Author Topic: Ten answers about God  (Read 26268 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

August 04, 2012, 02:24:14 AM
Reply #225

Faijer

  • Veritas Moderator
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Existential Pragmatist

  • 3201
  • Karma:
    40
  • Personal Text
    The Devil's Advocate
    • View Profile
    • WordPress Blog
Quote from: kobok
And switching to Faijer...  But then by saying there are no salient differences, are you not equating agnosticism and epistemological nihilism?  Surely that's non-pragmatic. 

Essentially, you undermine all knowledge by saying no experience can be trusted, because you have not established a threshold for establishing said trust.  It has greater utility to establish a threshold or process for trustworthy knowledge which reaches sufficiency for considering it true in future decisions.  And if one establishes such a threshold or process for experiences producing knowledge of everyday utility, why would the same threshold or process not apply to experiences of God?
It's more metaphysical nihilism than epistemological nihilism; the latter is another difficult notion to defend. It's currently an undeniable notion, not because it's necessarily true but because we have no reasonable way to show that anything is more than an illusory construct (all current testing methodologies require that we accept this world as real and shared, and then move on from there). The threshold for trust is something we each decide on- even if only to agree with others- not something that is. Being pragmatic, people typically go with what they can sense because, for all intents and purposes, it is their 'real' world. People typically accept the doubt, if they ever have it, but also accept their apparent circumstances and invest themselves in them. But, it must be recognised that any 'experience' of god is as apparent as the 'experience' of sensory phenomena, and potentially as illusory in its ontology. If you pragmatically accept your circumstances as 'real', you can pragmatically accept an experience of god as 'real'.
My WordPress Blog is updated regularly.
NEW UPDATE: Life begins at conception: A thought experiment (29/08/2012)

August 04, 2012, 07:22:45 AM
Reply #226

Searcher

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1017
  • Karma:
    -66
  • Personal Text
    Yes they bite😈
    • View Profile
Ok so one cannot do hard sarcasm on veritas!  :mad:

I will not bother replying to SD again because he should have read what I put so I will move forward to Kobok at #224

We have a few fundamental differences Kobok and one basic difference. The basic difference is that you believe that god created everything and I believe that god was created by man but it goes deeper than this in that I can see your point of view and accept it as a possibility although I reject it, you however cannot see further than trying to prove to your self that god created everything.

Yes Fusion existed before man. No one can dispute this but man had to discover how to ‘make’ fusion happen in the lab before he could use it out side of it, therefore my statement stands true (unless you are still being pedantic).

Which brings us onto another one of our fundamental differences – Logic! If you have A, B & C and it is not A OR B then it is C, this is logic. If you have the same A, B & C and it is not A, then it is either B or C, this again is logic but as soon as you make an assumption about either B or C then it is not logic. How this assumption is reached is immaterial and becomes an expression, a thought or a belief. If you then accept the assumption as fact then you have blind faith. Please read paragraph 3 again.

Which brings us to another fundamental difference:  When I discuss something I look at it, consider it and if needed gain more information, what I do not do is then look to see if it fits my belief system (probably because I haven’t really got one, just a selection of ideas and theories based on my knowledge, my experiences and the new information) whereas It appears to me that you always have to check if it’s fits you belief system and then amend to meet this belief system. I have alluded to it before but I think (I am not talking about my beliefs) that you can see that there are other possibilities but that you are frightened to go there just in case it rocks your belief system.

Come out the closet son, you may find clearer vision.  :)



We can look but do we see and we can listen but do we hear? So what gets in the way?
👂u have to say because I don't do hints👂

August 04, 2012, 11:55:37 AM
Reply #227

Steve

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3685
  • Karma:
    139
    • View Profile
On the topic of evolution, I'm quite sad to see that no one has mentioned that humans are incredibly adaptable, as proven by the fact that so many humans have adapted quite well to our man-made environments of steel and concrete, where laziness is a valued trait as we make other people do all our work and as our physical needs can be met quite easily without us needing to grow to our best in order to struggle to fulfill them anymore, where we can let our reaction times drop as there are so many safety nets in place, where we can become stupider and stupider as more and more laws and regulations are being set up to award us damages when we're injured in so many circumstances where we should have just used our brains beforehand in order to protect ourselves (ie, the hot-coffee-spilled-on-lap mcdonalds incident that led to a high-profile court case), etc etc.

