Why I don't preach anymore

Exactly my point. Their not certain.

"I love to see people struggling for their purpose in life..."

Well then nothing we say is certain, so I might as well never speak to anyone about anything because everything I say is uncertain.

"How can we be just in a world without mercy and merciful in a world without justice?"

Well there is no such thing as 'wrong' or 'right'. After all what we base as 'true', is only a perception.

"The summit is just a halfway point"

There is most definitely right and wrong. And that right and wrong is based on probability.

It is wrong to assume the improbable, and it is right to assume the probable.

This may seem like a concept that is difficult to accept... but it is the way it is. No matter how much you may want to bet against the odds to win more than the next guy, in the end, it is only the man who bets on the odds that will prosper in the end.

We are limited by human perception and intellect (which is an obvious given), however given that we are limited, we must use the information we have.

So although I agree that preaching is not the best way to exist, you are doing people a dis-service if you don't provide them information that you know that they may not, which may in turn help them make a more intelligent decision.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

What we base as 'true', is only a perception. Probability is only an interpretation. We identify probabilities with degrees of confidence or partial beliefs.

Of course, we must ask what makes a belief ‘suitable’. Yet what is suitable for one individual may not be suitable for another. Preaching, yes has its benefits, yet the problem lies with the preacher's beliefs, ethics and intentions.

"The summit is just a halfway point"

Fool, the larger the collection of perceptions the less biased the overall result... and therefore, the most true. Your words are pointless and point out the obvious and skew from the point that is to be made past that point.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

so you do or you don't agree that what we base as 'true', is only a perception. That probability is only an interpretation. And that we identify probabilities with degrees of confidence or partial beliefs.

"The summit is just a halfway point"

Probability is not an interpretation. We exist in a world where math is the most definite and reliable method of collecting and parsing data. If you argue this, then you should not be on the internet for the technology that provides your screen to your internet connection to your keyboard is based on precise mathematics.

The mathematics of science and the conclusions that are made are no different than those that we would make in less "scientific" endeavors... including morality. The same rules of mathematical organization and scrutinization of data applies.

As a result, only one truth is outputted given a certain number of inputs. As the number of inputs increase, so does the one truth alter. Hence, to share information (or preach) is to provide a human with as much input as possible, therefore creating one logical output.

Given a sane person that understands the reliability of mathematics, each person of this sort will look at the same information the exact same way. The supposed "differences" in methods of processing this data are not due to the differences in perception or interpretation... they are the result of different stored information that the observer simply isn't aware of.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

quote:

---

The supposed "differences" in methods of processing this data are not due to the differences in perception or interpretation... they are the result of different stored information that the observer simply isn't aware of.

---

"The summit is just a halfway point"
[  Edited by summit at   ]

I understand Decius that probability is a good way to live life but what about the spiritual aspect. How can we figure that through math?

"I love to see people struggling for their purpose in life..."

Summit: Yet again, you fail to grasp that preachers a-z differ in opinion solely because they have experienced different information. Yet again, you attempt to blur the final conclusion by spewing out information that may be true, but is still irrelevent in an attempt to assert intellectual awareness.

Jacker: By math i do not mean science.... When i say math i mean the simple concept of taking in information and mathematically assessing it. Life is binary... you are binary. You eat food because you are hungry. You type on a keyboard to create words. You visit this website to quench something.

Every small binary question joins with another and form a conclusion... that conclusions joins other conclusions to form another binary question.

Even spirituality is observed in a binary way... this isn't my interpretation... it's just the way humans interact with the world. Humans are victims of logic: we have no other method of assessing data. Our entire academic and scientific community must yield to logic because that is how our brains operate.

Spirituality... IS math. The beauty of "nirvana" or discovering enlightenment (described as joining the universe and realizing that everything is one) is the result of a full understanding of how everything relates. Everything relates in binary ways... so when you understand how your building is held up by pillars... and those pillars are made up of a certain material that goes 30 feet into the ground which reaches a base of concrete that spins with the world... then when you touch the wall of the pillar you are able to sense all these connections and outcomes and see what the pillar actually is.

Wouldn't you say that is spirituality? And beauty?

That is a defining moment of being a human. That sense of overwhelming beauty captures you during moments like that. And all of that is the result of logical probable conclusions.

So right now, I could be preaching... I'm sharing with you a new way of exploring the concept of enlightenment and looking at a wall.

Am I hurting you? Of course not. I'm giving you the exact information that provides me with perspective. Now, you will, if even for a moment, share my perspective and be able to make a more educated guess about how you wish to view the world around you.

So, in every way, I have helped you. Just like you will help others (and even me) by sharing your logical unbiased perspective.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

Decius: I don't think you read Summit's post correctly. Summit's arguement is that opinions do differ between all (and including preachers a-z) because they come from different contexts. Summit's post is valid (and well thought out), because it indicates that preacherA obtains different information from that of preacherB. This is what an openminded intellect is aware of. To be caught up in all of quasi-logical probability, ignores the subjective point of view.

JackerJones: good question. Spirituality is a natural phenomenon within people. However people have created religions that are outside the box of math (usually illogical). Probability applies to interpretation (as Summit stated well).

Well I guess this thread should be unwanted preaching. It's a little different when someone asks someone to tell them their beliefs.

I don't buy it though decius. That my whole life everything in it can be interpreted. Sure there's instances where i predict the future through assessing the probability of something happening but when i role three dices the odds of three sixes coming up is slim, but it can happen. So what i'm saying is that your theories are definitely accurate but how do you make them exact?

"I love to see people struggling for their purpose in life..."

kinison: With enough experience and effort, one learns the ability to take information from the other person and absorb it as true pure information without filtering it. Summit's post is not relevent because I am speaking only of those that are able to do that.

Logical probability ignores subjectivity because subjectivity is a human weakness that can be un-taught.

Jacker: It all becomes more and more exact as you absorb more and more information. If you knew enough about air velocity, centrifugal forces, the weights of the dice and their reactive forces against each other against gravity you could pretty reasonably predict what the next roll would be.

Making these theories exact is the whole process of life.

"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

Decius: Probability is a measure of the degree of belief that any well-defined proposition (an event) will turn out to be true. I recommend you to read into Bayesian probability and/or subjective probability. Which states that the mathematical theory of probability applies to the degree of plausibility of a statement. This also applies to the degree of believability contained within the rational agents of a truth statement. You can get an idea from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability#Bayesian_data_analysi
s

In regards to a situation such as the toss of a coin, yes the more information known about the conditions the more certain you are. Yet probabilities are really a measure of the lack of knowledge about the conditions which might affect the coin toss and thus merely represent our beliefs about the experiment. "If the real probability reasoning is followed out to its conclusion, it seems that there is `really' no probability at all, but certainty, if knowledge is complete". Knight.

"The summit is just a halfway point"