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

[Belindi]

So taking a cold hard look at the thread title.
Take two views of god:

1. God is a person that cares who you sleep with, what you believe. Knows every sparrow that falls; has a plan for you and the universe; is difficult to understand; does things in mysterious ways. "He" put a son on the planet and allowed humans to nail him to a bit of tree, to "save" you all? and will sent you to heaven or hell depending on how "good" you have been (whatever that is); to either listen to choirs of angels for the rest of eternity or be burned with sharp forks wielded by snickering demons.

2. God is a diffuse and vague notion of a higher power laying the basis for the laws of nature but not having desires or consciousness.


So, really, is question of "God" or "god" just related to use of language?
Or is this thread just another attempt to salvage the notion of god by pretending its really all just the same thing but people just express the idea a little differently?

I agree probably helpful to know what a poster means by "belief in God".
Besides thinking about what 'God' means, I'd also think about the different meanings of 'belief in' and 'trust' as a lot of people trust God without thinking about whether or not He exists as they take it for granted He exists. There are certain people I believe in like behave , think, or feel as I hope they will behave,think, or feel.

[Sculptor1]

So taking a cold hard look at the thread title.
Take two views of god:

1. God is a person that cares who you sleep with, what you believe. Knows every sparrow that falls; has a plan for you and the universe; is difficult to understand; does things in mysterious ways. "He" put a son on the planet and allowed humans to nail him to a bit of tree, to "save" you all? and will sent you to heaven or hell depending on how "good" you have been (whatever that is); to either listen to choirs of angels for the rest of eternity or be burned with sharp forks wielded by snickering demons.

2. God is a diffuse and vague notion of a higher power laying the basis for the laws of nature but not having desires or consciousness.


So, really, is question of "God" or "god" just related to use of language?
Or is this thread just another attempt to salvage the notion of god by pretending its really all just the same thing but people just express the idea a little differently?

I agree probably helpful to know what a poster means by "belief in God".
Besides thinking about what 'God' means, I'd also think about the different meanings of 'belief in' and 'trust' as a lot of people trust God without thinking about whether or not He exists as they take it for granted He exists. There are certain people I believe in like behave , think, or feel as I hope they will behave,think, or feel.

Belief is a confused word as you imply.
I try to avoid it.
If I think something is the case then i "know" it. If information comes along that challenges that knoweldge then I adapt.
The trouble with belief is that people think that gives them licence to hold a view point that is beyind challenge and they think justified to hold regardless of the facts, evidence or even reason.
"I believe nothing" is a defence against idiocy.
Belief can also be used as an aspiration: such as all men are created equal. A proposition which is palpably untrue, though we might aspire to bring such a thing to be.
But were a person to accept that as an already given truth then what could this lead to except to blame those who, having been born in poverty, are personally responsible for failing to work to their "equal" potential? I have seen this example many times amongst the Christian RIGHT.
My advice: start with a blacnk slate and build up, if you can.
The only valid starting position is to begin by not believing in "God" or "god" or "gods", and examine the propositions that exist for such a thing/s to exist.
Can you rely on your childhood stories? Surely like tales of Santa and the Tooth Faiery you should reject what you have been indoctrinated into beleiving?
What is your evidence, and can it be explained? Are there other answers?

But one thing is for sure. It is NOT "just" langauge.

[Belindi]

So taking a cold hard look at the thread title.
Take two views of god:

1. God is a person that cares who you sleep with, what you believe. Knows every sparrow that falls; has a plan for you and the universe; is difficult to understand; does things in mysterious ways. "He" put a son on the planet and allowed humans to nail him to a bit of tree, to "save" you all? and will sent you to heaven or hell depending on how "good" you have been (whatever that is); to either listen to choirs of angels for the rest of eternity or be burned with sharp forks wielded by snickering demons.

2. God is a diffuse and vague notion of a higher power laying the basis for the laws of nature but not having desires or consciousness.


So, really, is question of "God" or "god" just related to use of language?
Or is this thread just another attempt to salvage the notion of god by pretending its really all just the same thing but people just express the idea a little differently?

I agree probably helpful to know what a poster means by "belief in God".
Besides thinking about what 'God' means, I'd also think about the different meanings of 'belief in' and 'trust' as a lot of people trust God without thinking about whether or not He exists as they take it for granted He exists. There are certain people I believe in like behave , think, or feel as I hope they will behave,think, or feel.

