# So What is Spirit?

Iacchus32
... or, why do we call it Spiritual Energy?

If matter were just another manifestation of energy, does that make matter the visible property of that which is invisible, energy?

Take for example when we dream, and our "conscious energy" is directed inwardly, and we begin to experience a different reality ... where at times we become lucidly aware, "consciously" that is. Are we not in fact getting closer to the source of our "true being," and hence the spiritual source of all? Could this be why dreams affect us so personally, albeit they tend to be in a constant state of flux, and yet, isn't this the nature of energy patterns and fields that exist behind the scenes?

And, being more of a fluid realm, doesn't it also imply a certain degree of mastery, before the dreams become lucid and take on a life of their own? At which point we begin to experience their true effect and hence, spiritual dimension?

Mumeishi
Originally posted by Iacchus32
... or, why do we call it Spiritual Energy?

Who is we? Speak for yourself.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
... If matter were just another manifestation of energy, does that make matter the visible property of that which is invisible, energy?
Energy is not always invisible, in fact, energy is all that allows us to see anything at all - light. Matter is not always visible eg. air.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
... Take for example when we dream, and our "conscious energy" is directed inwardly, and we begin to experience a different reality ... where at times we become lucidly aware, "consciously" that is.

It has nothing to do with energy. Perhaps 'attention' is closer to the mark.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
...
Are we not in fact getting closer to the source of our "true being," and hence the spiritual source of all? Could this be why dreams affect us so personally,

Perhaps

Originally posted by Iacchus32
albeit they tend to be in a constant state of flux, and yet, isn't this the nature of energy patterns and fields that exist behind the scenes?

Everything is ina state of flux apart from perhaps the 'constants' of physics such as the speed of light and the Planck length.

Originally posted by Iacchus32

And, being more of a fluid realm, doesn't it also imply a certain degree of mastery, before the dreams become lucid and take on a life of their own? At which point we begin to experience their true effect and hence, spiritual dimension?

Last edited by a moderator:
Iacchus32
Well, what was there before the "physical manifestation" of energy -- i.e., what we call matter -- came into being?

Ahses to ashes, dust to dust, and then what? That's it? What is this thing that we call conscious energy? Where does it go? Does it just dissipate, like many died-in-the-wool materialists would have you believe? How do you know that we don't in fact come in touch with this "spiritual energy" source when we dream?

Mumeishi
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Well, what was there before the "physical manifestation" of energy -- i.e., what we call matter -- came into being?

Energy

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Ahses to ashes, dust to dust, and then what? That's it?

You can't object to an idea on the basis that it doesn't feel emotionally fulfilling.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
What is this thing that we call conscious energy? Where does it go? Does it just dissipate, like many died-in-the-wool materialists would have you believe?

No one who knows anything about psychology or neurology calls it 'conscious energy' . It's not a substance or a permanent or unchnging or separate thing - its a process. Where does the picture 'go' when you turn off the TV? Where does the walking 'go' when you stand still?

Originally posted by Iacchus32
How do you know that we don't in fact come in touch with this "spiritual energy" source when we dream?

There's no evidence for a separate or substantial 'spiritual energy'. I don't think people even know what they mean when they talk about this 'energy' Do you mean the sort of energy that is measured in Joules? Energy has a specific meaning and is fairly well understood. It is as physical as any matter. There is no need to postulate additional 'mysterious' forms of energy.

Iacchus32
Originally posted by Mumeishi
Energy
Is that to say that energy has always existed, even before the advent of what we call the "material universe?" If so, doesn't that offer a probable first cause, and hence the possibility that a Creator (God) has always existed in the form of pure energy? (or whatever form that might entail without matter).

By the way, how is it possible to transmit "encoded information" via energy waves? ... light waves, radio waves, etc. While here it is we can generate all kinds of "phyisical effects" through the use of this information.

You can't object to an idea on the basis that it doesn't feel emotionally fulfilling.
So what does it mean by having your "spirits uplifted?" Doesn't that in fact convey a sense of emotional fulfillment, indeed, based upon an increase in energy level? That's the best way I can describe it.

No one who knows anything about psychology or neurology calls it 'conscious energy' . It's not a substance or a permanent or unchnging or separate thing - its a process. Where does the picture 'go' when you turn off the TV? Where does the walking 'go' when you stand still?
Emotions are definitely a form of conscious energy, whereas thoughts are more like the "voltage pressure" -- with respect to electrical energy -- and emotions would be comarable to the current. So, if it isn't a form of energy, then what is it?

By the way, the mind doesn't typically shut off when you go to sleep, it begins to dream.

