It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WARNING: Actual philosophy!

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by rival



There is a high probability that each step we take will end up like everyone before it, but there is no logical base for it.

So we use faith everyday to stave off madness, I don't see why applying it to god makes any less sense.


For me it makes less sense because I have never interacted with God
in a tactile way. But I interact with the ground under my feet everyday
in a tactile way. The ground is part of a tangible and tactile reality that
I assess in real time, making logical assumptions based on previous
experience to keep myself safe from harm.


It's not PERFECTLY 100% logical to assume anything. That's my point. But we do, by faith.

Also, many things aren't tactile or observable. Assume there is a star so far away we will never see it. Does that cause it to not exist? Basing out beliefs in only things we can experience can be a dangerous road to go by.



Sorry, It is not my intention to direct your philosophy thread to religion. Please carry on with the philosophy...it is more fun.


Religion is a major part of philosophy, so is Time, Mind, Reality, etc.




posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Tamale_214
 


Scientists and atheists claim facts and truths about origins of the universe and evolution. But their really no better off then the theists, they just have a better imagination.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeanius
THE USA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY!!!

It's a republic, which means majority rules... UNLESS it infringes on someone's rights!!

Ben Franklin said something along the lines of "We just gave the nation a republic, how long they keep it that way is up to them".

A Democracy is SOCIALISM/COMMUNISM, if 51% of the voters want something from 49% of the voters, they get it.

NOT in a Republic though.

This judge saw that this law infringed on someones rights.


You are absolutely outside your mind. So why even vote? Just run to a federal judge when something happens that infringes on your rights, then the law will be changed



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Don't mention the Bible unless you are actually Bibicaly literate, because just from your post I can see that you've never read it. So allow me to clear this up for you. In Genesis God created Adam and then Eve. They lived happily in the Garden of Eden with NO knowledge of what was good and what was evil, therefore they had no comprehension of the matter of what was "right" and what was "wrong". That is until the day that Satan came and swayed Eve to eat an apple from the tree of knowledge which she shared with Adam. When they ate the fruit, they gained knowledge of what was good and what was evil, therefore condeming themselves and all humanity to follow to lives where choices must be made. Each choice from then on was weighed on the conscience and soul. Though we know when we do something wrong we still choose to do so, and that is what evil is. It is not some opposing force to love or good, but the conscience decision to do wrong. Evil is sin, and sin is an act or choice that seperates us from God.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by afterschoolfun
 





Seriously, you might want to sit down...



LOL... that was amusing, whether intended or not.

As for the subjects of God AND marriage, I think they both got ruined when the STATE got involved.

Politicians and judges are no good for anyone, folks!
They are making/breaking all the rules, and get elected by underhanded means.

Perhaps it's time to turn our pitchforks on the hand that spoon-feeds us.
Well, you know what I mean...



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by afterschoolfun

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Um, this is not philosophy in the least.

Your entire OP is based on faulty logic. You presume much. For example, the following:




-If god is perfect and good and all powerful he must be able and powerful enough to create a world with no evil
-Evil exists
-therefore god does not


Evil exists? how do you know that evil exists? Perhaps what you call "evil", i call "shiz happening"?

Evil is a term based on religion. To use it in your logic creates a flaw, as it is a circular logic type of thing. Without religion/God, there is no evil. Evil is dependant on the belief system.



I was going to say something but there's no point. You have no idea what philosophy is and I suggest you keep it that way. You wouldn't understand it.


I know what philosophy isn't. It isn't using a fallacy, such as Circular Cause and Consequence, as a tool to progress through a logic tree. And it most certainly requires something more grounded in logic than cheap ad hominem techniques.

You are the one who put something up here for feedback. I provided you your feedback. If you believe in your philosophy, there are a few things you need to consider:

- if you want to "test" it, grow some thicker skin. No one wants to give critical feedback to a whiner.

- understand that logic is the basis of philosophy. bad logic = flawed philosophy. if you have an emotional attachment to your philosophy (instead of truth) then you will be more likely to employ faulty logic.

- if your philosophy is worthy of being considered by others, then you will be able to defend it with something other than, "Oh well, you obviously aren't worthy my time so i will not bother responding to you" (could you not have made a better attempt at a defense of your logic than that? That, alone, says volumes and should tell you something).

