wouldn't know.my point is science hasn't discovered it(afterlife) yet so its impossible to use science in a debate.and all those are 100% fact so what did i say wrong?when science discovers it then we can use science.if scientist hasn't discovered it yet then yes I am am absolutely right to say we should take a philosophical approach to it and cone to your own conclusion.there is no proof for morality in a science point of view either btw.I honesly don't see whats so hard to understand what I said on my previous reply?how old are you may I ask?
You're not making yourself look any better by asking me for my age and calling me ignorant. I'm 21, not that such information will help you with your debate, the fact that you even care makes you look bad. It's wrong of you to imply that science has no value in this debate simply because science hasn't 'discovered' afterlife yet. What do you even mean by that? Why are you even assuming that an afterlife even exists? How would it even be possible to discover it if it existed. Science can tell us how our bodies work, it gives us an understanding of how conscience works. We know we're just a heap of cells trying to survive. If you die it stops. No more neurons being activated. No more electrical and chemicals signals being sent throughout your brain. Your entire conscience simply ceases to exist if you ask me. Hard to fathom? Yes, impossible even. But it's the most logical answer. You can talk about philosophy and morality all you want, but it does not make your answer any more true. In fact, only less likely to be true. It's not based on anything except your own beliefs and perhaps desires. There's no logical step backed with evidence that an afterlife even exists. I did understand your comment. Perhaps read again and think about whether or not you understood mine. then why are you debating about it if you know it won't get us no where?have you just come here to waste time?and no you obviously don't truly know what phylosophy is.true phylosophy is infinite.there is no limit to what knowledge it holds.to understand the afterlife we take a philosophical approach to it just like the concept of time.they are both just as valid as each other so why aren't you arguing agaisnt people who believes in the concept of time?neither has any scientific proof.there is still no proof whether there is truly something called time or is all an illusion
ok and the concept "logic" is all connected to phylosophy.just wanted to get that out there.
|
|
|
| |
|
jason vorhees
|
Feb 8 2018, 03:53 PM
Post #52
|
- Posts:
- 642
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #14,111
- Joined:
- October 19, 2017
- Gender
- Male
- Favourite Anime
- dragonball ,jjba,yugioh
|
- Bad User
- Feb 8 2018, 03:45 PM
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 07:30 AM
I don't see why anyone is still mentioning scientific views in those things when we all know there are none just like stuff like time,morality etc...the point is we already know there is no scientific proof for any of those especially afterlife so why mention science here?since we already know there are no scientific proof for it.so don't put science in those things as it won't be fair.instead we should take a philosophical stance on it, as if we keep repeating our argument on it based on science we won't get anywhere.no sides wins a debate.I mean no scientist is able to discover afterlife yet so how the hell are we supposed to get anywhere on this.so the point is we take a philosophical approach to it
Because there is a difference between knowing that there is no proof and you can as much as phrase an opinion (which usually starts with 'I believe that...') and claiming that your opinion must be true because...stuff. You posted this after I lectured halfbloodprince I see, about why we are using scientific facts. It's that simple. Let me give you an oversimplified example. If there's an envelope on a carpet and we all come to a debate to conclude if there is an envelope on a carpet or not, then it's pretty simple. By our universal socially accepted common sense (because it would be a bit too much to use science here), yes, we can agree there's an envelope on a carpet. But if the supposed 'envelope' is under the carpet, can we all agree? No, because unless humankind provides us methods to lift that carpet up and find out, it's common sense to agree that we can't really know. But then you (not you, ya get the point) come and say: oh, because the carpet has the color white which means the essence of all the dairy in the universe, and it also has circles on it, which circles represent the essence of everything that's round and has no edges and blabla blabla => yes, there must be an envelope under the carpet. And even represent them as concepts, which is funny, because there is no evidence, context, nothing provided to us whatsoever to back up all that explanation, it's merely a product of your imagination. And then I come and tell you: no, white is a color, circles are geometrical shapes and this doesn't prove anything and then you can't tell me I'm stupid, because that only makes you... pick whatever adjective you find suitable. So yes, science and common knowledge are utterly important when you're trying to convince someone that your opinion is true. Child fairy tales are not. Well here we go.another one who completely threw everything I meant out the window and choose to listen to what he thinks I meant just to makes things easier when I clearly didn't meant that. where did I say science isn't important.read man.or do you have trouble comprehending? read my other reply because I won't bother waste time with people who can't understand what am saying
|
|
|
| |
|
+ Emmeth
|
Feb 8 2018, 04:00 PM
Post #53
|
I ♥ Yoeri
- Posts:
- 20,075
- Group:
- Legend
- Member
- #8,985
- Joined:
- February 7, 2013
- Country
- Japan
|
Yikes, what's with the passive-aggressive attitude?