There's no evidence for a separate or substantial 'spiritual energy'. I don't think people even know what they mean when they talk about this 'energy' Do you mean the sort of energy that is measured in Joules? Energy has a specific meaning and is fairly well understood. It is as physical as any matter. There is no need to postulate additional 'mysterious' forms of energy.
None whatsoever huh? But what if God does exist? How would you go about describing this "mysterious power" which, can manifest itself if and when it pleases or, remain completely invisible altogether, that holds sway over everything?

If energy is the cause of what matter is the effect, then yes, I think it's an idea worth considering.

Greeting, Iacchus32.

... or, why do we call it Spiritual Energy?
I always figured it had to do with some nebulous field imagined to be floating about without a physical body.

If matter were just another manifestation of energy, does that make matter the visible property of that which is invisible, energy?
Well, I’ve never seen a really small particle of matter so as to proclaim it visible, but I think I get what you’re hinting at. I imagine it as something of a snake swallowing it’s own tail. Because of this, to go off on a tangent at any point along the circle and proclaim the exiting point to be the starting point from which all else derives seems intuitively wrong to me.

Take for example when we dream, and our "conscious energy" is directed inwardly, and we begin to experience a different reality ... where at times we become lucidly aware, "consciously" that is.
Is it really our “conscious energy” directing inward, I admit I’m not up on ‘dream theory’, but thought it was more of a sub-conscience thing…

Are we not in fact getting closer to the source of our "true being," and hence the spiritual source of all?
You might, actually, only be getting closer to the more primitive, reptilian, ‘source’. On the other hand, I’ve had plenty of hellish dreams filled with butchery, suffering, and torment, and so from these experiences, the idea of getting closer to the “spiritual source” seems to make sense. I would, for example, distrust the idea of a spiritual source so fickle as to allow me to build a vision of it by only focusing on the pleasant dreams. After all, it has been fairly well my experience to find, that if something sounds to good to be true, it most probably is.

Could this be why dreams affect us so personally,…
Dreams don’t have to affect anyone so strongly, as far as I can tell. Most people seem to either not remember their dreams in the first place, or ignore them.

…albeit they tend to be in a constant state of flux, and yet, isn't this the nature of energy patterns and fields that exist behind the scenes?
Interesting, I’d have to think about it.

…And, being more of a fluid realm, doesn't it also imply a certain degree of mastery, before the dreams become lucid and take on a life of their own? At which point we begin to experience their true effect and hence, spiritual dimension?
Not sure I follow you here. I know that I once had a great mastery over my dreams for a period of perhaps two years. I don’t believe I ever met another individual who could do with a dream what I could do. What any of it might have had to do with a “spiritual dimension” is another story.

Mumeishi
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Is that to say that energy has always existed, even before the advent of what we call the "material universe?" If so, doesn't that offer a probable first cause, and hence the possibility that a Creator (God) has always existed in the form of pure energy? (or whatever form that might entail without matter).

If the physical universe had a beginning, then that would have been the beginning of energy too, because energy is physical.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
By the way, how is it possible to transmit "encoded information" via energy waves? ... light waves, radio waves, etc. While here it is we can generate all kinds of "phyisical effects" through the use of this information.

Why not? Information can be stored and transmitted in the structure and pattern of any medium ie. matter or energy. Matter and energy can interact because both are really types of energy.

Originally posted by Iacchus32

So what does it mean by having your "spirits uplifted?" Doesn't that in fact convey a sense of emotional fulfillment, indeed, based upon an increase in energy level? That's the best way I can describe it.

Yes, but its a metaphor. You feel more energetic and there might even be hormones that allow more stored energy to be released, but there is no separate body of 'mystical energy' which is activated.

Originally posted by Iacchus32

Emotions are definitely a form of conscious energy, whereas thoughts are more like the "voltage pressure" -- with respect to electrical energy -- and emotions would be comarable to the current. So, if it isn't a form of energy, then what is it?

It is what your brain is doing. There is energy involved in brain activity of course - ultimately your brain like all matter *is* energy. But you cannot feel the energy directly - what you think and feel is complex informational processes about your external and internal environment. If something feels like energy, that may be just mode of representation withing you brain. Do not take superficial sensations as reality.

Originally posted by Iacchus32

By the way, the mind doesn't typically shut off when you go to sleep, it begins to dream.

Only some of the time. And there is no dreaming under general anasthesia or in a coma.

You are afraid of 'oblivion' aren't you? Don't worry - for the subject, death is an event that is never reached - it always lies in the subjective future - never the present or the past.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
None whatsoever huh? But what if God does exist? How would you go about describing this "mysterious power" which, can manifest itself if and when it pleases or, remain completely invisible altogether, that holds sway over everything?

