Thread: Can an Atheist Open Their Third Eye?

Yes, an atheist can open their third eye.

Originally Posted by Captain Sleepalot

Yes, an atheist can open their third eye.

Depends if the Atheist is an Atheist for intelligent, thoughtful reasons or not.
If they are, then they wont be able to.
If they are not, then they may think they are able to.

This got kind of off topic but thanks for the responses I found most of them really helpful. Seems like a mixed bag of yes and no as to whether an atheist can open their third eye but I think most are saying yes? So I'll try.
And, spaceexplorer I don't know if you're trying to be funny but you're being very rude... If you were going to make a joke of it you shouldn't have responded.

[ClouD: Agreed. Deleted.]

Wow, I've never seen a board get so off topic....

Even on Dream Views, the debate over religion still wages.

Of course an atheist can open their third eye. Everbody's got one.

That's like asking "Can a monk or a nun have sex?" In theory yes, they just don't. I suppose sometimes it could happen on it's own, like a priest having a wet dream through no fault of his own.

Here's a video i made about opening the third eye... using the wisdom of bill hicks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wCny...e=channel_page

Originally Posted by The Cusp

Of course an atheist can open their third eye. Everbody's got one.

How come none of my biology teachers ever mentioned this third eye the whole time I was at school?

No,

Monks and Nuns don’t have sex because they think that a big invisible, self contradicting, goat herding triplicate Zombie being, who lives in a magical realm will be angry with them if they do. So they stop doing one of the most natural magical parts of human existence... for the sake of some stupid myth.

Atheists don’t open their third eyes... not out of belief in something made up... but out of being open minded enough to not believe in something made up JUST BECAUSE IT SOUNDS NICE, and like something they'd want to be true. As an atheist I'd love to be able to open my third eye, just as much as I’d like to be able to write with my 3rd hand or smell with my second nose.
Unfortunately, there is no evidence for any of these things existing so we can’t.

Your analogy actually points to the stupidity of religious belief.
As an atheist I may not be able to open my imaginary 3rd eye, or lick a second ice cream with my magical second tongue.
But at least I can do all the things in nature without fear that some invisible being will be angry or judge me for it.
Sometimes it’s just nice to not have to be a superstitious, retro-minded human being, who thinks like someone from the middle ages.
Sometimes us atheists actually sit around and feel sorry for how awkward religious people must feel when having a wank and stuff like that... because who knows, God, the devil... or their neighbor (who has just opened their eye and is wandering around astrally) may have popped in for a look.

Nope, instead we accept we are evolved animals living in the most beautiful, mysterious natural world... alone, other than each other, the other animals we share earth with (and the possible life on other planets).
So our world becomes precious because it’s unique. There is no God to make a new one.
Other life becomes precious because it is unique in the universe. There is no God to replace it, and no afterlife.
Time, nature, life, love... all these things become vital and filled with mystery and tension because they are unique and short lived.

Plus, as an atheist there is a real sense of mystery and adventure. There is a whole universe to discover!
Things NOBODY has ever seen or known.
In a religious world you can never be the first to know something. God already knows everything, and also an angel, or the devil... or deceased aunty Mable... may have already peaked at them.... whilst astrally wandering.

Anyway, all this typing with my 3rd and 4th hands is getting tiresome... and my eleventh toe is itchy... so i best go see to that.
__________________

What about having sex with your second dick? Is that allowed?

Originally Posted by DreamQueen

How come none of my biology teachers ever mentioned this third eye the whole time I was at school?

Although our 3rd eye is non physical, it is in close assosiation with the pituitary gland. In older evolutionary animals this gland actually has a cornea and retina like a real eye.

To answer the question about an atheist opening their 3rd eye.. It is possible since you do have one. you are at a disadvantage though because faith and believe in a system greater than ourselves can help open it. Im not the most religious person but i suspect that if you have any luck with opening your third eye or crown chakra that you will start believing in god.. maybe not as some type of man that sits in heaven judging us but as a constant force of creativity permeating and uniting the entire universe.

