God doesn't seem to exist!

Post Reply New Topic

I'm very glad I could inspire such anticipation, and hope I shan't dissapoint.



Granted, a being that has foreknowledge of its actions may well know the consequences of a differrent course of action. However, the point was not that said being wouldn't change its actions because it knew the resulting consequences of the second course of action but rather that, with foreknowledge, it couldn't. We humans move through time one way, and as such can only look backwards at what has already happened and, short of a time machine, we are unable to change it. Imagine to be able to "remember" both past and future. We have arrived at predeterminism, a fetter which I dont think you're arguing for.

And for that matter said being would probably also be unfettered by time, yes? Hence it could travel both backwards and forwards or move entirely independent of time, but unless it can change its own knowledge, it would still be powerless to alter course. And if it can indeed change its own knowledge, what good is any knowledge it possesses?




I would argue that knowledge itself is only data. The "ability to have knowledge" is just the property of being able to contain and retain data. We humans, as you say, have processes that we go through to obtain knowledge. Our knowledge is the data we gather, process and remember for future application. A being with the properties you propose would have all knowledge by virtue of existing, unfettered by the requirement of data gathering. In fact, I think it might actually be unable to learn by definition. What data could it gather that it did not already possess?




It seems the property of omniscience invalidates A) and B). Already knowing the answer means you neither have to consider nor discern the truth value of anything. "Considering" and attempting to "discern" are things humans do exactly because we are not omniscient, but rather have to strive to learn. Come to think of it, being omniscient would probably be intensely dull.




Ah, now I think I see what you're saying. Granted, but what if said being was creating some other way? Say, some sort of self-replicating process with an aspect of descent with inherited modifications?




So, this hypothetical being starts having no knowledge, then starts creating everything and learns all things in the process, and ultimately loses the ability to learn by virtue of having learned all there is to learn? Also, having foreknowledge, did it already know how it was going to create everything?

I'm also curious as to how a being would learn by creating. I envision a character creation from a video game, but even then there's a template. I don't have to invent the concept of strength in order to add it as a value to what I'm creating.



Thank you Alexander, for acknowledging this.

Looking out at how large the Universe is; looking at science and truly understanding how little of reality science is able to evidence and wrap 'its mind around'; it is the height of amusement to me to see folks attempt to fit God; ALL OF GOD; in the way humans think.

And by the way; humans are a spectrum of thinking differently; experiencing emotions that emote humans in action differently; as well as experiencing much different sensory experiences of life through senses that are much more comprehensive in practice among some humans than others.

Honestly, if anyone thinks that knowledge is just data; they are missing a substantial part of just the human being experience in greater human potential.

To suggest a human can wrap a mind around GOD is no less illogical than to suggest a flea can wrap its mind around a dog that the flea depends on for live giving blood.

So yeah; as metaphor humans, all humans truly see the force of all existence as blood; whether they see it or not with so called data or knowledge. Written down stuff is certainly data; however, lots of people cannot understand the simplest of metaphors or sarcasm, so obviously even written language is not objective.

Everything is subjective.

Subjective is the rule of human being, as even science now shows that humans filter most of their decisions through emotions first before words even come on the 'conscious front of mind'.

The truth is, some folks are aware of much more than words.

Words are just symbols for deeper meanings of the emotional and sensory experiences of human that range from numb to a 'full kaleidoscope' of emotional and sensory experience.

As another metaphor some folks experience life as shades of data and other folks experience life as hues of Art.

God is Art; one need look no further than a sunflower; a nautilus shell; a galaxy; or a curled cat to see the golden mean spiral that can flow from waves to the written metaphors of human being when flowing with GOD instead of against GOD in human contrived so-called 'data order'.

Order is the illusion. Science is the illusion.

The ART of GOD is Reality.