I have no need to find an explanation for that which has no detectable effects - there is no more need to explain God than to explain extradimensional polyps, gravity elves or how Great Cthulhu can fly with such an unaerodynamic shape.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
If energy is the cause of what matter is the effect, then yes, I think it's an idea worth considering.

More specifically matter is a relatively stable form of energy.

Last edited:
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
our spiritual energy, or life energy, whatever you like to call it is like electricity that runs a television...

Mumeishi
Are you going to support your claim?

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Well, what was there before the "physical manifestation" of energy -- i.e., what we call matter -- came into being?

Ahses to ashes, dust to dust, and then what? That's it? What is this thing that we call conscious energy? Where does it go?

Where does what go?

"Conscious energy" is a fabrication of the religious mind, and has no connection to what physicists call "energy".

Iacchus32
Well, I’ve never seen a really small particle of matter so as to proclaim it visible, but I think I get what you’re hinting at. I imagine it as something of a snake swallowing it’s own tail. Because of this, to go off on a tangent at any point along the circle and proclaim the exiting point to be the starting point from which all else derives seems intuitively wrong to me.
Everything must begin with a foundation though, in which case I would have to say energy (what others might call spirit) is the foundation for all that exists. Whereas if there was any distinction to be made, it would have to be between matter and spirit, where matter is the physical outcropping of energy and spirit the non-physical outcropping (not unlike radio waves I suspect).

And here, I don't claim to understand the exact relationship on how this works. But rather, I'm trying to find a way to reconcile the material with the immaterial (or spiritual), both of which I know exist.

Is it really our “conscious energy” directing inward, I admit I’m not up on ‘dream theory’, but thought it was more of a sub-conscience thing…
And yet I've experienced dreams myself, where in fact I was conscious, but in a completely different reality. Take for example my dream about the Indian Tapestry on the following page ...

http://www.dionysus.org/x0901.html

You might, actually, only be getting closer to the more primitive, reptilian, ‘source’. On the other hand, I’ve had plenty of hellish dreams filled with butchery, suffering, and torment, and so from these experiences, the idea of getting closer to the “spiritual source” seems to make sense. I would, for example, distrust the idea of a spiritual source so fickle as to allow me to build a vision of it by only focusing on the pleasant dreams. After all, it has been fairly well my experience to find, that if something sounds to good to be true, it most probably is.
Ever see the movie Jacob's Ladder? Where the guy died on the battlefield in Vietnam and found himself living in a nightmare between two worlds -- heaven and hell if you will -- with all kinds of butcheries and machinations taking place, until finally, at the end of the movie, his son (a young boy), stood at the height of the steps "leading upstairs," and as his father approached he reached out his hand and said, "Dad, are you ready to go now?"

It's almost as if he had to go through this whole process of sorting things out, represented by the events in his life in the movie, until finally he could begin "his ascent."

Dreams don’t have to affect anyone so strongly, as far as I can tell. Most people seem to either not remember their dreams in the first place, or ignore them.
Which isn't to say they don't have a strong psychological impact.

Not sure I follow you here. I know that I once had a great mastery over my dreams for a period of perhaps two years. I don’t believe I ever met another individual who could do with a dream what I could do. What any of it might have had to do with a “spiritual dimension” is another story.
And yet it does allude to a state of existence beyond the norm of what we can see with our "physical eyes."

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by Mumeishi
Are you going to support your claim?
in case you didn't notice, this IS a philosophy forum...i don't need to support my claim necessarily... i think many people forget that it is okay to speculate and express your opinion...mumeishi, do you have an opinion on why it is referred to spiritual energy?

Mumeishi
Originally posted by Kerrie
in case you didn't notice, this IS a philosophy forum...i don't need to support my claim necessarily... i think many people forget that it is okay to speculate and express your opinion...mumeishi, do you have an opinion on why it is referred to spiritual energy?

Yes you do have to support your statements. In philosophy we support our statements with rational arguments otherwise it's meaningless opinionating.

Who refers to what as 'spiritual energy'? I don't use the term. Whether some people refer to certain feelings that way, might have cultural reasons and might be associated with the way those feelings are consciously represented. It doesn't mean that there must be a special mysterious form of energy (which is - as always - undetectable by verifiable means). It is probably representational and metaphorical and thus really has nothing to do with actual energy as the term is scientifically understood. So I would say it was a misnomer.