Originally Posted by ichigo

Although our 3rd eye is non physical, it is in close assosiation with the pituitary gland. In older evolutionary animals this gland actually has a cornea and retina like a real eye.

To answer the question about an atheist opening their 3rd eye.. It is possible since you do have one. you are at a disadvantage though because faith and believe in a system greater than ourselves can help open it. Im not the most religious person but i suspect that if you have any luck with opening your third eye or crown chakra that you will start believing in god.. maybe not as some type of man that sits in heaven judging us but as a constant force of creativity permeating and uniting the entire universe.

So how would the belief in any god other than the underlying god of the Hindu belief system be of any help?
Surely in that case, an Atheist would be in a better position than a Christian, Jew or Jehovas witness... because thier lack of belief system is more open minded than the strict dogmatic closed loop of the faith based worldviews.

If the pineal gland, is anything other than an evolutionary reduntant object, and possesed some kind of ability. Atheists would be in a much better position to discover it... as they would not have an already tainted world view. They would approach it with a blank page, not a whole book of gods words to interpret the world by!


Plus... saying

Although our 3rd eye is non physical, it is in close assosiation with the pituitary gland. In older evolutionary animals this gland actually has a cornea and retina like a real eye.

isn't actually saying anything... anyone can assosiate -via belief- any imaginary spiritual item, with a real scientifically validated part of the body. For example, I believe in the 2nd penis, and in my belief system it is closely linked with my middle finger, whilst the 2nd penis is non physical, you can find evidence that my middle finger is the physical representation of it, by the fact that it can be used to bring the girls im dating to climax... much like a real penis, only smaller and more "astral".

Ok well, the main reason i believe it will help is because one of the few methods of reaching enlightenment is through religious faith and devotion.. dont ask my why but its true. I dont see why you mention that it would have to be the hindu believe system just becuase the chakra concept is of hindu origin doesnt mean other religions havnt described the energy body in a different way for example chi in budhist practices.

now, dont get me wrong. im not a christian or jew or anything of the sort but i do believe in something greater than ourselves. i find the fact that you say an atheist is more likely to discover these metaphysical aspects ironic.. If they discount the existance of God due to lack of physical evidence then how can you fully believe in the chakra system which is itself non physical. If you have doubt that they even exist or not, your will to open and stregnhten the chakras can not be as strong.

And about the pituitary gland.. It's functions are mostly mysterious but we do know that it does some pretty interesting chemistry. It produces the strongest psychoactive compount known to man, DMT. This is only released at key points in our lifes:
1: after a few months in the womb..
2: during death or a near death experience
3: during spiritual experience and meditation
4: sometimes during dreams

scientifically it seems to be more related to spirituality then any other part of the body. it is the most useful tool for the job.. its kind of like using ur penis for sex, and not your penis shaped middle finger.

Originally Posted by ichigo

Ok well, the main reason i believe it will help is because one of the few methods of reaching enlightenment is through religious faith and devotion.. dont ask my why but its true.

Another one of the few methods of reaching enlightenment is through picking your nose.. don't ask me why but it's true.

Originally Posted by ichigo

now, dont get me wrong. im not a christian or jew or anything of the sort but i do believe in something greater than ourselves.

So do I. It's called evolution.

Originally Posted by DreamQueen

Another one of the few methods of reaching enlightenment is through picking your nose.. don't ask me why but it's true.

Ok you got me, i do know why.. i just didnt feel like typing it earlier. enlightenment is all about letting go completely of the ego and thus ascending typical human personality. The path to doing this is to treat every living thing with dignity and respect knowing that nothing makes you better than anyone else. this is not as easy as it sounds, but people who are intensly religious are half way there already. Because their intentions are already pure and directed towards only good. Im not talking about regular ignorant christians here, im talking about devout monks and people who dedicate their lives to serving God.

Care to tell us how picking your nose might help the process?

Yes. evolution is cool.. kinda doesnt explain how conciousness might have arised out of little bits of stardust. Im not trying to preach but im trying to get you to open your minds. has anyone ever considered how if any of the the fundamental constants of science or something like the weight of an electron was different by even the smallest amount there would be no universe. Either evolution has known all along exactly what it is getting at or its very lucky indeed.