Listen, i was not trying to be rude to you. I provided honest and critical feedback. That is all. Sorry it struck a nerve.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Imagine you are a genius and managed to create a mechanical robot. You put in the software for it to seek for energy sources and instructions to manage tasks, amongst them to replicate another robot.

As the robot blindlessly and mindlessly follow your instructions, it replicates continually and in time you will a whole world of robots perform its tasks to manage a planet, never stepping out of line, keeps and maintain the ecological balance.

A perfect world perhaps? Or a cold and quiet lonely meaningless one?

In His Likeness were we humans created. We are given the gifts of life, love and free will.

Within that free will a choice to follow the script to fulfill our destiny to the stars or to enhance it, but many of us ended up destroying the script and corrupting ourselves, with the elites contend to live off the hardwork and sacrifice of others on this planet for eternity.

Good and evil exists and it comes from our free will, a gift from our Creator who did not want cold mechanical beings to fill the stars.

Can you feel loved and give love? Chances are we all can, and it can only have come from our Creator, for He would not have been able to give us that which does not exist in Him.

In His Likeness, were we created....



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamale_214
Science does this as well. Whole sub-fields of physics rely upon assumptions to further ideas. The Big Bang is a pretty fine example of this: "We don't know how the universe was formed, but here's a good guess...". Evolution is another..."we don't know how human beings came to be on the scene, but here's a good guess...let's believe that"


Sorry, evolution is a fact mate, the theory of evolution is just trying to explain that fact, it may be wrong, but we know that evolution happens.
Much like gravity, we know gravity exists, but the theory of gravity was newton trying to explain it.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by afterschoolfun

Originally posted by rival

1. Pascals Wager......only works when you have one God to choose from.

well apply it to each religion separately. a God(s) either exist(s) or not, thats the main basis. Honestly using that argument is... well grasping at straws.




No, that argument is literal. Pascal's Wager requires ONE dogma. And then
from that premise the wager is made. Otherwise, it is likely making a wager
on roulette, and expecting an outcome on the blackjack table.


2.The Problem of Evil......first you have to define evil. Will live in a reality
where YOU HAVE TO KILL LIFE and consume it to survive.

define life. aren't beings just clumps of electrons which are mostly empty space?




Now you are waffling between philosophy 101, and a more abstract
philosophy where nothing is assumed, effectively changing the format.
My point is, the definition of evil is arbitrary. The definition of life is
much less so. For the sake of discussion, if it moves, consumes, and
procreates, it is life.


Could there be
anything more evil, or more necessary? And it's a tad arbitrary on our
(human's) part how we decide what is evil about killing. It is based largely
on relative size. We think nothing of eradicating an ant hill or swatting a fly.
Mice, spiders, snakes, minnows...all small, all fair game, even if you want to
be cruel for cruel's sake.


WTF? Death is apart of life... and last time I checked, animals ate other animals as well... yep. it's still like that.



Here I am trying to arrive at a definition of what is truly evil. My
philosophy dictates that waste is the true evil.--killing without benefit.
Society disagrees with me, and sees cruelty, and the absence of conscience,
as the truest form of evil.





But as you move up in size, and/or cuteness
society's morality takes effect. Can't kill it unless you're going to eat it.
And you can't eat puppies and kittens...that's evil, lol.


society and morality are completely different issues. But there is no natural laws that prevent us (human ANIMALS) from acting naturally. And if it was between starving and eating a kitten, if your instinct doesn't kick in... well natural selection did us a favor



My turn......WTF?




More about what is evil....We made the whole thing up. We draw up our
own arbitrary and dynamic guide, separated by time and geography. What
is evil for one culture is acceptable and normal in another...we make it up
on the fly to suit our selfish needs.


True. some things are wrong because of arbitrary reasons (jaywalking etc.) but some things are wrong in and of themselves (raping a baby etc.) As far as time and culture goes, it's a slippery slope, say that morality is relative. Someone rapes a baby and it turns out they come from a baby raping culture you couldn't judge them... scary huh?



