Atheist and believers are just a different side of the same coin.

What's funny to me about the evolution/creationist debate is that no one in it really seems to care what the truth is. They are so busy trying to convince and bully everyone that they are infallibly correct that they miss the epistemology of what they are discussing (don't these people read philosophy). It does not matter in the end which view point is correct. They are both, in the big sense of the word, conjectures at this point. There may be evidence (phenomenal or logical) for one or the other, more so for evolution, but behind both ideas lies the unknown(this is where philosophy comes in), it's not that we will some day enter the unknown area of understanding and understand it, but that there is that unknown. We are all believers in the end at this point. Believing in science or religion is not what matter it's that we believe adamantly and with a rigid fervor that's the scary part of the whole dialog between the two factions (believing does not amount to truth). They both push each other further into there own skewed ideologies and further away from the seeking that is so important to human nature. The ill founded debate is forcing the rest of the human race into a lackadaisical stance in which all forms of inquiry are believed to be superfluous and amount to reductio ad absurdum.

There is the field of perceptions, this field of perception "is". When expressing the is of perception I am not invoking the idea or belief in existence. The use of "is" is stating that which is present. The present of perception in not just apprehension of the sense data but includes ideas. Ideas here meaning mental images ether of memory's, mathematical truths, dreams and what ever else may be deemed idea. Also included in the perception are the emotions whether trigger by what one calls the physiological methods of perception (senses), psychological method of perception (ideas), or other emotions (and in truth emotions are a mix of the latter two). Perception then is composed of all that is in this case. One may assume that I am defining perception based of off these predefined components: ideas, emotions, and sensations, but in fact these three constituents are defined based of off perception and not the other way around. Perception is on the out set a wholeness. Only until that wholeness is categorized and put into divided groups do we perceive there being ideas, emotions, and sensations.

Most music that means anything to me has to be an intertwining of poetics and philosophy. One allows freedom of wonder and the other is the grounds for sanity. It's the free mixing of the irrational with the rational that creates the deep meaningfulness of music and causes mind to sore to heights unobtainable with out it

We are all so bewildered by an ignorance of such staggering incomprehensibility that we assign and actualize our own truths . This is the lot of that which is cognizant of self and in turn this is what creates pure freedom (perceptions fluidity through what is infinitely possible). Being cognizant of the human situations is the apex of philosophical thought and with out poetics as a pushing force philosophy amounts to absurdity "reductio ad absurdum".

Has the will created god to shield us from the abyss of the unknown? The will being the force that drives existence.

Being is awareness grouping.

I think what drives me mad the most is the inability to know that what one knows is actually truth. It's true freedom yes, but it still gives my head great pain. It's this "residing in the absolutely unknowable" that is freedom. It's what frees ones existence from any static form of being.