Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Felix]

ChaoticMind: "The problem I've been having is that I was taken out of context, when I said religion I meant religion based on a concept of God."

You did ask: "Why do you or why do you not believe in God?" However it is clear from your commentary ("I look at the idea of God as a sort of comfort blanket.") that you were really asking: "Why do you or why do you not believe in a personal (or anthropomorphic) God?" As was pointed out, many religions, e.g., Buddhism, Taoism, Materialism, do not require faith in a personal God.

[Alun]

Usually it is some of the "It's the way I was raised." Or, "I don't know" crap. Seems like pure stubborn ignorance to me...
I look at the idea of God as a sort of comfort blanket.

The reality is that we don't know some things about the universe--there are things we cannot know. Namely, first principles of reality. We do not know, for example, whether or not contradictory things are possible, whether things can exist without a cause, or whether there really is an outside world. Our "coping mechanism" for questions that don't have an answer is always to stop asking in some sense.

Theism is one such response. Materialism, pantheism, and egoism (of which beliefs like realism, nihilism, etc. are subsets) are other possible responses. It seems to be human nature to give up and stop asking questions when we know there isn't a good answer. So the real question is not what reason we have to believe in God, but why we would prefer the irrational response of theism to another irrational response.

Which comes back to where you started: it's just a matter of your environment; how you prefer to see the world. Because we cannot know, we just assume our preference is the case and move on.

[ape]

I'm surprised at how many people on this forum believe in God.

Hi ChaoticMindSays!
Because of the Complemenarity of Opposites in Quantum Physics, all those same people also believe in the opposite idea.

I haven't believed since I was about 10 years old and even before then I think I only said I believed because I didn't understand and it was expected of me.

So you have actively believed both primary opposites at different times.

The general concept of a God has always seemed completely illogical to me and almost every single one of my friends is the same way. They look at this idea and discard it as rubbish.

It is just as rubbishy to not believe in God.

When some one tells me they are a christian my first response is usually 'why?' and never once have I ever heard a good reason for the belief. Usually it is some of the "It's the way I was raised." Or, "I don't know" crap. Seems like pure stubborn ignorance to me.

Same thing when someone says that they are atheist.

Now, I know not everything is logical and I know that there are some newer theories that make a little more sense, mostly involution, but what I want from you guys is reasons.

There is nothing more permanent than change and more old than the new: Heraclitus.

If you believe in God please explain why.

You already know why: it's the same why as to why you believe in no God.

If you don't believe in God please explain why.

Ditto.

As for now I look at the idea of God as a sort of comfort blanket. When something big and scary that you can't understand is hovering over you you throw it over your head and it's gone. You don't have to think about it anymore. Religion is just a way of coping with a big scary universe.

Ditto for belief in no god: it's blanket to get rid of a guilty conscience and to deal with a scary uni.

[ChaoticMindSays]

Alun said

The reality is that we don't know some things about the universe--there are things we cannot know. Namely, first principles of reality. We do not know, for example, whether or not contradictory things are possible, whether things can exist without a cause, or whether there really is an outside world. Our "coping mechanism" for questions that don't have an answer is always to stop asking in some sense.

Theism is one such response. Materialism, pantheism, and egoism (of which beliefs like realism, nihilism, etc. are subsets) are other possible responses. It seems to be human nature to give up and stop asking questions when we know there isn't a good answer. So the real question is not what reason we have to believe in God, but why we would prefer the irrational response of theism to another irrational response.

Which comes back to where you started: it's just a matter of your environment; how you prefer to see the world. Because we cannot know, we just assume our preference is the case and move on.

I agree with what your saying and honestly I have nothing against religion or God, it's just that... My entire life I have been surrounded by people who use God as an excuse for not being completely honest with themselves. Everyone has the right to choose what they believe but I think that what someone believes should be chosen through experience and earnest effort to understand.

It seems to be human nature to give up and stop asking questions when we know there isn't a good answer.

This is the behavior I have a problem with, this is what is killing us as a race. We give up when we cannot understand when we should never even think about giving up.
So if I am to ever have a religion it will be a religion of asking, of striving for something new.

Felix said

You did ask: "Why do you or why do you not believe in God?" However it is clear from your commentary ("I look at the idea of God as a sort of comfort blanket.") that you were really asking: "Why do you or why do you not believe in a personal (or anthropomorphic) God?" As was pointed out, many religions, e.g., Buddhism, Taoism, Materialism, do not require faith in a personal God.

Thats pretty much what I meant. I'm asking why people personally disbelieve or believe in a God. What I'm NOT trying to do is debate what religion is.

