ponder this

[Hemp]

if something was unexplainable, could it still be valid? (thag, i already know your answer)

 

[nhojsmith]

not sure in what way you are using "valid" here, but im gonna say yes on the basis of natural law, ie interactions that exist that are bound by nature, many of which we are not aware of or uflly understand and therefore are inherently unexplainable. i cant explain fission to my cat in a way it would understand, but that doesnt make the phenomenon invalid. human conciousness is relatively new, the laws arent.

 

[Hemp]

what about say a belief being unexplainable, would it even matter?

 

[nhojsmith]

lol well if the belief is unexplainable then i would advise the person to get a pencil and a dictionary and take at least 24 hours to find a combinaiton of words that loosely describes the belief, in other words, i think all beliefs are "explainable," and back to the natural law thing, any belief you have has arisen because of your experiences and interactions with the world and with yourself

we use our own brain to analyze and manipulate our own brain

its a trip son

 

[Hemp]

words cannot even come close to comprehending thought and perception.
you know one can have 2 of the same "perception" but at unlimited degrees.


you are right, it is a trip.

 

[The Visualizer]

If you see a UFO it's unexplainable...

A belief on the other hand is different for the simple fact that you are challenging an idea

 

[Hemp]

but the beelief would only be unexplainable by words, and understood by perception.


thank you both for replying