Science will always hold better ground than other theories. Scientific theories will always trump religious or other theories.
|
 My Twitch Page
|
| |
|
jason vorhees
|
Feb 8 2018, 04:03 PM
Post #54
|
- Posts:
- 642
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #14,111
- Joined:
- October 19, 2017
- Gender
- Male
- Favourite Anime
- dragonball ,jjba,yugioh
|
- Emmeth
- Feb 8 2018, 04:00 PM
Yikes, what's with the passive-aggressive attitude?
Science will always hold better ground than other theories. Scientific theories will always trump religious or other theories.
who said it doesn't?but science is also part of philosophy as true philosophy is infinite .there we go maybe I am talking on a lv too high for some people to comprehend my approach to these "things" . jeez nobody knows philosophy/theology/theories here
afterlife is just spirituality, has nothing to do with religion
|
|
|
| |
|
+ Emmeth
|
Feb 8 2018, 04:11 PM
Post #55
|
I ♥ Yoeri
- Posts:
- 20,075
- Group:
- Legend
- Member
- #8,985
- Joined:
- February 7, 2013
- Country
- Japan
|
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 04:03 PM
- Emmeth
- Feb 8 2018, 04:00 PM
Yikes, what's with the passive-aggressive attitude?
Science will always hold better ground than other theories. Scientific theories will always trump religious or other theories.
who said it doesn't?but science is also part of philosophy as true philosophy is infinite .there we go maybe I am talking on a lv too high for some people to comprehend my approach to these "things" . jeez nobody knows philosophy/theology/theories here afterlife is just spirituality, has nothing to do with religion Yeah, afterlife is spirituality but so is religion. Maybe you don't always connect the two but they do share a common theme.
Science can be part of philosophy, but not always. Science can also be technology.
What are we trying to conclude here?
|
 My Twitch Page
|
| |
|
jason vorhees
|
Feb 8 2018, 04:14 PM
Post #56
|
- Posts:
- 642
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #14,111
- Joined:
- October 19, 2017
- Gender
- Male
- Favourite Anime
- dragonball ,jjba,yugioh
|
- Emmeth
- Feb 8 2018, 04:11 PM
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 04:03 PM
- Emmeth
- Feb 8 2018, 04:00 PM
Yikes, what's with the passive-aggressive attitude?
Science will always hold better ground than other theories. Scientific theories will always trump religious or other theories.
who said it doesn't?but science is also part of philosophy as true philosophy is infinite .there we go maybe I am talking on a lv too high for some people to comprehend my approach to these "things" . jeez nobody knows philosophy/theology/theories here afterlife is just spirituality, has nothing to do with religion
Yeah, afterlife is spirituality but so is religion. Maybe you don't always connect the two but they do share a common theme. Science can be part of philosophy, but not always. Science can also be technology. What are we trying to conclude here? ok it seems nobody here has ever learn about true phylosophies so am wasting my time here...(religion are just organized so saying afterlife is connected to religion makes no sense whatsoever)
so everything you see is connected to true knowledge which is true philosophy.let me give you a clue knowledge isn't created or destroyed but its eternal.now grasp on this for a while and you may gain true wisdom
|
|
|
| |
|
+ Emmeth
|
Feb 8 2018, 04:24 PM
Post #57
|
I ♥ Yoeri
- Posts:
- 20,075
- Group:
- Legend
- Member
- #8,985
- Joined:
- February 7, 2013
- Country
- Japan
|
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 04:14 PM
- Emmeth
- Feb 8 2018, 04:11 PM
- jason vorhees
- Feb 8 2018, 04:03 PM
- Emmeth
- Feb 8 2018, 04:00 PM
Yikes, what's with the passive-aggressive attitude?