Originally Posted by ichigo

Yes. evolution is cool.. kinda doesnt explain how conciousness might have arised out of little bits of stardust. Im not trying to preach but im trying to get you to open your minds. has anyone ever considered how if any of the the fundamental constants of science or something like the weight of an electron was different by even the smallest amount there would be no universe. Either evolution has known all along exactly what it is getting at or its very lucky indeed.

Together, abiogenesis and evolution do in fact explain how conciousness has arisen out of little bits of stardust.

Evolution has nothing to do with luck or chance and it does not have an initial goal.

With all due respect, I can tell from what you have written that you do not actually understand the concept of evolution. I strongly recommend you watch these two videos for a basic introduction

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2SVMKZhV2g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OEl1FCdR9A

Originally Posted by ichigo

has anyone ever considered how if any of the the fundamental constants of science or something like the weight of an electron was different by even the smallest amount there would be no universe.

Yes many have considered this. The Anthropic Principle explains it. Start reading at the 7th paragraph from the bottom of this webpage

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dawk...s06_index.html

Still not convinced there was no designer? Watch this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxsnq...eature=related

Originally Posted by DreamQueen

Together, abiogenesis and evolution do in fact explain how conciousness has arisen out of little bits of stardust.

Actually, not quite. There is still no "proven" theory on how consciousness (especially if we talk about subjective consciousness) appeared in humans and it is one of the great mysteries. Personally, I like bicameral mind theory because it applies very well to lucid dreaming , and the whole idea is very fascinating. It linked our subjective consciousness to developing of language, especially written, so in a sense we do really got lucky.

Evolution has nothing to do with luck or chance and it does not have an initial goal.

It is not quite right. There is a "fitness function" (the term used in genetic algorithms; it means a function which is used to quantify a quality of "chromosome"), and it seems that human species is indeed a "maxima" (the largest value (maximum) or smallest value (minimum), that a function takes in a point either within a given neighbourhood (local extremum) or on the function domain in its entirety (global extremum)) of an evolution function. Of course, it may be just a local maxima where it may stay indefinitively or leave at some point .

Originally Posted by DreamQueen

Evolution has nothing to do with luck or chance and it does not have an initial goal.

So you are saying that evolution happens completely randomly? Maybe this is too far out for you but have you ever had a look at the mayan calendar? It is devided to into layers that litterally date the developement and expantion of conciousness amazingly accurately.. it may just be by chance but everything from the rise of animal conciousness to the formation of family and society to the more global awareness we see now are precisely calculated almost as if the developement of conciousness is following a schedule.. one that many believe is about to be completed. Who knows how the mayans were advanced enough to know all this stuff but if they are right how can we doubt some sort of intelligent design.

I do have one theory which could explain life without the existance of God tho and how we could be the only planet with life in the universe.. As you might know, in quantum physics it is proven that all matter exists as probability waves and is only condensed to actual matter in a defined position when it is observed. when you think about it that way, how did anything ever form at all without some kind of ultimate observer calling the shots? the only solution i have which has no space for God would imply that the universe only formed because we are here to witness it.. at one point the entire universe existed in a single point with infinite probabilities of different universes, all with slight differences like slightly different fundamental forces and so on. Only when one of those "possible" universes creates some kind of intelligent life to experience it will the universe become a complete self-referential system capable of physically existing - hence the big bang. If this is the case, then the physical history of the universe and it purpose would all be to serve the developement of its conciousness. I would say the universe was created in reverse but time doesnt exist.

I still believe in God tho, but im pretty sure not in the way that you think. to me, he is pretty much a form of collected conciousness that exists everywhere.

Hi ichigo, I will reply properly to this later as I'm not feeling well at the moment but your thoughts on quantum physics are very interesting.

Just a quick comment...

No, evolution is not a random process. Evolution is the result of reproduction, mutation and natural selection. Reproduction may be random (although not entirely), mutation may be random, but natural selection is not. Therefore evolution is not random.

The first video link explains it fairly well.