'Same reason' that in the movie 'Contact' when Jodie Foster sees 'God' for the first time, she suggests that they should of sent a poet instead of a scientist to more fully describe what the oneness of all things looks like in human abstract metaphors of truth. Science is a sketchy tool to describe what is observable by limited human emotions and senses.

God is the masterpiece of all that some folks sadly see much less of than others; and science proves this out.

It doesn't matter if one call 'it' GOD; the ALL; All that IS; the Force; the Great Spirit; Brahman; ONE; the Alpha and the Omega; or just everything put together and how it all works interdependently as connected; never the less, 'it is reality'; 'it' has always been 'reality' for the smallest of human 'eyes'; and long after human is gone this three letter metaphor abstractly constructed by a poet somewhere down the line in history will continue to exist; no matter what 'little blood sucking fleas' of human beings have to say about it in words of art and or science.

It will always be folly to attempt to describe GOD with science only eyes; fortunately some scientists like Carl Sagan understood and understand 'this'; and he while under the influence of weed gained greater access to his poetic side of mind; and puts 'it' into literature; and now 'it' exists forever as a kind of portal on YouTube and other sources in video way.

Anyway, here 'it' is for reference for those with deeper eyes like Carl Sagan to see greater truths than sketchy science can provide alone.

Some folks don't need weed to 'go to places' like 'this'; I for one am blessed this way, by all natural GOD as GOD lives in pArt within me; expressed as spiRit coming straight from the emotional and sensory heARt that fuels my sOul..



Some folks around here would love to shut me up; as they understand none of this; those that do, listen in the background, as all interpreting 'right-brain' minds do. I do both; LEFT AND RIGHT, as one FORCE; 'THAT' makes me 'special'..

Jodie Foster likely would have invited me on 'her trip', in 'real life'; and not 'the movie'..

Yes, and that was precisely my point. I may not have used the correct terminology, but whichever way you look at it neither system you mention (i.e. evolutionary ethics, moral relativism) can provide the solid and objective standard that is needed for a system of such ethics.

And yet we still have them. Atheists rule!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!

You haven't been paying proper attention to this discussion, have you?

NO ONE ever made the claim that atheists either can't have moral standards, or that they cannot behave ethically. That's not the point. What they cannot do is explain why morals should matter at all in the first place if all we are IS matter.

Get it? Do you see the conundrum here? Do I really need to spell it out again, for your benefit?

"Atheists rule"? - sheer poppycock.

You are welcome, Wolfram. I thought it was important to acknowledge this, as some seemed to have taken others as implying that somehow there was a direct correlation between one's view on this question and one's degree of virtue, or indeed belief in the possibility of meaning, which I think may have been a misreading, but I still felt it important to make clear that this is not the case. Both from people I have met and people I know of, it seems to be somewhat more complex than that. Also, some might speak as though there was only one philosophical viewpoint that all atheists adopted with one ethos following, which is not so. Not that I wish to be understood that there are no ethical consequences from theological beliefs (indeed it would strange to me if there were not, as surely if one adheres to any faith tradition one would need to at least seek to follow the ethical teachings seriously, however understood, and however problematic in some cases) just that clearly integrity, honour, compassion, love of learning and wisdom, etc., are not the preserve of adherents of one faith-tradition, or conversely of one atheistic philosophy. I realise much of this will be obvious to many here, I just thought it needed saying.

I think in any case that this was not the intent of theists such as myself in speaking of this ethical question (well, obviously I can only really speak of my own intentions with any great degree of authority). Rather, given the existence of any ethics at all, let alone overlapping ethics, one of the philosophical arguments in defence of theism may wish to ask what can be the source of enduring values, if ethics is simply the result of a response to the need for human societies to avoid collapse (simplifying a bit there). Now clearly many people who have a range of views on religion follow at least some virtues, while perhaps rejecting others, and equally clearly there are many instances of us failing to honour the principles we profess to adhere to, whatever source one claims for one's morality. I know from my own experience that I do not always even act in accordance with what I know or believe to be right; I fall short, and it seems that humans share this state of susceptibility to failure and error, while also being capable of remarkable achievements - there are many people who in at least one area of their lives, put me to shame, which can be humbling, yet while there are many humans across history whom one might respect or even admire, who have also done appalling things to fellow human beings. So this problem of why there is evil in the world, and how we are to live, seems really important to me, and one that is or should be in some sense relevant to us all, as we do share this world with each other, and how we can live together and seek peace with justice tempered by mercy, is as pertinent now as ever.

