It seems to me that, if you are given to meditations generally, what makes you you is your ‘philosopher’s stone,’ so to speak. I think of it as a kernel at the center of one’s being from which the self might honestly grow. It seems to me, further, that at this center sits a relationship between certain core notions (or not, if you’re into that.) What presents naturally to me are the notions of Truth, Beauty, Meaning, and Justice; actually, i think i’ve got T, B, and J transending into M. Ultimately i see a nested transendance, where the ‘new’ M is born in a flash and finds a place in the ‘new’ TBJ. So, yeah.
Well there’s nothing that says you can’t believe what you want. However, you’re just making it more complicated than it has to be. If what you say is true than you find meaning in Truth, Beauty and Justice? Would have been easier just to say that in the first place. But I personally don’t think that’s what you meant in the first place, you’re just looking for an escape through your mistake. That’s the most bizzare thing I’ve ever heard and I think your caught up in your own personal logical excuses.
Not to nag but it’s ‘transcends’.
How so? I think you’re missing the point.
Ofcourse you leave out transendance 
. The whole point is the movement through nested structures; that’s what meaning is, the place of that movement.
What mistake?
I find your own statements misdirected and without substance.
Thanks, but i’d appreciate something a little more substantial.
I don’t know why I bother wasting my time. Your mistake is that you didn’t answer the question, you picked at it.
Ok well to make it easier on yourself, you could have just said. “I believe meaning is place of movement through nested structures.” Would have worked just fine.
Substantial? Correcting you for misspelling isn’t substantial? Man I feel sorry for your english teacher.
Mick, you’re an evolutionist ? 
Makes sense to me mate, God wrote the “Creation/Evolution Program”, then snapped his fingers to start it, THAT was the Big Bang
Sense or coherence do not mean true.
On what basis do you build your argument ?
From the bible. What basis do you build your argument against it?
The Bible supports evolution theory ?
You admit evolution is just a theory, (i.e. a hunch or guess?)
Any opportunity to better yourself is not a waste of time.
Let’s see;
A choice between two questions, i chose to answer both. To the first:
You suggest i limit my answer to:
No, it wouldn’t have. “If you are in your ‘right’ place” might have done it, but i obviously didn’t think so. I felt it important to include more; like the notion of justice, respect for justice helping one be meaningful.
And i appreciate the opportunity to talk about transcendence . You can use reason or chance to transcend dogmatic justice; reason has a better chance at long term survival. And look how the only justice that survives into the long term is reasonable justice.
When i started on the net, i didn’t know how to spell ‘cognitive.’ I was all ‘cognitive’ this and ‘cognative’ that. Correcting that one would have been substantial; but noone did, i eventually got to it, with much misunderstanding along the way (but not too much, since it was clear i didn’t know how to spell). I like ‘transendance’ because of an implied movement and an appeal to harmonics, and i don’t think it causes any confusion. Ofcourse, if you find the word ‘transendance’ offensive, just say so.
I only remotely associate the word “theory” with “hunch” or “guess”. Evolution theory itself is a coherent set of principles, that do not contradict with each other and offer a relevant view on the dynamic guidelines that shape our world.
But my dear, o, chara, how does this pertain to our conversation ?
I asked you what are the reasons why you so arrantly express your confidence in evolutionism… care to answer ?
Firstly, evolution theory is so full of holes its unbelievable, I’ve read Richard Dawkins books and honestly believe he’s got severe stress problems.
I had a brief letter-correspondence with him a few years back and ended up feeling sorry for him, he started off being rude, but then mellowed and we parted on good terms after I told him God wrote the Creation/Evolution Program then snapped his fingers to start it…
My take on evolution is this - Its a proven fact that creatures had to evolve to survive, but what I’m saying is they couldn’t have done it by themselves, they needed a God to tweak the program at strategic points through the millennia…
What problems are these?
Why would they need a God? You believe a mighty being decided “Hey, you guys aren’t gonna make it.”? I am quite familiar with biology and genetic anomalies are quite often useless but on the occaision some pick up some viability.
Sounds kinda like the flying spaghetti monster if you ask me…
I’m a Christian who believe in microevolution, but not macro. I believe the basic animals were created by God and new breads have evolutionized from these over time. This is my belief and I don’t believe the microevolution theory has holes in it at all, nothing had to be tweaked.
I think that you are in denial. I and several others have brought up many problems and complications with evolutionary theory in the Natural Science Forums. You can read some of my older posts to learn about all the ‘problems’ with evolution.
What about humans ? Mick says they evolved from amoebas, via the primates. All I wanted to know is on what grounds does he state this.
Firstly, yes I’m afraid Dawkins is getting worse, I hear he now refuses to shake hands with anybody who argues with his theories.
Second, of course humans evolved from amoebas or whatever 
Only fundie christians take the bible literally nowadays.
So when God “formed Adam out of the dust of the ground” I have no probs at all taking that to mean he formed him over millions of years of evolution, beginning as an amoeba…
Denial of what I simply asked a question. 