[ChaoticMindSays]

BlessedLunaticWiseman, Your saying there is something intervening between me and everything else and that that thing is God. And that all things are perfect and that this perfection is God. Am I wrong? The problem I have with what Your saying is that your are trying to back your claims with rhetoric, which seems ridiculous to me. Rhetoric is something we made, you aren't going to solve any real philosophical questions by playing with words.

Ape, Everything obviously has an equal opposite, there is duality in all things. But if that is all you can look at you lose your true perspective. In reality you eventually have to pick a side, even if you have an understanding for that which is opposite.

Geez, you two like to play with words... Rhetoric doesn't define reality, reality defines us and we define rhetoric.

[BlessedLunaticWiseman]

Dear "ChaoticMindSays" from Pluto!
Greetings;

Let's read what you said:

BlessedLunaticWiseman, Your saying there is something intervening between me and everything else and that that thing is God. And that all things are perfect and that this perfection is God. Am I wrong? The problem I have with what Your saying is that your are trying to back your claims with rhetoric, which seems ridiculous to me. Rhetoric is something we made, you aren't going to solve any real philosophical questions by playing with words.

Dear!
I'm not playing with words;the only thing I'm playing with is a mustache!!!

Anyway....To be able to find what I mean,you should read between the lines!
But no matter;I try to be a little serious,solving the problem you face!

What is "existence"?
Is it the "existence" who exists or the "existents"!?

Confronting everything you derive two sorts(I mean two kinds)of the concepts!
One shows the "limits"(I mean the "whatness" or the substance),the other refers to the "existence"!

PERFECTION and the OBJECTIVITY comes from EXISTENCE not the SUBSTANCE!
We may say SUBSTANCE is "figurative",it is just a concept,what is REAL is the EXISTENCE!

Suppose I'm a burning donkey you're watching me!!

Suppose there are just three ones shaping the cosmos:

1)There's(:exists)a burning donkey!I'm the one!
2)There's(:exists)a lovely ape!I mean the dear "ape" on this thread!!!
3)There's(:exists)an educated human being!You're the one!

Well;the first parts of the sentences are equal!
We all exist!You,ape,and a donkey(I mean me!!)!
Then the second parts of the sentences(our "Whatnesses" too) should be equal;
But we differ!

From where do our differences enter!?
Out of existence!?
Is there any "existent" out of the "existence"!?

As you see we are equal and unequal at the same time!
We share something in which we differ too.
The shared one is the "existence",the differences come from the limits!

You may remember what I said in my previous posts.

As I said before to be able to define something you should put(:consider)a "finish" for it.The "finishes" make finite ones deFINable.

Infinite is undeFINable,for... there isn't any FINISH for it!
You may call the INFINITE the SHARED EXISTENCE,every single one of us,is indebted to!

Before asking a critical question,I may offer three allegories,you may pay close attention to their contents;I hope you get the point!

Which one was the first?!
The Sea or the Waves?!
Where were the Waves without the Sea?!
Where was the Sea without the Waves?!

Which one is the Last?!
The Mind or the Words?!
Where was the Mind without the Words?!
Where was the Words without the Mind!?

If there wasn't any Light,were would be Shadows!?
If there wasn't any Shadow,how the Light could be Shown?!
But which one really is?!
The Light of "Existence"?
or the Lacks?!The Devil Of The Shadows!?



Now;a critical question you should think about:

Suppose I'm a burning donkey,you're watching me!


If the perfection comes from my "whatness"(from the limits),there should be similar results in different stages of the existence according to the essence you're confronting!

I'm a "burning" donkey!Thinking of me,you grasp me as a concept,besides of the concepts of me in the minds of the others.To be able to know me accurately I and the concept should coincide each other in details!

You make an image coinciding me!!

I'm burning,too "hot" of course!
Tell me please,if your brain is burning!?
How about the brains of the other people who are watching me!

As you see there are several stages of the existence for a substance!The same for everything in the cosmos!

The image in the mind of the painter is more real, than the painted one on the board!

Now,go back reading my previous comments carefuly.

The perfection of a donkey comes from Almighty,
the stupidity of me comes from my limits!!
God teaches you philosophy through me,the long tail and the "heehaw" is the result of the limits!

A donkey is God Almighty minus many other things!
All-Mighty+Limits!!
As your insults are you minus many other words!

God Almighty is a donkey plus many other things!
All+Mighty-Limits!!
As you are your insults plus for example your coughs!


To be contd. ....God Willing!


Yours/"Blessed Lunatic Wiseman"(the nonsense/serious/humorous)!

[Alun]

Everyone has the right to choose what they believe but I think that what someone believes should be chosen through experience and earnest effort to understand.

It seems to be human nature to give up and stop asking questions when we know there isn't a good answer.