One of the oldest arguments raised against the existence of God, which has troubled minds across much of human history, is why does the world have so much suffering and wickedness in it? Now, obviously it has a great deal of good and wonder as well, but this question does not get any easier. Glib answers might seem persuasive in theory, but feel hollow in the face of many real instances of suffering and evil, as well as at times shockingly insensitive.

Yet the very fact that such questions are asked, and that people do seek meaning and to live lives of compassion and courage, seems to me at least evidence for the existence of God, not withstanding that the troubling questions raised remain incompletely addressed. If all were the result of chance, why should we expect otherwise? Why should we feel the injustice as though it were an affront to the natural order of things? Yet we do. In any case a certain amount of human responsibility for many causes of suffering needs to be acknowledged; that still does not answer the question of many natural disasters for which humans have no responsibility. This is an age old question, and not one likely to be answered to the satisfaction, but it is important to ask these sorts of question, to get the ball rolling as it were.

Thank you all for so many thoughtful contributions, by the way.

Atheists have no problem explaining the subjective value of morals. You may not like the answers, but that alone cannot render them null.



The question is redundant. One does not start with "God" and set out to disprove "him". God is the hypothetical argument, not the lack thereof.



The existence of a question does not prove the existence of your preconceived answer. Such questions constitute evidence of man's thirst for knowledge, of our desire to understand the how and why of everything we encounter. "God" is the name we give to our hubris, a lie we tell ourselves and each other to maintain our illusion of superiority. We are no more valued by the cosmos than any other creature that resides on Earth.

Since God/Gods don't exist, God doesn't cause morality or ethics. Explain how you 'magically' came to have them...

Morals matter because this is all we have. Life on earth is precious because life on earth is what there is for us. Morals don't matter to me because of heaven or hell. They matter to me because we're matter. (Using 'matter' as both a noun and a verb is getting a bit confusing.) This is our only chance. There are no do-overs. There is no God to ask forgiveness from. It's all on us.

There is a saying in the U.S., "let go and let God". I understand the appeal of religion. It would be very relaxing to just 'let go and let God', secure in the knowledge that no matter what horrors happen here on earth, heaven awaits. But it's just a story people tell themselves and I can't suspend disbelief and believe this story, regardless of how stress-relieving it would be.

Not being able to look forward to heaven( or behaving to avoid hell) puts a tremendous importance on right here, right now. I don't try to live as morally as possible so I'll get into heaven. I try to live as morally as possible because this life right here is all I have and all any living thing has. That makes it precious, more precious than if this life were a mere way-station on the way to afterlife.

Very well said...

Religion is a good way to teach moral codes.

What brought you to this sudden realization at age 33?

It's really simple; and by the way this is NOT directed at 'YOU'..

It is a monologue; and THAT is what 'Gillberg Criteria Asperger's does'..

God is the Force of Nature as Naturally evolving NOW.

NOW IS ALL THAT EXISTS.

NOW IS GOD.

And God does evolve 'humans';
'normal humans', anyway;
with affective empathy
that allows humans to
feel the pain of other
humans; children
share laughter
with other
children;
not 'cause
of church
but because of all naturAlly
evolving innate instinct and
intuition to do JUST THAT;
BUT THEN; cognitive empathy
comes from trial and error
in socially cooperating with other
human beings for greater chances at human survival.

