Do only religious people think "theft" and "murder" are real?

Can you explain your question? What do you mean?



We have what we seek, it is there all the time, and if we give it time, it will make itself known.

"Theft" and "murder" are fictional. We made them up. They didn't exist in the Stone Age and they don't exist now.

So do only religious people think they are non-fictional?
Or are non-religious people also just "Yeah, makes sense."?


(Atheists was a misnomer on my part since you could believe spirits or something are what make "theft" and "murder" real.)

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".

That doesn't make much sense. Theft and murder didn't exist because the human brain was in the earliest stage of development. Survival meant finding the tools and resources necessary for survival. This was long before human beings felt things like lust, greed, envy...etc.

I wouldn't refer to spirits in this case. I would use the word phantom. Which are simply traces of existence. For example, if you did the math for every death that happened in a six month span you could probably create a faux story about a rampage shooting.

You could also say that 9/11 was planned. That everyone on board the flights were guilty of a crime. And that everyone in both WTC were suicidal and informed months in advance that the opportunity to commit suicide would be available.

Or you could say that everyone who died before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were made immortal after the bombing. And that the phantoms you speak of are lost souls living in a limbonic state that is almost like a simulated reality.


We have what we seek, it is there all the time, and if we give it time, it will make itself known.

That doesn't make much sense. Theft and murder didn't exist because the human brain was in the earliest stage of development. Survival meant finding the tools and resources necessary for survival. This was long before human beings felt things like lust, greed, envy...etc.
Lust, greed or envy can't make "theft" non-fictional. No one "owns" anymore than anyone did during the Stone Age and they can't make "murder" non-fictional since no one can make killing okay or not okay anymore than we coul duting the Stone Age (which lasted over 4 million years and only ended ca 10,000 years ago after homo sapiens sapiens had already been around for a long time).

I wouldn't refer to spirits in this case. I would use the word phantom. Which are simply traces of existence.
I didn't mean humans having souls would make a difference. I just meant not all religions have gods in them but still rules about human behaviour or things like karma.

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".

It comes down to whether you want to follow or lead. By paying attention to politics you learn one of two things. One is how to play the game the other is how not to play the game. If you go about life as a follower you will only inherit mistakes of the past. But, if you lead you might find that the daily nonsense of arguing over *beep* is all part of our growth as human beings. The worst mistake a human being can make is believing they've seen it all.

Everyone wants to live a stress-free life. They want to be happy. Sometimes we fear pain when the pain is simply an irrational fear of happiness. Because if I could live my life without worry what would I have left to worry about?

Sometimes we fear pain when the pain is simply an irrational fear of happiness.
So sometimes we fear being irrationally fearful of being happy but don't know that's what we're fearing.

Because if I could live my life without worry what would I have left to worry about?
And if you could live your life without oxygen how much oxygen would you have left?

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".

It comes down to whether you want to follow or lead. By paying attention to politics you learn one of two things. One is how to play the game the other is how not to play the game.What does learning the game have to do with being a leader or a follower? Are you saying only leaders definitely know the game while for followers it's optional?

If you go about life as a follower you will only inherit mistakes of the past.
While leaders inherit something else? I think you mean followers will only pass on the deeds of others (including the mistakes) to the next generation or something.

But, if you lead you might find that the daily nonsense of arguing over *beep* is all part of our growth as human beings.In other words, your idea of followers don't find that. I guess your idea of followers just sit in their cubicles, do the 9-5 and never argue with anybody.

The worst mistake a human being can make is believing they've seen it all.
I think we can find a worse mistake to make.

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".