This is the behavior I have a problem with, this is what is killing us as a race. We give up when we cannot understand when we should never even think about giving up.
So if I am to ever have a religion it will be a religion of asking, of striving for something new.

I believe, paradoxically, that sort of religion would still involve 'giving up' on some questions. What if nothing matters? What if nothing exists? What if people are all deluded? You can never fully deny these possibilities, and yet you must in order to ask any other questions or generally function. This is the kind of deliberate ignorance I am ok with.

I do not think it is justified to 'ignore' other topics. E.g. the current issues of evolution, the age of the earth, consciousness, the nature of the empirical universe, and even the nature of human life are bogged down by people who are convinced that humanity already knew the answer to the questions centuries ago. Clearly, these are types of questions which we can get a better answer for and in which deliberate ignorance is unacceptable.

[OTavern]

OTavern, you assume far to much. Good luck with that.
It's kinda funny really, you try to shut me down the same way I started in on religion and then call what I (you) did ignorant.
I obviously know much more about religion than you know about me or my background. You know, because I haven't said ANYTHING about myself or my religious background, besides that I stopped believing when I was ten.
Your obviously insecure about your faith or you would not have responded in such an aggressive manner. If God were as good as your really believe he wouldn't need you to defend him.

I wasn't defending God, I was defending a philosophical position by pointing out that the reasons you have for dismissing that position are not very logical at all. In the end your reasons for dismissing the position are just as irrational as the reasons of the irrational believers you disparage - that is why you are "ticked off" at me for pointing that out.

You didn't even answer the damn question.

You weren't ready to hear the answer and you still aren't.

[ape]

Ape, Everything obviously has an equal opposite, there is duality in all things. But if that is all you can look at you lose your true perspective.

True!
So the word Love supplies that perspective!:idea:
Love loves all words and their prebound opposites and so rebinds them giving each the unified, universal and categorical perspective.
Love is the constant and stability that gives consistency and permanent balance to all views and their opposites.
Know the constant word or thought thru which all things are steered thru all things: Heraclitus.

In reality you eventually have to pick a side, even if you have an understanding for that which is opposite.

No, you can't since each side you pick is also the opposite side.
Examples:
If you pick heads, you also have tails.
If you pick giving, you also picked taking.
That is where Love comes in: you will only accept failure as a part of success if you first love yourself as a failure!:idea: then you will see that to succeed is to fail to fail!:idea:
So too with atheism and theism: I am both, and so am neither impressed with my theism nor depressed by my atheism: I am only impressed with the Love I have for me and thus for you et omnia alia as myself no matter who you are.
So I encourage you to be an atheist but in Love of you as what atheism auto-includes: theism! Why? If you hate theists, you must hate and are already hating your fellow atheists and also undermining the concept of atheism!:idea:

Geez, you two like to play with words...

We two will take that as a compliment coming from someone who is also using semantics::)

Rhetoric doesn't define reality, reality defines us and we define rhetoric.

Once again true, but only half-true and backwards!
It starts off exactly the opposite: words come first of which 'us' and 'reality' and 'rhetoric' are 3!:idea:
Then it is because we love us and rhetoric and reality and all other words that we, rhetoric and reality and all other words mean Love and each other, and that then, as you say, we, rhetoric and reality mean Love or other words!:idea:
So words define both us and reality and rhetoric and Love, which Love is a word but the word that loves all words, and Love defines all words.
Example:
As a kid, what did you learn first and learn to love first:
Your alphabet and so you, or reality and rhetoric?:idea:

It works the same with any word:
When you first love yourself, then you mean Love and Love means you!
When you first love meaning, then meaning means Love and Love means meaning.
When you first love reality, then reality means Love and Love means reality.

Then, you will find that there are 2 dual duelling realities: Inner and Outer, with Love as the Master of Reality and of Words!


The whole truth comes from the clash of millstoneword-opposites in the Mill of Love.


"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth."
Niels Bohr

[ChaoticMindSays]

Ape, I'm familiar with what you are talking about here but I have always used different words. Your saying everything is derived from love and that the duality, stems from this love. So all things are loved and all opposites are equal. Right?

BlessedLunaticWiseman, that is a very interesting way to look at it. I have always thought that nothing really seemed as substantial as it should, like it is hardly real. Existence trumps substance, substance is our concept of existence. So substance is what we perceive and existence is what exists before our perception.

[ChaoticMindSays]

OTavern, everything you have said is based off of unwarranted assumptions and arrogance. You keep contradicting yourself and are only offering a shallow viewpoint of the subject at hand while trying to attack me because of something I said.

I would add that a "pre-judgment" of anything is not done in pursuit of truth, but for the sake of some kind of personal convenience or bias.