Iacchus32
Originally posted by Mumeishi
Who refers to what as 'spiritual energy'? I don't use the term. Whether some people refer to certain feelings that way, might have cultural reasons and might be associated with the way those feelings are consciously represented. It doesn't mean that there must be a special mysterious form of energy (which is - as always - undetectable by verifiable means). It is probably representational and metaphorical and thus really has nothing to do with actual energy as the term is scientifically understood. So I would say it was a misnomer.
The only thing that science neglects is that our existence is all part of the human equation. Which is to say, the only way we can truly verify anything, first and foremost, is through the human condition, otherwise we lose sight of the fact that we exist, as humans, and the world around us becomes purely mechanistic.

Therefore we musn't lose sight of those spiritual underpinnings which underscore who we are.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by Mumeishi
Yes you do have to support your statements. In philosophy we support our statements with rational arguments otherwise it's meaningless opinionating.

Who refers to what as 'spiritual energy'? I don't use the term. Whether some people refer to certain feelings that way, might have cultural reasons and might be associated with the way those feelings are consciously represented. It doesn't mean that there must be a special mysterious form of energy (which is - as always - undetectable by verifiable means). It is probably representational and metaphorical and thus really has nothing to do with actual energy as the term is scientifically understood. So I would say it was a misnomer.

i support my statement by saying this is my opinion and how i see it...enough said on that...

and mysterious energy? please don't put your words as mine, as i never made this claim, you just assumed i was insinuating that...

is it not true that it takes energy to keep one alive? and if that one is a dead carcass, doesn't energy take over in the decaying process? it is my opinion that this same life energy is the same as spiritual energy, similar to the electricity that runs a tv or computer...

i find it ironic by the way you have a yin yang as your avatar when from the posts you have made suggest you don't believe in a spiritual level...the yin yang is the symbol for balance-such as material (yang) and spiritual (yin)...

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Everything must begin with a foundation though, in which case I would have to say energy (what others might call spirit) is the foundation for all that exists.
If everything must begin with a foundation, then where is the foundation for this energy, spirit, or whatever you mean by those words?
I see two conflicting statements;
1) Everything must begin with a foundation.
2) Energy needs no foundation.

Whereas if there was any distinction to be made, it would have to be between matter and spirit, where matter is the physical outcropping of energy and spirit the non-physical outcropping (not unlike radio waves I suspect).
And here, I don't claim to understand the exact relationship on how this works. But rather, I'm trying to find a way to reconcile the material with the immaterial (or spiritual), both of which I know exist.
I’m not really comfortable with the interchanging of words taking place in the above statement. I do not, for example, consider the effect between two magnets as being of a spiritual nature. It is certainly quite magical, however.

And yet I've experienced dreams myself, where in fact I was conscious, but in a completely different reality. Take for example my dream about the Indian Tapestry on the following page ...
I know that there are people who believe dreams are real and the wake-state to be an illusion. I just want to know why they think in such a way. I have been unconscious more times than I wish, and no dreaming took place. I have also been self-aware, or conscious (if you prefer), while I was dreaming. I knew it was a dream while I was having it and could alter events that would have happened by ‘thinking’ for something different to happen instead (they were recurring dreams). The thing is that I knew it was a dream even while it was taking place, and this left me convinced that dreams were, well, dreams.

It's almost as if he had to go through this whole process of sorting things out, represented by the events in his life in the movie, until finally he could begin "his ascent."
Well, ok, but after an hour or two the movie ends, correct?

And yet it does allude to a state of existence beyond the norm of what we can see with our "physical eyes."
The problem with this is you can also close your eyes while awake, then see and imagine things too. What state of existence would that then be?

Mumeishi
Originally posted by Iacchus32
The only thing that science neglects is that our existence is all part of the human equation. Which is to say, the only way we can truly verify anything, first and foremost, is through the human condition, otherwise we lose sight of the fact that we exist, as humans, and the world around us becomes purely mechanistic.

Therefore we musn't lose sight of those spiritual underpinnings which underscore who we are.

I agree that we are human, emotional and intuitive creatures and that we shouldn't lose this. I certainly don't think we should allow ourselves to confuse these things with reason or verifiable evidence.

At one time mankind lived could not distinguish between these things, in a 'demon haunted world' where reality was fully blended with his imagination. It is only through gradual refinement of the sciences that we have learned to tell the difference betweeen them and advance our understanding of the world. But knowing the difference does not mean suppressing our intuition and emotion.

Iacchus32
If everything must begin with a foundation, then where is the foundation for this energy, spirit, or whatever you mean by those words?
I see two conflicting statements;
1) Everything must begin with a foundation.
2) Energy needs no foundation.
Indeed. Water is the "base medium" for harvesting a lake of fish. A layer of topsoil is the "base medium" for harvesting a field of hay. A floppy diskette is the "base medium" for harvesting computer bits. So why can't an energy field be the "base medium" for harvesting matter?