2. Free will.....There is simply no way to tell if we possess this.
But no matter. We live our lives, in EVERY society, as if freewill
is a given...even the fundamental theists who believe God is omniscient
operate under the assumption of freewill, regardless of logic.


umm Calvinists. Google it. And regardless of logic? Really? If god knows everything then he knows what you're going to do. Even the Bible mentions "predestination".

I don't understand your point. Predestination, or an omniscient
God, precludes freewill. If the outcome of your life is known, then your
actions are predetermined--you have no freewill. It is an either/or
proposition. But most theists defy logic and assume the two
exist simultaneously. It is the old "have your cake and it eat too" cliche'.




And yes, be skeptical about knowledge. Knowledge is dynamic. Today's
accepted truth is tomorrows false and silly notion. Always be skeptical
...it will keep you from falling off the edge of the world, and into the mouth
of a dragon.

I don't think you know what skepticism means in the philosophical community. It's not being unsure like in the way we use it in everyday language. It's denying it outright as in we know nothing we can't know anything.



You are probably right, I'm handicapped because I literally
did not finish ninth grade, but while assuming nothing is a fine premise for
discussion, it is not a workable premise for dealing with reality, as you
have already pointed out.


Believing the earth is flat wasn't knowledge because it wasn't true. A belief is NOT KNOWLEDGE, only a true FACT can be knowledge. OF course belief changes, but no matter how much you believe 2+2=5, it's still 4.



Is that philosophical skepticism or everyday skepticism. You are
having your cake here...Knowledge is what we believe we know, ie,. we
believe in facts, but as your professor of philosophy taught you
we know nothing.


Edit to add: I don't know how to format a reply to a reply.
My HTML skills are lacking. I hope you can work with it.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:29 AM
link   
How about inifinity.

Within infinity contains everything. Imaginable or not. Negative. Positive. Limited. Unlimited.

Afterall, how could anything *stop*? This would require a *stop* rule, which would require a rulemaker. Which in turn would require a maker to the rulemaker ect ect...

Infinity of ultimate existence solves these problems of infinite reducability.

Incomprehensible to humans, but isnt that the point?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:52 AM
link   
A logical conclusion is one made after eliminating all the possibilities based on an assumption, and then working out what's left.

Your logic runs that an infinitely powerful God could create a perfect world, and because the world isn't perfect, God doesn't exist.

That's crazy. Look at that. You've decided that God's existence has been disproven because he didn't do things the way you reckon he should have. "God, who is supposed to know everything, doesn't behave the way I think he ought to. I, who know really very little in the grand scheme of things and haven't even the first notion of why I'm here in the first place".

You see the problem with your "philosophy"? It presupposes that we should be living in a perfect world, but if we look at a lot of philosophies, there is a belief that this world is a training ground of sorts, and that souls come here, many of them many times over, in order to train themselves and advance. Since we have no data on existence outside of this mortal one, we don't have any way of knowing what it's like. We don't know why we're here, so we cannot say that a perfect world is what we need, or that we're ready for one.

Any time you take someone else's word for something, you're making an assumption that they're right. Doesn't matter whether that's your friend, your parent, your teacher, your minister or priest, doesn't matter. Believing in God because you've been told he's there is an act of faith, not logic. Not believing in God is another act of faith, unless you're going to claim to have explored the whole of the multiverse and beyond and can verify that he's nowhere to be seen?

OK. Either God exists, or he doesn't. Perfect logic. Belief in God does not create him if he's not already there, and not believing in him is merely sticking your fingers in your ears and singing if he really is there. People put far too much stock in their own beliefs. I read it all the time on this site. "That can't be true, because I believe/ don't believe in...." Absolute rot. You can say "I disagree with that", or "I'm not convinced by that because I am convinced of something else and the 2 cannot both be true", but what you believe in has absolutely no effect on the actual state of things.

Firstly, to explore the logic of God's either or existence, we must define "God". Are we talking about the Christian God, in which case what we're arguing for is not God's existence, but the traditions and doctrines of the Christian churches, and therein lies a great deal of mire.

