# Are you a Super or a Bright?



## Marino (Jun 26, 2009)

I'm not here to debate, I'm just curious. Feel free to discuss/debate, ect, but I'm going to GTFO and just look at the stats. 

So, are you a Bright or a Super? I'm a Bright and predict that most here, as in most communities, are Supers. 

Picture provided from The Brights Movement

To anyone having trouble deciding if what they believe is supernatural or mystical, a good rule of thumb is this: Do you believe in spirits or souls / consciousness existing outside of the brain? If you do, you are a Super. If you do not, you are a Bright. I'm sure there are Supers that do not believe in spirits/souls somehow, they seem to be very broad in their beliefs.


----------



## Vasoline (Jul 3, 2009)

Guess I'm a bright...


----------



## εmptε (Nov 20, 2008)

I try to find logical ways for illogical things. Thus I'm a super


----------



## Schattenjaeger (Jul 9, 2009)

Bright, definitely.
Sometimes I do use 'mystical elements', but as I'm always aware of the fact that I'm just letting my brain play tricks on me, you can't really call this a super's worldview.


----------



## WickedQueen (Jun 1, 2009)

Bright and a muslim.


----------



## εmptε (Nov 20, 2008)

WAIT, I believe in ghosts and ESP, but I'm not spiritual or religious. I don't believe in other creatures or stuff like that. I'm Agnostic Theorist. Does that make me a super or not? That I'd try and find a way to make Ghosts and ESP real? The human mind is an extremely powerful thing plus everything is just matter. Matter manipulation could be possible. I'd rather try and find a way for them to exist or reasons why its impossible, instead of dismissing them out of hand.


----------



## de l'eau salée (Nov 10, 2008)

Hmmm, what's a Murkie?

But to answer the question, I'm a Super.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

Mine was an obvious, simple choice. Super all the way.


----------



## hommefatal (Jul 15, 2009)

Super, due to the fact that I would rather call myself spiritual than religious and despise rational roles.


----------



## Psilo (Apr 29, 2009)

I don't like that dichotomy. Would I be a murkie, then? I don't believe in the supernatural because if it exists it is natural, we just don't have the tools or knowledge to observe or measure a particular event. I'm interested in the metaphysical but only so far as to discover more of the natural world and what goes on beyond the surface. I believe that modern science is imperfect, but use it as the best means we have to understanding. I think the concept of magic, God, psychic events, ghosts etc etc are terms that avoid looking into the subject more deeply, but I don't necessarily believe in those things. I would not be against more strictly defining them and developing ways to accurately decide on their existance. 

"Supernatural or mystical" is far too vague.


----------



## CrimsonWing (Jun 23, 2009)

Ookami said:


> I try to find logical ways for illogical things. Thus I'm a super


I'm always trying the same roud:


----------



## Marino (Jun 26, 2009)

WickedQueen said:


> Bright and a muslim.


So a cultural Muslim? Wow, I've never met one of those before! Can you tell us more? You don't believe in Allah but you align with the moral teachings? I know a lot of Jewish folks are like that but not Muslims. :shocked:

Ookai and Psilo: You are both Supers. If you think anything is somehow "beyond" physical laws then you are a Super. In other words, if you think anything cannot be explained by Science (natural observation, experimentation and theorizing) then you are a Super. To a Bright it is obvious they are free of supernatural/ mystical elements. We see no "hidden agents". You might fall into the "Murky" category if you can't decide, but I didn't think there would be any. I thought the terminology is pretty straightforward: natural processes explain everything or they don't. :tongue:


----------



## PeacePassion (Jun 9, 2009)

this over simplified black and white thinking reeks... be wary of this "Bright" movement is my suggestion.


----------



## Psilo (Apr 29, 2009)

> You are both Supers. If you think anything is somehow "beyond" physical laws then you are a Super. In other words, if you think anything cannot be explained by Science (natural observation, experimentation and theorizing) then you are a Super.


I don't think anything can be beyond physical laws. I just don't believe we fully understand what those laws are.


----------



## εmptε (Nov 20, 2008)

Brights seem to be the people that would go a long with whatever science tells them. Science tells them the world is flat, the world is flat.

I'd rather be a super because at least we don't trap ourselves in little tiny boxes.


----------



## PeacePassion (Jun 9, 2009)

Psilo said:


> I don't think anything can be beyond physical laws. I just don't believe we fully understand what those laws are.


exactly. and if someone believes we do understand those laws in full, that leaves nothing to seek and creates a closed system, and we all know what happens to closed systems- entropy.


----------



## hommefatal (Jul 15, 2009)

Ookami said:


> Brights seem to be the people that would go a long with whatever science tells them. Science tells them the world is flat, the world is flat.
> 
> I'd rather be a super because at least we don't trap ourselves in little tiny boxes.


Always keep an open mind.


----------



## Bastable (Mar 25, 2009)

Well I believe in God, so i suppose that makes me a super. Although i refer to God as being "supranatural" as opposed to "supernatural".


----------



## hommefatal (Jul 15, 2009)

Wow, more supers than brights.


----------



## Munchies (Jun 22, 2009)

bright obviously, science can explain everything, i wont believe in ghosts till i see one, but even if i do see one... i know science would be able to explain that.

what created god? god was here all along? but where was he if he was *here* before he created everything? there would be no *here* for him to be at since it wouldn't have been created..... unless we are like god's biology homework in a petri dish from another dimension that the bible didn't tell me about.


