Posted by Bartholomew (63.214.122.89) on April 26, 2002 at 14:12:20:
In Reply to: Re: No. posted by froggyTheFrog (9w1) (68.35.149.134) on April 25, 2002 at 23:23:28:
: Hmmmmmmmmmm? If I think positive things but do not believe them, what good does this do me?
Well, it's not possible to think something is true without believing it to at least SOME extent, however small. But you're right, positive thinking requires a good deal of belief to back it up. Positive thinking is a subset of complete belief.
The difference is that there is a lot of belief that can do a person many good things, but that has nothing to do with positive thinking.
: How would you define belief? Is its difference from "thinking" the level of commitment to the idea?
I defined belief on the main board. Go read it. Yes, it's the level of commitment to the idea.
: : Everything is physical. Even non-solid things like the soul or the aura (if you believe in them) are physical. To have complete belief in something, the chemical state of that person's brain must align itself to the belief, just as everything else.
: Okay. I agree with your point, but still I have a problem with the bold statement, "everything is physical". How would you even attempt to prove that?
Well, technically not EVERYTHING is physical, but everything it's possible to know about is, by the "pertaining to the laws of nature" definition of "physical." In order to know about something, it must have some effect, direct or indirect, upon oneself, from which its existence can be noticed. It is physical because it interacts with the physical.
: : I don't want to get into a big semantic debate over exactly where the boundary of the self is. For the purposes of belief, I'm drawing the boundary at the brain and nervous system, and the attendant chemicals and structures.
: Right. I don't know the definition of soul. I just know I have one. Everything is physical, you start getting into proving God is physical, then you bang up into this "belief" issue.
I didn't say "soul," I said "self." Some people define the self as the soul. I'm not one of them. In my opinion, what we call the soul is just a small part of the self.
Anyway, the definition of "self" doesn't have much to do with the physical/non-physical issue.
: : : As Isaac indicated, this idea is faaaaaaaaaaaar from new.
: : It's primal. Most people don't consciously realize it, though, which means they can't apply it where they want.
Also, most of those people who DO consciously realize it, don't realize its importance.