Alphabets and written language are developed to enhance this
survival with written text of what works best for human peace of
mind and overall subsistence activities to maintain and thrive the
human population alive as is; particularly, in food gathering, shelter
making, and reproductive activities. So the bible is developed as a
rudimentary written code to enhance the survival of the social group;
and in doing this the laws of human nature are uncovered that include
a Universe of much differently experienced emotions and senses among
a tribe of human beings; but never the less, consistencies are observed that
make life work better, overall, for survival; so the great work of human survival
goes on; God exists as all of this; and strange that people cannot see THAT reality
of how this started and how it goes on; people get caught up in semantic differences
of abstract language code to describe, as much of reality that varies in mileage from each
human being; particularly, psychopathic leaning individuals that are totally selfish and don't
give a crap about the rest of the social group; there is a time when they are pushed off of cliffs
as they serve no useful purpose for the survival of the social group as one with the GOD of Nature;
now they are tolerated no matter how silly they act in selfish ways of more or less, trying to feel a love
in life that is to lost to them; for reasons of screwed up nurturing parents; or whatever it is in social stress
that kills their ability to feel a full nuanced life of heart in emotion, balance in emotions and senses in soul;
and the ability to fully express spirit of emotions verbally/non-verbally to carry on the mission of survival of
human beings that has been going on for thousands and thousands of years with great success; anyway, GOD
exists as Nature; always has and always will long after human beings disappear from the face of the earth will all
their verbal disagreements over a reality that is as clear as the nose on their face and emotions of love, hope, faith
and belief in the laws of Nature AKA GOD that truly work super cool for those who do work in alignment with those
laws of GOD AKA Nature, instead of going against them; like sitting still as a couch potato with a remote control
watching TV everyday; consuming sugar and fats all the time; and in general, falling to the 'sin of culture' rather
than living in accordance with the LAWS OF HUMAN NATURE AS ASCRIBED BY THE NATURE OF ALL AKA GOD..

HAVE A NICE NOW; it's all one gets; all one ever had; and all one ever will be with the GOD of Nature as ONE
FORCE OR ILLUSION OF SEPARATION;
THE greatest GOD Delusion
of IT
ALL;
Yes, separation
from GOD as Nature..

The Jesus of Gnostic Gospel of Thomas attempts
to explain this in parables, as Lord knows if anyone
with this much common sense did it in plain language
it would be too simple for most minds to understand this TRUTH.
Culture clouds the God of Nature; always has; always will; to escape
Culture in mind and body balance is to once again 'join hands' with GOD;
and be born
AGAIN WITH THE
GOD OF Nature, instead
of Insane rules of Culture
that make no real human nature
sense AGAINST the Laws of Nature AKA GOD;
as applicable to Nature and Human
Nature, specificAlly as
Core TRUTH.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/thomas.htm

SAME STUFF OF THE BIBLE;
for those with
deeper eyes and ears
who are not afraid of the Truth;
but of course most people cannot
handle the TOUGH LOVE TRUTH OF
GOD THAT rarely stays fair through the
course of a lifetime; and yes, in this way;
GOD is a lot like Jack Nicholson in this
play of life that is more like reality
than any bible school
class of
study; afraid of THAT
FACT THAT ALL WE
GET IS
NOW;
TO make the best
of it is truly SUPER COOL..

BUT AGAIN; most people
CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH
THAT GOD EXISTS; BUT
GOD AIN'T FAIR;
AT LEAST NOT in
one
lifetime
for NOW..

You can find the Bible in the fiction section next to Greek Mythology at your local library as well as the book store!

Oh horrors to you AO. Some "moderator" has been sleeping and I managed to log in.

The only thing that has been proved about "evolution" is that it is a scientific impossibility. The "Origin of the Species" and all subsequent fantasies should also be catalogued next to Greek mythologies.

One wonders if you dress in Motley, carry a Marotte and have bells on the end of your shoes.

D: All of the above.

These multiple choice questions are really easy if you're even slightly more knowledgeable than the examiner.