----------



## PeacePassion (Jun 9, 2009)

Munchies said:


> bright obviously, science can explain everything, i wont believe in ghosts till i see one, but even if i do see one... i know science would be able to explain that.
> 
> what created god? god was here all along? but where was he if he was *here* before he created everything? there would be no *here* for him to be at since it wouldn't have been created..... unless we are like god's petri dish from another dimension that the bible didn't tell me about.


actually i think you're exactly right, our existence is sort of a petri dish amongst a greater existence. and in mystical readings into the bible they do talk about such things which are communicated as a sort of deeper reading of the bible. and sure science can explain everything, IMO science is a method of god. science is the language of god's creation, IMO. usually i wouldn't say anything but i think your understanding is strangely on point, even though you seem to think these things are contradicting. as for what created god, i think that is way beyond our full understanding. god just exists, always has, always does, always will as they say- but that's hard for us to understand in our limited dimension that is bounded by time.


----------



## Munchies (Jun 22, 2009)

Peace-3PO said:


> actually i think you're exactly right, our existence is sort of a petri dish amongst a greater existence. and in mystical readings into the bible they do talk about such things which are communicated as a sort of deeper reading of the bible. and sure science can explain everything, IMO science is a method of god. science is the language of god's creation, IMO. usually i wouldn't say anything but i think your understanding is strangely on point, even though you seem to think these things are contradicting. as for what created god, i think that is way beyond our full understanding. god just exists, always has, always does, always will as they say- but that's hard for us to understand in our limited dimension that is bounded by time.


limited dimension bounded by time.... that's good

But For something to exist, wouldn't time have to be present?

But I guess you could answer that with "that's hard for us to understand in our limited dimension that is bounded by time."


----------



## εmptε (Nov 20, 2008)

Munchies said:


> bright obviously, science can explain everything, i wont believe in ghosts till i see one, but even if i do see one... i know science would be able to explain that.
> 
> what created god? god was here all along? but where was he if he was *here* before he created everything? there would be no *here* for him to be at since it wouldn't have been created..... unless we are like god's biology homework in a petri dish from another dimension that the bible didn't tell me about.


You seem to be mistaken. Super doesn't mean you're religious, if so I'm getting changed to something else. I'm Agnostic Theorist. Most of my theories don't even involve a god. As I mentioned above I try to come up with ways for science to explain things like Folklore or Magic. (OT: Magic is a Science...)

You don't believe in anything science doesn't have already? You're a sad extroverted intuition dominate. Ne is all about possibilities man. Go back 60 years and they'll tell you half the stuff we have now isn't scientifically possible. By saying it is impossible you're only putting a lock on what is possible.


----------



## Munchies (Jun 22, 2009)

Evolyptic said:


> By saying it is impossible you're only putting a lock on what is possible.


Thats true, but i set myself up to figure out what i know can be figured out with science, emotions... basically everything that i know already exists, this way my conclusions have a better chance at becoming real rather than just theories.


----------



## εmptε (Nov 20, 2008)

If I said Aliens you'd say:


----------



## Munchies (Jun 22, 2009)

Evolyptic said:


> If I said Aliens you'd say:


i lol'd

I would say that since it is possible that we are here it is possible for it to occur somewhere else.

It is rare, but chances are in huge universe out there that there is an energy ball out there contributing to a planet close by with a 24/r day period at the right distance.... Mars has about a 23/hr day time zone and there is bacteria there (i heard, correct me if im wrong) so it could be that the conditions aren't good enough? not enough nutrients or any of that stuff... but there is still life there wow look at me go... 

ill just stick with my first statement


----------



## εmptε (Nov 20, 2008)

Cryptozoology


----------



## Munchies (Jun 22, 2009)

Peace-3PO said:


> actually i think you're exactly right, our existence is sort of a petri dish amongst a greater existence. and in mystical readings into the bible they do talk about such things which are communicated as a sort of deeper reading of the bible. and sure science can explain everything, IMO science is a method of god. science is the language of god's creation, IMO. usually i wouldn't say anything but i think your understanding is strangely on point, even though you seem to think these things are contradicting. as for what created god, i think that is way beyond our full understanding. god just exists, always has, always does, always will as they say- but that's hard for us to understand in our limited dimension that is bounded by time.


It seems like science is so perfect. The carbon cycle, the water cycle, the nitrogen cycle ( which involve nitrogen fixing bacteria!! ), weird how it all just "happens" I couldn't possibly imagine how the first cell came to be.... then again maybe earth had the perfect conditions. And by perfect i mean... the entire earth was covered in water.. somehow...

hmm.. i guess that could be explained by planets evolving from big clouds of gasses.. some of which i asume hydrogen and oxygen.....

Sure its odd how perfect the settings are for earth to have happened, but in a galaxty so huge, i would say that this happeneing by itself seems natural.

i could go on for days, but i want you to read my posts


----------



## Munchies (Jun 22, 2009)

Evolyptic said:


> Cryptozoology


pickles and peanut butter, its alright if you eat it in proportion.


----------



## PeacePassion (Jun 9, 2009)

Evolyptic said:


> If I said Aliens you'd say:


 ...... slime!


----------



## εmptε (Nov 20, 2008)

Aliens not Ghost Busters.


----------



## PeacePassion (Jun 9, 2009)

Evolyptic said:


> Aliens not Ghost Busters.


tell that to my subconscious. and hollywood. i swear aliens are always slimy.


----------



## pianopraze (Jun 29, 2009)

acid slimy....


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

I'm a "weak" Bright. I do not believe in gods or incorporeal souls. or supernatural planes of existence, but I do consider myself a "mystical" person with Buddhist leanings.


----------



## Danse Macabre (Oct 30, 2009)

I'm a bright. I don't believe in a God or anything supernatural.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Definitely super 
I always call myself much more spiritual than religious


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

I am a dimly-lit murky.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

I'm a Bright and hold a very naturalistic world view.


----------



## Lucretius (Sep 10, 2009)

I am of course a Bright! roud:


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

Is this an actually a group people can belong to? Anyway, Bright.


----------