This is mostly aimed towards rebutting some strong statements that Searcher made: Society does indeed change the rules by which natural selection works, but it does not negate natural selection entirely. And natural selection is not the only form of selective breeding that influences a society. "Natural" selection still works quite well in full-on nature and still works a little bit within our concrete jungles (after all, a person who dies within our cities still dies and can no longer pass along genetic information after that point), but social selection is now quite strong in our human societies as social interactions determine who mates with whom in order to produce offspring and carry on genetic traits. Searcher's points about artificial insemination also hold true, however, as such methods do fight against natural selection, but they haven't won just yet as the technologies are too-seldom used while they're still being developed, on too small a scale compared to the complete populace, and are too new to be a worthwhile competitor to something that's existed for billions of years ;)

And one last disjointed point about natural selection: it doesn't work on individual basis. It influences in small ways, over very long periods of time, on large populations - it is not dead just because you don't notice it, or cannot conceive of it, within your lifetime.

~Steve
Mastery does not occur when you've performed a feat once or twice. Instead, it comes after years of training, when you realize that you no longer notice when you're performing a feat which used to require so much effort. Even walking takes years of training for a human: why not everything else?

August 04, 2012, 07:21:20 PM
Reply #228

supadude

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Super Villain

  • 834
  • Karma:
    16
    • View Profile
Quote
I will not bother replying to SD again because he should have read what I put so I will move forward to Kobok at #224
You should be glad and thankful to kobok for removing it as it only served to maintain your image. He deleted it because what you posted made you look like a 12 year old child.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnA8GUtXpXY&feature=player_embedded
A must see study for all!
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVWUFDDyAHmC2k1m2rnGvQw
My youtube channel

The proud owner of the 200,000th post made on Veritas.

August 05, 2012, 06:02:28 AM
Reply #229

Searcher

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1017
  • Karma:
    -66
  • Personal Text
    Yes they bite😈
    • View Profile
I wish I was as quick as you SD in #228. As I said Veritas can not do hard sarcasm or poignant satire.

So Kobok! was thinking of me; how quaint…….probably not! But there again he probably didn’t delete the post?

Thanks for the rebut Steve, I cannot wait to see your response when you agree (said light heartedly)  :P
We can look but do we see and we can listen but do we hear? So what gets in the way?
👂u have to say because I don't do hints👂

August 05, 2012, 07:29:46 AM
Reply #230

Akenu

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3343
  • Karma:
    -41
  • Personal Text
    यम या रा आना
    • View Profile
    • Akenu's Initiation
Kobok's example about Sun and fusion is quite a nice example of how modern science works. Observation and derivation are the most typical ways of developing "new" things. Science is usually lost when something cannot be observed nor derived.

P.S. I just thought I would add some flame when you already started flaming here...

August 06, 2012, 04:06:42 AM
Reply #231

Searcher

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1017
  • Karma:
    -66
  • Personal Text
    Yes they bite😈
    • View Profile
"The United States takes very seriously the responsibility to respect and protect people of all faiths. Religious freedom and religious tolerance are fundamental pillars of US society."

US Embassy, India

More here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19143281
We can look but do we see and we can listen but do we hear? So what gets in the way?
👂u have to say because I don't do hints👂

August 06, 2012, 04:30:32 AM
Reply #232

Akenu

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3343
  • Karma:
    -41
  • Personal Text
    यम या रा आना
    • View Profile
    • Akenu's Initiation
OK, let's end the flaming.

As many of you already noticed, whatever takes a good deal of belief will start manifesting somehow. Various demons, deities, hell even pikachu got its metaphysical life by this way.

