Author Topic: Empirical & philosophical proof of Set/Satan  (Read 67 times)

Xepera maSet

  • Too Serious / Not Serious Enough
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2016
  • Total likes: 2097
  • Mephistopheles of the Southern Deserts
    • View Profile
    • My Book on Setianism
Empirical & philosophical proof of Set/Satan
« on: March 30, 2019, 04:09:04 pm »
"Why Do You Believe in The Prince of Darkness/Setianism?"

I have removed some of the points to elaborate on the more important and powerful ones. Sorry for the length but I'm literally proving god from scratch haha.

1. Property Dualism - this is that consciousness and matter have different, contradictory properties. For example to matter/consciousness respectively, this includes spacial/nonspacial, universally accessible/personal, deterministic/autonomous, no aboutness/aboutness, accessible to senses/not accessible to senses, Objective/suggestions, no experience/has experience, the list can go on and on. We can empirically test any of these by imagining an image and seeing if it has the former properties or the latter - you can scientifically confirm this yourself in your own home. Because of the Law of Identity we know things with contradictory properties cannot be identical, so consciousness is of an ontologically different source/substance than matter.

2. Axiomatic self-existence - meaning "I exist" is an unquestionable fact of reality. You cannot ever argue "I do not exist", and that "I" is what knows anything and everything you know about reality. Indeed the existence of your consciousness is a necessity and certainty, and all we know of matter itself is known through that consciousness. So not only is consciousness obviously separate from material nature, it is more directly known and known with certainty. If all knowledge of X depends on Y, we cannot reduce X to Y. If X is more certain than Y, we cannot reduce X to Y.

3. Ability to question nature - further showing we are outside nature, despite out material bodies being part of it, is the fact we can question all this. Materialistic systems do not question themselves (the only possible exception being systems made by a higher consciousness to mimick it, like A.I.). This entire argument is a testament to this. Where else in nature do we see such questioning?

4. Ability to manipulate nature - even more impressively we can manipulate nature, both to contradict it and to create entirely new things. You're reading this on one such phone or computer which could never be grown without the unnatural consciousness possessed by humans. Medication is another - where other animals and even our own ancestors would die to natural illness, we get ever more vigilant in the fighting back against nature.

5. Ability to go against nature - even beyond manipulating nature to our benefit we have the free will to utterly go against it. To  illustrate,  surely  everyone  reading  this  has  felt that  desire  to  yell  at  a  sales  associate  when  the  proper  context arises.  This  is  the  brain,  the  body,  the  nervous  and  adrenal  system, all  driving  the  animal  Nature  of  the  human  being  to  yell  at  the person  standing  before  them,  possibly  even just  for  a  minor annoyance!  Yet  thanks  to  our  consciousness  and  free  will  we  can self-regulate  –  we  become  aware  of  this  natural  desire,  the  response our  body  is  making  towards  our  coworker  or  stranger,  and  then…  we can  simply  choose  not  to  follow  it. To  walk  away, take  some  deep breaths, move  on. Can  one  really imagine  an  animal  encroaching  on another's  territory,  and  the  other  simply  realizing  "meh,  he  probably didn't  know  this  was  my  territory, let's go  talk  it  out," as  opposed  to simply  attacking  the  encroaching  animal?

 Another  example  of  this  is  Cognitive  Therapy 138. Something like  depression  or  anxiety  works  within  the  deterministic  system  of the  body.  The  individual  doesn't  choose  to  have  random  drops  in serotonin  or  whatever  their  specific  issue  may  be,  it  simply  happens the  same  as  breathing  happens  and  your  heart  beating  happens.  But with  things  like  Cognitive  Therapy,  humans  are  able  to  recognize these  coming  changes,  learn  their  triggers,  and  hopefully  be  able  to pull  themselves  out  of  their  episode  with  their  own  conscious willpower 139. Placebos  are  further  evidence  of  this,  where  you  are given  something  that  explicitly  causes  no  change  to  the  deterministic system  (placebos  by  definition  do  not cause  physiological  change). However,  the  mental  belief  that  one  is  being  aided  can  cause  actual, objective  change  in  the  physiology  of the  body, such  as  with  pain 140. The  mind  causes  physiological  change  to  the  system,  rather  than  the other  way around  in  this  case.   