I’m not really comfortable with the interchanging of words taking place in the above statement. I do not, for example, consider the effect between two magnets as being of a spiritual nature. It is certainly quite magical, however.
Like I said, I don't understand all the details here, but if spirit and matter do exist, then there must be a means by which to reconcile the two. Whereas it would have to entail something which was most basic between matter and spirit -- or, most basic in general -- and I can't conceive of anything more basic than energy. Can you?

I know that there are people who believe dreams are real and the wake-state to be an illusion. I just want to know why they think in such a way. I have been unconscious more times than I wish, and no dreaming took place. I have also been self-aware, or conscious (if you prefer), while I was dreaming. I knew it was a dream while I was having it and could alter events that would have happened by ‘thinking’ for something different to happen instead (they were recurring dreams). The thing is that I knew it was a dream even while it was taking place, and this left me convinced that dreams were, well, dreams.
Except that you would not have the option to wake up in your material body after you die, and would have to "settle" for remaining awake in your so-called "dream state."

Well, ok, but after an hour or two the movie ends, correct?
Oh, it was just a movie huh? I guess that's fair enough so long as you don't get anything out of it.

The problem with this is you can also close your eyes while awake, then see and imagine things too. What state of existence would that then be?
Indeed, you can aso imagine things with your eyes wide open. But there's quite a difference between peering across the water from the surface -- or, looking just below the surface -- than becoming fully submerged and making like a fish, if you know what I mean?

Last edited:
Mumeishi
Originally posted by Kerrie
i support my statement by saying this is my opinion and how i see it...enough said on that...

!

Originally posted by Kerrie
and mysterious energy? please don't put your words as mine, as i never made this claim, you just assumed i was insinuating that...

If I misunderstood you and you are referring to the ordinary sort of energy I apologise. Your words seem to infer a quite different sort of energy since you referred to it as 'spiritual energy'. And you are defending the existence of 'life-energy' as if that was special and the existence of a 'spiritual level' below - its not too clear exactly what you mean, but very easy to interpret you as I have.

Originally posted by Kerrie
is it not true that it takes energy to keep one alive? and if that one is a dead carcass, doesn't energy take over in the decaying process? it is my opinion that this same life energy is the same as spiritual energy, similar to the electricity that runs a tv or computer...

Everything is energy. The energy of life processes is not different to or separate from the rest of the energetic processes of the universe.

Originally posted by Kerrie

i find it ironic by the way you have a yin yang as your avatar when from the posts you have made suggest you don't believe in a spiritual level...the yin yang is the symbol for balance-such as material (yang) and spiritual (yin)...

It is the symbol for harmonic opposition, it is not the symbol for unquestioning acceptance of imaginary energies. I think this is a very interesting principle but I'm not a Taoist or a 'New Ager'.

I do 'believe in' a spiritual level, but I don't believe in confusing that with physical objective reality and projecting our imagination onto the world and thus misunderstanding the world. The spiritual is internal, not some mysterious dimension or undetectable energy that floats around. I think the best way to explore the spiritual is through art and perhaps spiritual practices, not by projecting it onto the world and thinking we are learning about the world when we are just looking at our own projected imaginings.

Iacchus32
Originally posted by Mumeishi
I agree that we are human, emotional and intuitive creatures and that we shouldn't lose this. I certainly don't think we should allow ourselves to confuse these things with reason or verifiable evidence.

At one time mankind lived could not distinguish between these things, in a 'demon haunted world' where reality was fully blended with his imagination. It is only through gradual refinement of the sciences that we have learned to tell the difference betweeen them and advance our understanding of the world. But knowing the difference does not mean suppressing our intuition and emotion.
Now this is a perfectly good example of a human response, and I can appreciate that. Thanks.

Now the problem with science, in attempting to "seperate the wheat from the chaff," is it tends to hold onto the chaff but toss out the wheat, that very kernal of imagination which defines who we are. If life by its nature is a subjective experience, then how is it possible to rise above this (I'm not saying we can't) and grasp that which is objective, and not forsake our very existence?

Contrary to what science might believe, there's nothing wrong with a healthy imagination, even if it were replete with monsters from the id -- which surely do exist -- so long as we understood what they represent.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by Mumeishi
If I misunderstood you and you are referring to the ordinary sort of energy I apologise. Your words seem to infer a quite different sort of energy since you referred to it as 'spiritual energy'. And you are defending the existence of 'life-energy' as if that was special and the existence of a 'spiritual level' below - its not too clear exactly what you mean, but very easy to interpret you as I have.