Could that be the case with God, as well? Depends on definition. When you define the God as some entity with some powers, it certainly will be egregore. Another definition is absolute and all-encompassing spirit, living Universum if you will with definition as outlined in The Kybalion, God with such definition couldn't be created by human mind to begin with, just because it existed before anything else, it never got created nor destroyed, it was simply there all the time before time and space rose up within it.

Before you start ranting again that there are so many definitions of God, think about it, let this definition to devour you and you will find something interesting.

August 06, 2012, 05:22:22 AM
Reply #233

Searcher

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1017
  • Karma:
    -66
  • Personal Text
    Yes they bite😈
    • View Profile
Akenu I agree with you but whether egregore is the correct word can be up for debate. I don’t give two hoots about who believes in what and I definitely don’t want followers – I am a loner and always have been and I am happy in my own skin. Yes I like to help and to empower others to help them selves by knowledge and reasoning.

So what is the issue I hear you ask?

I do not feel the need and I have never knocked anyone’s door and said ‘god as a message for you today’ and although milder in vocabulary “…there are so many definitions of God, think about it, let this definition to devour you and you will find something interesting.” fits within this social unacceptability (from my point of view) activity.

When I first started reading veritas and when I started contributing, there were debates on metaphysics (some heated as different views and opinions where put forward). Very little was mentioned surrounding Divinity (the name of my parents house by the way) but now it seems impossible to have a discussion without it being referred back to a creator god as the controlling factor and wowbetied the poster who goes against it, receiving a capital WHAT!

Now you could argue that this section is called spirituality and as a follower of Majick I should not post here and yes you are correct but it does not say what type of spirituality or to define it only to the Christian style of worship, be it within what ever form.
We can look but do we see and we can listen but do we hear? So what gets in the way?
👂u have to say because I don't do hints👂

August 06, 2012, 05:43:07 AM
Reply #234

Akenu

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3343
  • Karma:
    -41
  • Personal Text
    यम या रा आना
    • View Profile
    • Akenu's Initiation
@Searcher: In the very first post of this thread you could notice I was talking about my study of Kabbalah, so you might figure out my definition of God refers to Kabbalah, which, by the way, is very same as the depiction of THE ALL in Kybalion.

Talking about different definitions of God and talking about preachers going from door to door is a bit out of place when we consider that no one of them have ever read any Kabbalistic scripture. Not speaking about that Kabbalah warns about people that misunderstood sacred knowledge and built religions on their false perception (similarity to The Kybalion, maybe?)

Whether you believe or not believe, doesn't matter.

P.S. I will please you with something. Message I personally got from God, lesson I got from him was: "Believe in yourself". Isn't that what you believe in, as well? I think everyone should believe in that ;-).

August 06, 2012, 06:50:28 AM
Reply #235

Searcher

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 1017
  • Karma:
    -66
  • Personal Text
    Yes they bite😈
    • View Profile
But how many understand the difference and that ‘god’ is a name that people use in many different ways and to mean different leaders of different deities or beliefs.

An old Irish comic reportedly sponsored by the Catholic Church always finished with the line:

And may your god go with you!

I was trying to say that the door to door sales is symbolic of the need to introduce the creator god idea at every possibility in order to down play, down grade idea’s within Majick. Again this is a personal belief: the two eventually can not live side by side. And that I do not feel the need to keep peeing on the creator god theorist party, but I have been to get them to understand that it is not a nice thing to do because trying to reason with them is impossible. # 231 is another example.

In some areas I agree with AC (not the Christian bit obviously) in that it is what we do in and with our lives that counts but from my point of view it makes no difference who or what you are.
We can look but do we see and we can listen but do we hear? So what gets in the way?
👂u have to say because I don't do hints👂

August 06, 2012, 07:34:35 AM
Reply #236

Akenu

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3343
  • Karma:
    -41
  • Personal Text
    यम या रा आना
    • View Profile
    • Akenu's Initiation
@Searcher: "may your god be with you" is still valid option in Kabbalah. Joke is that Kabbalah doesn't neglect any god or deity (or even atheism).