The greatest Philosophical idea, ever?

reply to post by serbsta

Oh, boo hoo for pauvre petit Jean-Jacques, throwing a little tantrum just because his dry old philosopher's God doesn't have enough juice in Him for the masses (those same masses he professed to be so bent on liberating) and prefer their hairy old Nobodaddy with His all-too-human wants and pathologies!

Pardon me if I refuse to bend a knee. I don't believe in God - not that kind, anyway - but if I did, I'd want a God who stood in my corner, a God enough like me that I could understand Him, one whose Divine Fiat was never so final that I couldn't get around him with a bit of flattery and the bribe of a sheep or two (and maybe the odd virgin on high days and holy days). A God in my own image, geddit?

Pity God lost the plot and thought he had to sacrifice Himself to Himself to pay for the sins He committed against Himself. Before he went nuts he was quite a useful lad - especially on the battlefield - though he was always a bit hard to control on his manic days.

Tell you what: that old psycho from the Bible might have been a horror, but at least He was a comprehensible horror. Le Dieu des philosophes is both an absurdity and an abomination.

* * *

Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
A world where we can actually be free? Utter madness, sir

You are perfectly (and unironically) right. I salute you.

Starred!

Im not as knowledgeable (due to my inexperience and young age) as some as of the members on ATS here, but i just enjoy reading posts like the one above, even if i agree/disagree with it.

Awesome and witty insight mate.

Originally posted by Astyanax
Pardon me if I refuse to bend a knee. I don't believe in God - not that kind, anyway - but if I did, I'd want a God who stood in my corner, a God enough like me that I could understand Him, one whose Divine Fiat was never so final that I couldn't get around him with a bit of flattery and the bribe of a sheep or two (and maybe the odd virgin on high days and holy days). A God in my own image, geddit?

I hope you won't mind if I pluck this to make a point somewhat unrelated to your post and not necessarily directed at you.

I believe that is what most of us want. To believe in the existence or lack of by our own choosing. Which was the core idea behind my original post in this thread. At least it was when I thought of it. Which has nothing to do with religion singularly, but everything to do with human behavior generally. The need to categorize and define this or that as better or even the best. Useful to an extent, for individuals, but universally only when such defines standards which we can near equally agree are beneficial to all. Standards for living as harmoniously as possible.

This does not apply to god; an issue which has little bearing on our physical existence no matter how much some insist otherwise. A fact that can be proven to my physical existence if not to my metaphysical. At least not on a substantive level. Nor does it apply to religion, politics or chili recipes. All issues of subjectivity and taste.

Which is why I've "defended" religion numerous times on this site. Not because I'm particularly religious, but because I don't see such a subjective concept as the true issue, but rather the all-too human and childish selfishness that instigates violence over it.

"Like what I like!" is a generalized command by both the religious and non-religious, leading at best to scorn and at worst to violence. It isn't exclusive to arguments over god or religion. And so religion cannot be exclusively blamed as some would seem to like to do. Nor concepts of god for that matter around which religion, a purely human institution, is based, which is why I say religion is no more or less useful or harmful to humankind than any other human institution insofar as it serves its purpose to those who desire it. What that purpose is to them is what determines its detriment.

In short, religion is not the issue. And abolishing it will only leave a gaping hole to fill. And can any really suppose the extent of control over their fellow humans it wold take to fill that hole with something equally useful to them?

So while I view arguing and debate as valid in that it exposes us to viewpoints which can actually strengthen our own by altering them, shining new light; ultimately people will be what they are and will find their own way in their own time.

I know; a bit of wishy-washy, pinko, peacenik, hippie tripe. Not at all the hard-lined, bloodthirsty, adversarial view of the world most choose to balm their egos with. And my point being of no more or less value than any other, by my own admission and philosophy, I'll simply move on now. Because while we will never be completely free while we live in the world we live in, we are free to an extent. Free to think and feel as we wish, to view the world as we choose. Or at least we should be, and we should allow others to be out of respect for our own freedom. At least I see it as such.