6. "Great Leap Forward" durning Upper Paleolithic Revolution - Another  overwhelming  piece  of evidence  for  the  existence  of a  being  or  force  like  Set  is  the  leap  forward  in  human  consciousness during  the  Upper  Paleolithic  Revolution. You  see,  humans  existed  as a  species,  physically/biologically,  for  around  150,000  years  without any advances  in  higher  consciousness. We  were  another  animal,  very slowly  learning  to  interact  with  the  world  we  lived  in  within  a  purely animalistic/survivalist  mindset  (Eden). Then,  rather  suddenly,  came abstract  thought,  art,  religion,  jewelry,  and  eventually things like language  and  alphabets,  cities  and  cultures.  Our  consciousness “greatly  leapt  forwards”  (the  literal  term  used  in  anthropology),  and began exponentially increasing  on  such  a  level  that  it  still  hasn't stopped. nterference  from  something  like  Set  is  by far  a  more reasonable  belief  than  the  entire  human  species  magically  sharing the  same  mutation  which  overwrites  the  previous  genetic  makeup  of the  whole  species,  or  even  worse  having  a  massive  leap  forwards  as some  sort  of  uncaused  event,  or  the  product  of  some  mythical people  like  the  Atlanteans  (or  aliens!).

7. Hierarchy of Needs - so not only is consciousness clearly unnatural and clearly, intentionally given to humans in some form, but it is teleological, meaning it has purpose/meaning. This is best Illustrated in Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, which teaches us the path to self actualization. This is something completely contradictory to the community based life which dominated the planet before. Instead, humans are best of being self-seeking and self-caring first and foremost, valuing the individual as a separate being than part of an evolutionary collective. Self-Actualized  individuals have  a  consistent  view  of  reality  that  works  for  them  (Pragmatism) but  does  not contradict  objective  reality  –  or  at  least  they  recognize where  it  is  at  odds  with  objective  reality (such  as  in  magic). They  may seem  a  bit  aloof  and  removed,  but  have  a  deep  care  for  the  wellbeing  of not  only  loved  ones  but  the  human  species  as  a  whole,  and life  as  a  whole  in  many cases.  These  individuals  will  be  creative  and “dreamy”  but  also  able  to  experience  the  here-and-now, the  day to day and  moment  to  moment  aspects  of  life.

So what does this mean? Our minds are unnatural, they have an unnatural source that became involved at a specific point in the past, and this unnatural source provided a teleology meaning it itself had conscious intent. Both the reasoning and empirical evidence here can be confirmed by anyone and support the existence of Set/Satan. Until there are refutations of #1-7 the position stands as the most comprehensive explanation for the world as we know it and most likely to be true. In short, mind is unnatural --> mind was added to nature at specific point --> mind has create intent --> mind is of Set/Satan, a god.

Working overtime to uncover
the mysteries of existence
(as described by Onyx)

I have come into being like Set,
the Separator who contends against Osiris for Eternity.



Etu Malku

Re: Empirical & philosophical proof of Set/Satan
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2019, 04:36:40 pm »
Hmm . . . I don't see how anything you listed necessarily validates the existence of Set and/or Satan. If anything it validates the idea of the Black Flame. However, you 'might' be able to tie in the common statement that the Black Flame is the Gift of Set . . . although that seems like circular logic to me.  :huh:
IAMTHATIAMNOT

Liu

Re: Empirical & philosophical proof of Set/Satan
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2019, 05:51:18 pm »
1 Sure - I see 4 realms, though: objective universe, objects of the mind, rules of logic, and subjectiveness (basically Frege's version of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popper's_three_worlds + the observer as an additional 4th).

They influence each other (or rather, logic rules over OU and, to a lesser degree, mind, subjectiveness probably influences mind, and OU and mind influence each other).

2 Sure.

3-7 You may consider those circumstantial evidence, but they prove nothing.
My theory is rather: There was the potential for human minds in nature since ever, but it only became reality once certain conditions were met, and the further development from there is merely a chain reaction.
I cannot explain consciousness either, but Occam's razor tells me that I should rather assume that consciousness always was a part of existence than assuming that consciousness only was added to existence by some external source.

Xepera maSet

  • Too Serious / Not Serious Enough
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2016
  • Total likes: 2097
  • Mephistopheles of the Southern Deserts
    • View Profile
    • My Book on Setianism
Re: Empirical & philosophical proof of Set/Satan
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2019, 08:39:26 pm »
1 Sure - I see 4 realms, though: objective universe, objects of the mind, rules of logic, and subjectiveness (basically Frege's version of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popper's_three_worlds + the observer as an additional 4th).

They influence each other (or rather, logic rules over OU and, to a lesser degree, mind, subjectiveness probably influences mind, and OU and mind influence each other).

2 Sure.

3-7 You may consider those circumstantial evidence, but they prove nothing.
My theory is rather: There was the potential for human minds in nature since ever, but it only became reality once certain conditions were met, and the further development from there is merely a chain reaction.
I cannot explain consciousness either, but Occam's razor tells me that I should rather assume that consciousness always was a part of existence than assuming that consciousness only was added to existence by some external source.

Definitely getting into this worlds thing, thank you!

Working overtime to uncover
the mysteries of existence
(as described by Onyx)

I have come into being like Set,
the Separator who contends against Osiris for Eternity.