So, if we strip away any religious notions, then we're still needing a definition. If we define God as the creator of the universe, the one who wrote the laws of nature and let them go spinning off into the emptiness and created planets and trees and bipedal humans, the missing fraction of a second of the Big Bang, the miracle that lit the fuse, then maybe we can get started. Of course, there's another question of "after care" here. We're not discussing here how much involvement God has had since creation. We're just talking about the first kick.

So, either this universe was created by an intelligent force, or it was created without an intelligent force. I'm a designer, of all sorts of things, and I can tell you that intelligent design is obvious. It works. You can just look at an advertising campaign, or a vaccum cleaner, or a piece of clothing, and you can tell, instantly, just by looking at it, whether or not intelligence was a factor in it's design.

I can't say for sure whether or not "God exists", however, when I look at the world, either from far away, looking at a photo taken from orbit, or so close up you can see the tiny hairs on an insect's leg, wherever I look I see good design. The only bad design I see on this planet is man made.

I believe it is logic to assume that intelligence was involved in the universe's creation. I believe that to look at the order of the universe, at it's complexity and it's consistency, and to claim that all of this perfect design was a freak accident that we can't really explain requires you to ignore an awful lot of really amazing stuff.



[edit on 7-8-2010 by TheIrvy]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by TheIrvy
 


...it follows that within inifinity perfection does exist, and the only perfection that can exist is infinity itself because only infinity can be without lacking. So existing as finite beings that lack perfection, but still within the infinite perfection, our state of lackingness shows us that we have chosen to lack, since we are part of infinity and can never be divided from it. Therefor we exist in a dualistic/imperfect world due to choice and not coersion, since no force could make infinity do something against its will.

We chose to be imperfect, to experience good and evil, therefor the question should not be 'why has God done this to us?' but rather 'why have I chosen to experience this?'

Since lack of experience is the opposite of infinity, it follows that we chose to become ignorant, and the only point of this that my monkey mind can see is to *rediscover* infinity. To *rediscover* ourselves. For no other reason than to experience the wonder of looking up at the stars and wondering 'whats out there?'

Basically to get kicks. After all it cant be too fun to know everything. (which suggests that inifnity is lacking in some way, and 'bored', which should be impossible since infnity can never lack, i know makes my head hurt too. but remember inifnity inclues all so within that contains boredom)

bla bla bla who knows.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
reply to post by TheIrvy
 


...it follows that within inifinity perfection does exist


OK, with you there, infinity logically should include perfection somewhere.


and the only perfection that can exist is infinity itself because only infinity can be without lacking.


A fire engine is red, therefore a red rose petal must be a fire engine.

We have no concept of perfection or infinity, therefore we have no frame of reference to say anything about the only perfection that can exist.


So existing as finite beings that lack perfection, but still within the infinite perfection, our state of lackingness shows us that we have chosen to lack, since we are part of infinity and can never be divided from it. Therefor we exist in a dualistic/imperfect world due to choice and not coersion, since no force could make infinity do something against its will.


I'm sorry, what now? You just went weeeellll away from logic and just threw something in there. Our state of imperfection show us that we have chosen to be imperfect? How exactly does it do that?




We chose to be imperfect, to experience good and evil, therefor the question should not be 'why has God done this to us?' but rather 'why have I chosen to experience this?'



We have no hard data on why we are here, no memory of being anywhere before, no way of knowing whether or not we came here voluntarily or against our will. There are philosophies that argue both sides.




Since lack of experience is the opposite of infinity, it follows that we chose to become ignorant, and the only point of this that my monkey mind can see is to *rediscover* infinity. To *rediscover* ourselves. For no other reason than to experience the wonder of looking up at the stars and wondering 'whats out there?'