[edit on 18/5/09 by TravelerintheDark]

[edit on 18/5/09 by TravelerintheDark]

reply to post by TravelerintheDark


I understand your views.

What it comes down to is perception. You see yourself living under someone, while I see myself being my own leader.

If you disagree with me - it is just a difference of opinion. All philosophy is just a way of thinking. If you like thinking in a way that you serve someone, go ahead. I will be a leader and make my own rules.

Sound hypocritical? Who cares? When it comes to philosophy, why can't I have my cake and eat it too?

All philosophy helps us do is see life in a better way (or how it should be used for).

I am perfectly content with my view. Makes the most logical sense to me, and it keeps me the happiest. I don't know about you, but THAT is the greatest philosophical idea ever. Not something that others agree with, but what makes you feel complete.

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist
I am perfectly content with my view. Makes the most logical sense to me, and it keeps me the happiest. I don't know about you, but THAT is the greatest philosophical idea ever. Not something that others agree with, but what makes you feel complete.

And so we also couldn't agree more readily. All the best to you on your journey. And thanks for shedding a little light on mine.

edited to correct a typo: There's always at least one it seems. Must say something about my personality that I can't let that single missing letter go.

[edit on 18/5/09 by TravelerintheDark]

reply to post by TravelerintheDark


Despite our disagreement, thanks for the discussion itself

One idea might sound crazy to someone else, but may help a bystander. Even though we are not on the same page, maybe someone else will find their answer in our separate views.

reply to post by TravelerintheDark

And abolishing it will only leave a gaping hole to fill. And can any really suppose the extent of control over their fellow humans it wold take to fill that hole with something equally useful to them?

Killer insight. Star for that.

Man has a god in him because he has a beast; and he needs both of them to make him man.

You missed a typo, by the way. I left it uncorrected in the quote above.

Originally posted by Astyanax
Man has a god in him because he has a beast; and he needs both of them to make him man.

Absolutely. The undeniable and intrinsic duality that lies at the heart of not just philosophy and/or religion, but forms the basis and apparent need for social structure as a whole as well as reality as we know it.

Reminds me that I've spent much of my life denying one and embracing the other. But as I've gotten older it strikes me as more sensible to reconcile the two in some way. To satisfy both as equally as possible.

I suppose that's why I've come to disregard certain ideas that humans have held somehow sacred for thousands of years. Ideas that conclude we simply can't be "right" the way we are. That we need to eliminate elements of our basic nature to be better than we are. That we are imperfect. But that doesn't make sense to me anymore. I see the idea of imperfection as misalignment. And what has been misaligned can be realigned, disregarding extremes that inevitably exist for the sake of this particular discussion

Thank you for your input, Astyanax. You've reminded me why I enjoy these discussions as much as I have. Allowing me to understand myself as much as I try to understand others. And that is something I'm genuinely appreciative for.

Originally posted by Astyanax
You missed a typo, by the way.

I left it uncorrected in the quote above.

Indeed. It took two looks to find it lol Once I did, I realized that from today I can simply let it be

____________________________________________________________

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist
Despite our disagreement, thanks for the discussion itself

Thank you as well

[edit on 19/5/09 by TravelerintheDark]

reply to post by TravelerintheDark

I realized that from today I can simply let it be.

Thus you advance a step farther than I along the Path to Enlightenment.

Humans are babbling belief whores- i said it. I do not exist though.

reply to post by nonthought


your comment is true but somewhat insulting to yourself ...

You see the question that is being asked is not in fact yours!

You may think, well in fact you do! but .. the lesson is understanding not the answers

can you tell me what would happen if humans YOU had all the answers?

ironic do you not think?

What is it you are asking ? well that is your answer is it not ?

The very question is the reason why you and i are here

I do not exist. I am your mind, your ego , your belief.

I show what humans think and what he needs.

That said no one can help humans from babbling. It is a method he uses to balance his energy