Science will always hold better ground than other theories. Scientific theories will always trump religious or other theories.
who said it doesn't?but science is also part of philosophy as true philosophy is infinite .there we go maybe I am talking on a lv too high for some people to comprehend my approach to these "things" . jeez nobody knows philosophy/theology/theories here afterlife is just spirituality, has nothing to do with religion
Yeah, afterlife is spirituality but so is religion. Maybe you don't always connect the two but they do share a common theme. Science can be part of philosophy, but not always. Science can also be technology. What are we trying to conclude here?
ok it seems nobody here has ever learn about true phylosophies so am wasting my time here...(religion are just organized so saying afterlife is connected to religion makes no sense whatsoever) so everything you see is connected to true knowledge which is true philosophy.let me give you a clue knowledge isn't created or destroyed but its eternal.now grasp on this for a while and you may gain true wisdom Philosophy isn't linear. You are suggesting there's one true philosophy to life when it's really many. Maybe you studied philosophy in school, and if you did you've completely missed the point of it.
Philosophy is the study of knowledge and existence in itself, and since we know so little about why we are here it's considered speculation.
For instance: "Is there an afterlife?" is a philosophical question since we're pondering it.
But hey, don't let me waste your precious time.
|
 My Twitch Page
|
| |
|
jason vorhees
|
Feb 8 2018, 04:28 PM
Post #58
|
- Posts:
- 642
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #14,111
- Joined:
- October 19, 2017
- Gender
- Male
- Favourite Anime
- dragonball ,jjba,yugioh
|
there is one true phylosophy of life, its all connected.when you ponder on what I said"knowledge is eternal".you shall know the true meaning of life.
|
|
|
| |
|
halfbloodprince
|
Feb 8 2018, 06:27 PM
Post #59
|
- Posts:
- 60
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #14,244
- Joined:
- February 5, 2018
|
- Bad User
- Feb 8 2018, 07:18 AM
- halfbloodprince
- Feb 7 2018, 02:23 PM
- Bad User
- Feb 7 2018, 06:40 AM
- halfbloodprince
- Feb 6 2018, 08:33 PM
fire is light, passion, fuel, energy = life.
water is dark, cool, and translucent = death
Nah. Fire is just oxidation of stuff. Water is 2 molecules of Hydrogen mixed with 1 of Oxygen. And usually it has a whole culture of microorganisms inside. Still don't know how that proves that there's life after death.
im talking about polarity 2 extreme opposites, yin and yang forces of positive and negative dont insult yourself by acting like you cant understand these simple concepts.
Stay chill, 'cause I'm not. Because they're not concepts at all, nor scientific facts as Demon Kaedo pointed out. They're mere metaphors, I studied such those in highschool, in Literature classes. Still doesn't prove anything. I also left some other post unattended. - Quote:
-
Have you ever studied microbiology ? Or do you know exactly how can we reproduce a living cell from molecules out of nothing?
If you can answer that sure i will answer your question
No, it wasn't in my field at all. But if you can provide a study with researches you yourself find sensible and accurate, I'd be more than happy to take that into consideration. a metaphor is a concept lol and polarity is not a metaphor. the definition of polarity is
the state of having two opposite or contradictory tendencies, opinions, or aspects. "the polarity between male and female
thats from google. notice how it gives male and female for opposing polarities. well you may not realize it but everything revolves around the law of polarity. its not a metaphor it is ancient philosophical concepts of yin and yang, duality and balance.
therefore we have night and day.
therefore we have male and female
so like i said you may not realize it but we actually do live in a fractal almost like a mirror where everything syncs up. so if day + night = day
male + female = child
and 1 + 0 = 1
then life + death = life.
because its not about just one side or the other its about the whole picture. life and death are 2 parts of a whole and when you experience both only then can you be reborn.
the very fact that we ended up here from out of nowhere proves it.
|
|
|
| |
|
+ Emmeth
|
Feb 8 2018, 06:48 PM
Post #60
|
I ♥ Yoeri
- Posts:
- 20,075
- Group:
- Legend
- Member
- #8,985
- Joined:
- February 7, 2013
- Country
- Japan
|
I feel like you're mixing correct and incorrect formulas to your answer.
What does male + female = child have to do with it?
|
 My Twitch Page
|
| |
| 0 users reading this topic
|