I do 'believe in' a spiritual level, but I don't believe in confusing that with physical objective reality and projecting our imagination onto the world and thus misunderstanding the world. The spiritual is internal, not some mysterious dimension or undetectable energy that floats around. I think the best way to explore the spiritual is through art and perhaps spiritual practices, not by projecting it onto the world and thinking we are learning about the world when we are just looking at our own projected imaginings. [/B]

i believe life energy is special, precious and rare...and i can contribute that perspective to being a mother...

spiritual is internal, yes i agree...do you believe that exploring the spiritual through art is the only way?

Mumeishi
Originally posted by Iacchus32

Contrary to what science might believe, there's nothing wrong with a healthy imagination, even if it were replete with monsters from the id -- which surely do exist -- so long as we understood what they represent.

We are already in agreement over most of this. You are saying pretty much what I already said. Science is not *against* intuition and emotion, it is against getting confused and thinking that intuition and emotion are enough to understand the physical, objective world.

Most ground-breaking scientists have a very healthy imagination, the pure methodologists and number-crunchers rarely change the way we think.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Now this is a perfectly good example of a human response, and I can appreciate that. Thanks.

Now the problem with science, in attempting to "seperate the wheat from the chaff," is it tends to hold onto the chaff but toss out the wheat, that very kernal of imagination which defines who we are. If life by its nature is a subjective experience, then how is it possible to rise above this (I'm not saying we can't) and grasp that which is objective, and not forsake our very existence?

You can of course value spiritual, emotional and intuitive matters over factual, objective ones, but if so, I recommend you concentrate on artistic pursuits and avoid confusing it with understanding reality in-itself.

I don't agree that 'life' (presumably you mean the experience of living a human life) is inherently purely subjective. I think that subjective and objective aspects of life have a complex, mutually dependent relationship much like the Yin and Yang on my avatar.

Mumeishi
Just noticed the Thom Yorke quote in your signature - cool.

Originally posted by Kerrie
i believe life energy is special, precious and rare...and i can contribute that perspective to being a mother...

This is a vlue judgement about life. And a laudable one at that. But you shouldn't misapply this onto the world. The difference between the energy of life and that of the rest of the universe is a conceptual and semantic one that people sometimes project onto the world. There is no fundamental difference.

Originally posted by Kerrie

spiritual is internal, yes i agree...do you believe that exploring the spiritual through art is the only way?

I don't distinguish between 'spiritual' and 'existential'. Just by being and feeling what it is like to exist as a human, we are expressing this. I think that understanding reality through science and mathematics can have 'spiritual' quailities - not because our feelings can usually provide us with the truth on such matters, but because our quest for the truth is ultimately driven by human needs.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Indeed. Water is the "base medium" for harvesting a lake of fish. A layer of topsoil is the "base medium" for harvesting a field of hay. A floppy diskette is the "base medium" for harvesting computer bits. So why can't an energy field be the "base medium" for harvesting matter?
For the same reason as already touched on; the conflicting claims that everything must have a foundation, then excluding energy from this claim.

Like I said, I don't understand all the details here, but if spirit and matter do exist, then there must be a means by which to reconcile the two.
You are doing it yet again; interchanging energy and spirit !
First I'd like to have it explained to me why energy is the turtle at the bottom of the stack, and then I'd like to see support for not only the existence of spirit but also that spirit = energy. I believe there is a difference between a force and a consciousness, do you?

Whereas it would have to entail something which was most basic between matter and spirit -- or, most basic in general -- and I can't conceive of anything more basic than energy. Can you?
You are once again making the assumption that spirit exists and, as best I can tell, using the fact that people have dreams as the proof of spirit?
I don’t think the case has been made strongly enough for me to simply go along with accepting spirit as a given. Also, even if I did accept this, why should I feel confident that energy must be the key? Is it simply, to use your own words, because I can’t conceive of anything more basic than energy?
What kind of logic would that be?
Does the universe limit itself to match my mental capabilities?!

Oh, it was just a movie huh? I guess that's fair enough so long as you don't get anything out of it.
Just questioning obsessions people often have with creations coming out of Hollywood, that is all. Just because a viewer is presented with something that has a meaning for them doesn’t mean that the universe has to act accordingly.

Indeed, you can aso imagine things with your eyes wide open. But there's quite a difference between peering across the water from the surface -- or, looking just below the surface -- than becoming fully submerged and making like a fish, if you know what I mean?
But now you are putting the emphasis on imaginings that take place during the sleeping hours and holding that they are more credible than the imaginings which take place during the waking hours. On what possible grounds, I ask, do you hold this to be true, and even more to the point; why should I ?