I pre-judged nothing, but your assumptions are really just pre-judgments. Now your a hypocrite.

You weren't ready to hear the answer and you still aren't.

Theres that arrogance,which is of course due to your biased pre-judgement.
Oh and I wasn't "ticked off" I was only a little surprised by your response. It's kinda funny really, in a way your just proving my point.

Alun said

I believe, paradoxically, that sort of religion would still involve 'giving up' on some questions. What if nothing matters? What if nothing exists? What if people are all deluded? You can never fully deny these possibilities, and yet you must in order to ask any other questions or generally function. This is the kind of deliberate ignorance I am ok with.

I do not think it is justified to 'ignore' other topics. E.g. the current issues of evolution, the age of the earth, consciousness, the nature of the empirical universe, and even the nature of human life are bogged down by people who are convinced that humanity already knew the answer to the questions centuries ago. Clearly, these are types of questions which we can get a better answer for and in which deliberate ignorance is unacceptable.

I think all questions should always be asked and answered to the best of our abilities, no matter how pointless or inconceivable they may seem.

[BlessedLunaticWiseman]

Dear "ChaoticMindSays" coming from Pluto!
Greetings;

I'm very happy to see you got the point!

BlessedLunaticWiseman, that is a very interesting way to look at it. I have always thought that nothing really seemed as substantial as it should, like it is hardly real. Existence trumps substance, substance is our concept of existence. So substance is what we perceive and existence is what exists before our perception.

What a clever "being" you are,not too limited as a "substance"!

A few days ago I posted a comment to dear "ape",I'd rather to repeat a part of it here to be read!
I hope it can help us to continue the discussion.

A few months ago I was invited to a "funeral" to give a lecture!After several days suffering from "coma",one of my friends were dead,I was invited to give a "deFINition" of the dead friend!

I'm a nonsense author,so my friends too seems be a little nonsense!!!

Looking at the people in ceremony I got confused! I didn't know what I was supposed to say!A group of flys were crying the nonsense ants were celebrating the birthday of a butterfly!

NOTE:If the "flys" were celebrating the "birthday" they wouldn't be nonsense!
But the "nonsenseness" emerged for the laughing ones were the unflayable ants!!!!!!!

Yes;the nonsense friend of mine was an ordinary "worm",sharing his "funeral" with the birthday of a "butterfly"!!

Since then I've started to look at myself carefully,to be able to recognize myself among "different substances" as the "one altering existence" whose "identity" is saved,during constant changes!

It should be known too,if the changing substance is related to the substances of the other people with different identities not so similar to mine!?

A kind of "Celestial Schizophrenia" as you see!

...I'm afraid if I'll be a "horsefly" at the end?!Or just the insane donkey,in the previous posts I've mentioned!

I hope to be a nonsense "horsefly" at the end;it is a shame for a "donkey" to be just a "mule" or "ass"!! even though the "horseflys" are not honorable as the "eagles" are!!!

I'm happy for you.You seem to become either a "PERFECT HUMAN" ,or even a "god" at the end!

Though...the "MAIN Eternal Original GOD" remains UNtouchable!

Yes;everything is being changed.
No way to give for a "thing" a "fixed" absolute "definition"!


To be contd. ....God Willing!
Yours/"Blessed Lunatic Wiseman"(the nonsense/serious/humorous)!

[Felix]

One could argue that any belief in God (a.k.a., Spirit, Higher Intelligence, etc.) not based on direct experience (a.k.a., personal revelation) is mere superstition. For example, I know someone who had a near death experience (declared clinically dead for over 10 minutes) who has no doubt that there is a Divine Intelligence. Of course, skeptics may argue that it was just a psychophysical anomaly, but then they did not have the experience. It's easy to dismiss something with which you have no acquaintance.

[ape]

Ape, I'm familiar with what you are talking about here but I have always used different words.

I did *not* know that!:)Awesome! Excellent!
So apply that one Frame of Mind or Reference to all your words and so to all subjects in areas of REAL LIFE and in TECHNICALs!

Your saying everything is derived from love and that the duality, stems from this love. So all things are loved and all opposites are equal. Right?

Exactly! Except that it is the UNITY of and in the duality of words and their opposites which stems from this unified and unifying One Love.
So there is no problem in believing in God and in not believing in God or in believing in no god.
Qed.

The only problem is the Belief in Hate and in the Belief in Hate with which either belief or any belief in anything is believed!

[OTavern]

Theres that arrogance,which is of course due to your biased pre-judgement.
Oh and I wasn't "ticked off" I was only a little surprised by your response. It's kinda funny really, in a way your just proving my point.

Which is what exactly?