Nothing is the opposite of infinity, absolute nothing. You just stuck lack of experience in there because it suits your philosophy, there's no link we can draw between experience and infinity. It's like saying my socks are the opposite of Tuesday.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:37 AM
link   
If you want to know god, you can. All the organized religions point, yet until known it`s just a story. If you meet god, this mythical being, you will most certainly live in heaven.
Life before i stumbled across god was full of suffering, each day was a real struggle.
Life hurts when we think it is our life and that we are the masters of it, because even though we think we are in control, it goes wrong. Why and how can that be? We have not questioned the belief, my life!
The original sin (missing the mark), the first, primary mistake is 'i exist'.
On this base assumption we build all other beliefs, and ask unaskable questions. All questions lead us away from god, any question is disbelief!
God is here, god is now, god is life itself.
Such a shame that we do not know what life feels like.
We live in a world of interpretations, assumptions and beliefs, presented to us and believed. We play god by thinking we know what is best, we live in a world that is dead.
Wake up now to this, see, hear, smell, touch. Life is here, not yesterday, tomorrow. Don't sit in the shade of what is not happening. Bask in the light of what is happening, feel the glow of life.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


When you met, or stumbled upon God, did you happen to take a photograph?

You've had a spiritual experience, which I have had too. But you mentioned interpretations. Your interpretation of that spiritual event was that it involved the Christian God you read about in the Bible. Unless your spiritual event left a calling card or made some effort to identify himself as that particular "version" of God, you cannot say you actually, definitely met God. It's just your interpretation. You then tried to bundle a lot of Christian doctrine about original sin in with it as well.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by TheIrvy]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by TheIrvy
 


haha clearly in way over my head, but at least we agree (sorta) on the infinity principal. That or youre just humouring me.

Should have chosen my words better! Im sure I'll stumble across what I'm thinking at some point.

No, there cannot be an opposite of infinity because infinity encompasses all. Right. So perhaps what I was trying to drive at, however akwardly, is that we, as humans, are clearly not infinite, at least within our perceptions. Since we are all ecompassed by the inifinite, but we ourselves are lacking infinite perspective, it seems to me that there must be a reason for such division. Since infinity is, by definition, all encompassing and perfect, and we lowly mortals are not, and yet still a part of the oneness, it would seem to me that the oneness itself has created our percieved lack of oneness for a specific purpose. Since the result is us here, as individuals and not part of the universal infinite, and since the infinity is infinitely wise and without fault, it would follow that it knew what it was doing when it spawned finite beings. The result is us being here, some more confused than others, speculating on the nature of infinity *which is unknowable* instead of just *being* infinite.

So to me the nature of existence is the infinite splitting into an infinite number of finite realities in order to reexperience finiality. Head hurting once again.

But I could be way off~



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:53 AM
link   
The unhappy one is unhappy because he has believed an unhappy thought.
See the thoughts for what they are, not you! Believe those thoughts and you will be a slave to them! You must be the see-er of all things, which you already are, step back and know the mind and the body. But who or what is knowing them?
That gap, when the mind stops, that gap of unknowing is you/god.
What you experience is things, form, taking the shape of thoughts, objects, words etc.
What experiences all things is no-thing, no-time, ever present.
This no thing is heaven.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TheIrvy
[more
I didn`t mention christian beliefs, i see you are interpreting and assuming.
God is always here, i didn`t have to read about it. Like i said know god.
The only calling card i have is that life is beautiful now.
It is available now to each and everyone of us.
If only we would stop saying 'everything and everyone is wrong' and realize it`s perfect.


[edit on 7-8-2010 by Itisnowagain]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:01 AM
link   
Here, try this.



If we look at this video as one possible illustration, and imagine that the first mandelbrot shape that we see, the original, outer one, is the perfect iteration of the shape. We can only see this perfect iteration (who for the purposes of this illustration we'll call "God") when we can take a viewpoint that encompasses the whole of it's being, which is absolutely everything.

When we zoom in, we see lots of smaller versions of the top level God shape, and they are all made in it's image. However, if you take the time to look you will notice that each of them is slightly imperfect, and each of them is absolutely unique.

When we zoom in again, we see that each shape is made up of a series of smaller, less perfect versions of itself, and each of them is again unique even though they look so alike.

And all of that from the simplest of equations.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by TheIrvy
[more
I didn`t mention christian beliefs, i see you are interpreting and assuming.
God is always here, i didn`t have to read about it. Like i said know god.



Original sin is a christian doctrine, and generally not one held by many people who have explored outside of christianity to any degree.

If you know God, could you ask him to get in touch with me, see I've been kind of left to sort things out on my own, and I've been trying to talk to him for years, but he never returns my calls. You can't know someone unless you converse with them in a 2 way dialogue.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join