Last edited by a moderator:
Iacchus32
Originally posted by Mumeishi
We are already in agreement over most of this. You are saying pretty much what I already said. Science is not *against* intuition and emotion, it is against getting confused and thinking that intuition and emotion are enough to understand the physical, objective world.
Even so it's the other half of the equation, and perhaps the only means by which to discover why we are truly here. Existence is not "just" material.

Most ground-breaking scientists have a very healthy imagination, the pure methodologists and number-crunchers rarely change the way we think.
That's good news.

You can of course value spiritual, emotional and intuitive matters over factual, objective ones, but if so, I recommend you concentrate on artistic pursuits and avoid confusing it with understanding reality in-itself.
And yet that which is viewed in the "objective sense," is only the material outcropping, and hence aftermath (effect), of that which stirred it into existence. By no means does it suggest the nature of a precursor or primal cause -- which, for all intents and purposes, is brought about by design or intent. This is what you don't see in your three-dimensional world view.

So, is there a spiritual design or intent behind the creation of the Universe? Indeed, energy would seem to be the orchestrating medium, while perhaps, just on the other side of the "energy barrier," operates the world of spirit which, instills purpose and gives meaning to it all.

I don't agree that 'life' (presumably you mean the experience of living a human life) is inherently purely subjective. I think that subjective and objective aspects of life have a complex, mutually dependent relationship much like the Yin and Yang on my avatar.
Truth is the vessel (form) and good is contained within (essence). This is how I perceive the relationship myself. Whereas truth acretes around the essence and is designed to serve the essence, not the other way around, otherwise all you have is that which is "formal" and "empty." Which, I'm afraid is how I view much of science.

Last edited:
Iacchus32
For the same reason as already touched on; the conflicting claims that everything must have a foundation, then excluding energy from this claim.

You are doing it yet again; interchanging energy and spirit !

I believe there is a difference between a force and a consciousness, do you?
Yes, consciousness does act as a precursor upon force, in which case it makes greater sense to say that energy is not spirit itself, but more so the medium which exists between spirit and matter, and therefore contains elements of both.

In which case we have three things involved: 1) the intent or motive = "spiritual design" 2) the force or medium = the release of energy, and 3) the outcome or effect = the material world.

Thus I think it's possible to have both a spiritual world (that which is immaterial) and a material world, separated by an invisible energy barrier, which serves as the go-between or medium between both cause (spirit) and effect (matter).

I don’t think the case has been made strongly enough for me to simply go along with accepting spirit as a given. Also, even if I did accept this, why should I feel confident that energy must be the key? Is it simply, to use your own words, because I can’t conceive of anything more basic than energy?
No, because the outcroppings of spirit are most often conveyed in terms of energy.

What kind of logic would that be?
The kind of logic that might facillitate an answer.

Does the universe limit itself to match my mental capabilities?!
And yet there does seem to be a message behind it all now doesn't there?

Just questioning obsessions people often have with creations coming out of Hollywood, that is all. Just because a viewer is presented with something that has a meaning for them doesn’t mean that the universe has to act accordingly.
Not every movie which comes out of Hollywood is run-of-the-mill. And this I think is one of those exceptions.

But now you are putting the emphasis on imaginings that take place during the sleeping hours and holding that they are more credible than the imaginings which take place during the waking hours. On what possible grounds, I ask, do you hold this to be true, and even more to the point; why should I ?
Mine is a perfectly valid assessment ... If in fact we do have a spirit, which is conscious, then what happens to that spirit when we die? I don't see how you can construe anything other than this from what I've said?

FZ+
Thus I think it's possible to have both a spiritual world (that which is immaterial) and a material world, separated by an invisible energy barrier, which serves as the go-between or medium between both cause (spirit) and effect (matter).
How can you say anything about an energy barrier, if in the same sentence you say it is invisible? If it has an influence, then it plainly is visible by the effect it has, which would drag it right back into the material.

A fundamental inconsistency then - on one hand, we for no reason insist on the absolute intangibility of the entity, whilst on the other we insist on a significance for the entity that relies on its tangibility!

And yet there does seem to be a message behind it all now doesn't there?
No there doesn't. Bummer.

Not every movie which comes out of Hollywood is run-of-the-mill. And this I think is one of those exceptions.
Because it supports your own beliefs. What's the point?