I highly recommend Richard Dawkins' "The Blind Watchmaker".

I look forward to continuing this discussion but il only be back on wednesday. In the mean time i will try find an interesting article i read on natural selection recently.

Originally Posted by The Cusp

Of course an atheist can open their third eye. Everbody's got one.

That's like asking "Can a monk or a nun have sex?" In theory yes, they just don't. I suppose sometimes it could happen on it's own, like a priest having a wet dream through no fault of his own.

The best response, it's as simple as most atheists probably not believing in such a thing.

Unfortunately, there is no evidence for any of these things existing so we can’t.

Correction.

Their is no evidence provided by science, so I choose not to believe. But we still can.

P.S. Your attitude is degrading, and doing atheists a dis-service.

Originally Posted by spaceexplorer

Surely in that case, an Atheist would be in a better position than a Christian, Jew or Jehovas witness... because thier lack of belief system is more open minded than the strict dogmatic closed loop of the faith based worldviews.

Sorry, Atheists are just as bad as religious nut jobs. Religious people have made up their minds before hand that those things are real, while Atheists have made up their minds before hand that it's not. Just different sides of the same coin.

If anything, it's the Agnostics who are in a better position to judge these matters. They live on the edge of that coin, so to speak.

Originally Posted by The Cusp

Sorry, Atheists are just as bad as religious nut jobs. Religious people have made up their minds before hand that those things are real, while Atheists have made up their minds before hand that it's not. Just different sides of the same coin.

If anything, it's the Agnostics who are in a better position to judge these matters. They live on the edge of that coin, so to speak.

You clearly don't understand the terms you are talking about if that is your opinion.

Read anything by Dawkins and educate yourself.

Are you an agnostic about the god Zeus?
no, you are an Atheist about Zeus.
Other Atheists (because YOU are an Atheist too for all the Gods you don't believe in), just choose one more God among the many to add to the list in things they refuse to accept without evidence.

An Atheist dosn't BELIEVE anything, an Atheist REFUSES to take something on belief, or without evidence.

Also, many many Atheists are "Agnostic Atheists"
The terms are not exclusive to themselves.

As Dawkins says:
"I am an agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden."

I find if fascinating that so many people consider Atheism to be a bad thing. As if requiring decent evidence for the existence of somethign is a BAD thing!
It's the INTELLIGENT thing to do.

Yes, I am agnostic about Zeus.
Who the hell do you think you are? Telling me what is real and what isn't.
You're just a little human like me, so it's possible that you don't know the truth.

Originally Posted by Timothy Paradox

Yes, I am agnostic about Zeus.
Who the hell do you think you are? Telling me what is real and what isn't.
You're just a little human like me, so it's possible that you don't know the truth.

Are you an Agnostic about Father Christmas?

Or do you just accept the evidence is hugely in favour of it being a myth?

Being "open minded" is one thing.... but being so open minded your brain falls out is another.

It all falls down to semantics in the end.
Sure, no one can ever REALLY know if Zeus is real or not, but come on, lets face the facts... we are more Atheist than Agnostic about it in real terms...
or do you say a little prayer to Zeus each night (along with every other god) just in case? of course you don't.

I can see your point, but i think it is taking the point too far.

And you say im human... well, what if i tell you i'm not, and i'm God himself...
Do you hold onto your Agnostic view and have to accept that you will never really know?
or do you just do the sane thing and accept that the evidence really strongly points to me just being another human?
Because if you do the latter, that's what i'm talking about when it comes to Atheism.

And i dont only agree with you that its possible i dont know the truth, i am CERTAIN i dont know the truth!
That dosn't make me agnostic about God... that dosnt mean i cant draw conclusions based on the evidence.
Sure it may not be the ultimate answer... but its the best answer based on the facts available, and requires no faith.


Oh and one last point... when people refer to God in this thread... can you please refer to WHICH God you are talking about?
Because the arguments against The Christian God are very different from those against the Hindu Panthion, or the Tibetan demi-gods.

Because either you believe in ALL gods, non of them, or one of them.
Make it clear what exactly you are arguing about!