Belief is a confused word as you imply.
I try to avoid it.
If I think something is the case then i "know" it. If information comes along that challenges that knoweldge then I adapt.
The trouble with belief is that people think that gives them licence to hold a view point that is beyind challenge and they think justified to hold regardless of the facts, evidence or even reason.
"I believe nothing" is a defence against idiocy.
Belief can also be used as an aspiration: such as all men are created equal. A proposition which is palpably untrue, though we might aspire to bring such a thing to be.
But were a person to accept that as an already given truth then what could this lead to except to blame those who, having been born in poverty, are personally responsible for failing to work to their "equal" potential? I have seen this example many times amongst the Christian RIGHT.
My advice: start with a blacnk slate and build up, if you can.
The only valid starting position is to begin by not believing in "God" or "god" or "gods", and examine the propositions that exist for such a thing/s to exist.
Can you rely on your childhood stories? Surely like tales of Santa and the Tooth Faiery you should reject what you have been indoctrinated into beleiving?
What is your evidence, and can it be explained? Are there other answers?

But one thing is for sure. It is NOT "just" langauge.

"What you have been indoctrinated into believing" is the paradox about the word 'believe'. I believed in (i.e. absolutely trusted) my good parents and so I believed (i.e. trusted) what they told me were all facts(i.e. credible, believable.).I might have said to somebody who knew my parents "Of course I believe in my parents, you well know they are good people!" Or "I certainly believe in my husband. He would never cheat me."

'Believe in' is an example of the meaning's being its use in its social context. (Wittgenstein).Social context is very hard to see in online postings where people are identifiable only by literacy , political affiliations, religious and philosophical affiliations, and the few facts about their lives they choose to reveal.

[Sculptor1]

So taking a cold hard look at the thread title.
Take two views of god:

1. God is a person that cares who you sleep with, what you believe. Knows every sparrow that falls; has a plan for you and the universe; is difficult to understand; does things in mysterious ways. "He" put a son on the planet and allowed humans to nail him to a bit of tree, to "save" you all? and will sent you to heaven or hell depending on how "good" you have been (whatever that is); to either listen to choirs of angels for the rest of eternity or be burned with sharp forks wielded by snickering demons.

2. God is a diffuse and vague notion of a higher power laying the basis for the laws of nature but not having desires or consciousness.


So, really, is question of "God" or "god" just related to use of language?
Or is this thread just another attempt to salvage the notion of god by pretending its really all just the same thing but people just express the idea a little differently?

I agree probably helpful to know what a poster means by "belief in God".
Besides thinking about what 'God' means, I'd also think about the different meanings of 'belief in' and 'trust' as a lot of people trust God without thinking about whether or not He exists as they take it for granted He exists. There are certain people I believe in like behave , think, or feel as I hope they will behave,think, or feel.

Belief is a confused word as you imply.
I try to avoid it.
If I think something is the case then i "know" it. If information comes along that challenges that knoweldge then I adapt.
The trouble with belief is that people think that gives them licence to hold a view point that is beyind challenge and they think justified to hold regardless of the facts, evidence or even reason.
"I believe nothing" is a defence against idiocy.
Belief can also be used as an aspiration: such as all men are created equal. A proposition which is palpably untrue, though we might aspire to bring such a thing to be.
But were a person to accept that as an already given truth then what could this lead to except to blame those who, having been born in poverty, are personally responsible for failing to work to their "equal" potential? I have seen this example many times amongst the Christian RIGHT.
My advice: start with a blacnk slate and build up, if you can.
The only valid starting position is to begin by not believing in "God" or "god" or "gods", and examine the propositions that exist for such a thing/s to exist.
Can you rely on your childhood stories? Surely like tales of Santa and the Tooth Faiery you should reject what you have been indoctrinated into beleiving?
What is your evidence, and can it be explained? Are there other answers?

But one thing is for sure. It is NOT "just" langauge.

"What you have been indoctrinated into believing" is the paradox about the word 'believe'. I believed in (i.e. absolutely trusted) my good parents and so I believed (i.e. trusted) what they told me were all facts(i.e. credible, believable.).I might have said to somebody who knew my parents "Of course I believe in my parents, you well know they are good people!" Or "I certainly believe in my husband. He would never cheat me."

This is not a paradox. It is the lifeblood of all religions and political ideologies. It is the shame of human kind.

'Believe in' is an example of the meaning's being its use in its social context. (Wittgenstein).Social context is very hard to see in online postings where people are identifiable only by literacy , political affiliations, religious and philosophical affiliations, and the few facts about their lives they choose to reveal.