If in fact we do have a spirit, which is conscious, then what happens to that spirit
Everybody "knows" differently:

It goes to heaven. It goes to hell. It inhabits the body of dear Woofie. It dances in Elysium. It joins the cosmic union. It sells books for $4.99. It vanishes in a puff of illogic and dust. Invisible dust. Iacchus32 Originally posted by FZ+ How can you say anything about an energy barrier, if in the same sentence you say it is invisible? If it has an influence, then it plainly is visible by the effect it has, which would drag it right back into the material. I only say it's invisible because it's there -- all about us and throughout us, and permeates everything -- with none of us being the wiser for it. Of course the fact that it leaves a signature and can be experienced on some level (not always) is another matter. A fundamental inconsistency then - on one hand, we for no reason insist on the absolute intangibility of the entity, whilst on the other we insist on a significance for the entity that relies on its tangibility! If spirit were somehow related to energy, as many claim, then we should be able to experience the effects of it as well, as many do, in which case it wouldn't be invisible either, as many suggest ... hence implying tangibility. And of course if energy were like a membrane that exists between two cells, chances are you're not going to know what occurs on the other side of it, although it will have its effect, because it's done such a good job of disguising itself -- hence, that which is "intangible." Hmm ... wouldn't this be akin to suggesting there was another dimension? Similarly, how often do you question what goes on inside your own body, without really thinking of it as "you?" I myself do it all time, while I'm sure everyone else does as well. So, why can't God operate through the "induction principle?" No there doesn't. Bummer. Does 1 + 1 = 2? If you say no, then I would suggest you missed the point. Because it supports your own beliefs. What's the point? At least I can claim to have something to support it, which is the whole point of this exercise don't you think? Speaking of movies, ever see the movie, The Matrix? ... Everybody "knows" differently: No doubt. It goes to heaven. It goes to hell. It inhabits the body of dear Woofie. It dances in Elysium. It joins the cosmic union. It sells books for$4.99.

It vanishes in a puff of illogic and dust. Invisible dust.
Indeed it does!

Guybrush Threepwood
Originally posted by Iacchus32

Originally posted by FZ+
How can you say anything about an energy barrier, if in the same sentence you say it is invisible? If it has an influence, then it plainly is visible by the effect it has, which would drag it right back into the material.

I only say it's invisible because it's there -- all about us and throughout us, and permeates everything -- with none of us being the wiser for it. Of course the fact that it leaves a signature and can be experienced on some level (not always) is another matter.

so, it's a barrier, but it permeates everything and is all about us and throughout us so it'n not really a barrier isn't it?

on what level can we experience it?

Royce
Energy is a barrier in the sense that we as physical humans can't cross it. It is everywhere and permeates everything and we experience it every moment that we are alive. It is so ubiquitous that we are not consciously aware of it as a fish is not aware of the water in which it swims. We can and do experience it on a spiritual level if not on a conscious physical level.

There is only one reality and it can not be separated into different catagories or realms. It can be spoken or thought of as the spiritual, subjective and objective but they are not separate realities. The question has risen many times; "How can the spiritual and/or sujective effect the objective?" The answer we have come p with is energy. Energy is the medium through which this happens. If it effects our spirit or consciousness, we call it spiritual energy. If it is what keeps us and everything else alive, we call it life energy. If it effects only the physical, we call it physical energy.

Since no one knows what energy is, it seems pointless to say what energy can and can't do or to think of only physical energy when speaking of the spirit or subjective. Everything is energy in one form or another. Everything that happens takes energy and uses energy.

FZ+
But then what stops me from just calling it an unusual variant of objective?

Iacchus32
Originally posted by Guybrush Threepwood
so, it's a barrier, but it permeates everything and is all about us and throughout us so it'n not really a barrier isn't it?
How do you define a radio wave, which effects can't be seen, felt or heard ... unless of course you have a means by which to convert it?

on what level can we experience it?
Perhaps as with the radio waves, "subconsciously" at first, that is, until we learn how to "tune in."

Guybrush Threepwood
Originally posted by Iacchus32
How do you define a radio wave, which effects can't be seen, felt or heard ... unless of course you have a means by which to convert it?

certainly not as a barrier.
From your point of view I can't be seen, felt or heard either .
Am I a energy barrier?

pelastration

Originally posted by Mumeishi
Energy is not always invisible, in fact, energy is all that allows us to see anything at all - light. Matter is not always visible eg. air.
Even we don't 'see' matter at all. We capture the photons that are reflected or re-emitted from the surface of an object.

Royce
That is what our senses are, converters. They detect and convert energy of different forms, photons, vibrations, heat etc, into eltrochemical signals to be processed by our brains and perceived mentally. In this way our only contact with reality is via energy.
Our thoughts, emotions, experienses, our being, physical, mental and spiritual is energy. In one sense enegry is a barrier, we as beings of one form can not cross or change form. In another sense, energy is not just the medium but it is all that there is in one form or another.

As in this sense energy is all that is, if we do have a spirit or a characteristic which we call spirit is must then be energy.