The God thread

But, an implicit assumption in that process is that mathematical principles (most importantly, the Law of Identity) can be applied to those representations of reality (integrated through time).
This isn't a trivial assumption.

Additionally, your words highlight the issue of not knowing whether or not the original premises are true. The only ways we have to determine the truth of assumptions like "F = ma" always lead us back to induction. And we all know about the problem of induction.


But, to put the first part more flippantly:

RichardGarfinkle said:

Because mathematical deduction never produces false results from true premises we preserve the same level of truth.

Click to expand...

Prove it.

It was a trick request ment to highlight one of my major points:
That logic has proven that logic cannot validate logic.

And, since logic is the only tool at our disposal to validate such things, that puts us in a bit of a bind epistemologically.

RichardGarfinkle said:

In a sene you're right, but the basic aspects of logic can be seen as a minimal set of consistency principles.

Click to expand...

Sure, it can be seen as a lot of things. I was simply talking about what it is, however.

RichardGarfinkle said:

Simple example. If object a has property f then there exists an object with property f. If you didn't allow that deduction then your idea of deduction would be inconsistent.

In some ways the basics of logic add up to a definition of proof rather than a provable structure themselves. They're a minimal set of tools for what deduction should be.

Click to expand...

I believe we're starting to talk in circles, but I also believe we both understand what the other person is trying to comunicate at this point.

I am satisfied with that. I hope you are as well.

I did not even notice; I am very bad at proofreading.

I am a hard atheist, crass, without divine illusions. As far as I have understood religious dogma or beliefs; it is all coming from 'outside', or is 'instilled'. If a person does 'good' it is because 'God' acts from within. If a person does 'bad' it is only to be expected.

And what is 'God' supposed to 'save' us from? Ourselves? Our instincts? Our personality? And how is this saving supposed to happen??? By being missionary? And with what? The axe? The sword? Or thumping a belief by other force or shear persistence that; "either accept my way or take the highway"?

There must be as many deep beliefs on our planet as there are villages. Who gets to choose if a native tribe in the Amazon's are wrong or if the Christians are? Much as I fear the fundamentalist Muslims, I also fear the fundamentalist Christians, fascists or communist zealots.

Without wishing to sound like a 'new-wave spiritualist' or equally 'far-out' drug induced space maniac, I firmly believe that we are a part of the Universe in a non-emotional matter-of-fact kind of way. The more I look at the stars, the more I read about the wonder of life itself the more I become convinced that our being here is not part of a plan. It has nothing to do with creationism, not evolution (because I'm not convinced by that reasoning either) or purpose. We just are!

I agree that we have a choice to do good or bad, but I can not, and will not, agree that our actions are preplanned by 'a Supreme Being' or 'God'. Our actions belong to ourselves.

I have also become (almost) convinced that this whole good v/s bad concept allows a lot of A-holes to behave even worse - convinced that they will not be punished as harshly as they should because of this whole religious debate going on in the world, and of course the PC-police.

Adhering to the law, showing proper respect and accepting the fact that we are mammals who will die no matter what is enough for me.

For the longest time I romanticized about spirituality and religious notions. I dreamed of a better place - maybe even heaven. Until I realized that there is no better heaven than Planet Earth, no bigger wonder than being right here, right now.

Melisande said:

I am a hard atheist, crass, without divine illusions. As far as I have understood religious dogma or beliefs; it is all coming from 'outside', or is 'instilled'. If a person does 'good' it is because 'God' acts from within. If a person does 'bad' it is only to be expected.

And what is 'God' supposed to 'save' us from? Ourselves? Our instincts? Our personality? And how is this saving supposed to happen??? By being missionary? And with what? The axe? The sword? Or thumping a belief by other force or shear persistence that; "either accept my way or take the highway"?

There must be as many deep beliefs on our planet as there are villages. Who gets to choose if a native tribe in the Amazon's are wrong or if the Christians are? Much as I fear the fundamentalist Muslims, I also fear the fundamentalist Christians, fascists or communist zealots.

Click to expand...

Although you mention the Amazon, you do seem to be basing all this mostly on Abrahamic religions. There are plenty of belief systems that are not evangelical and do not tie together their deities with the notion of "good" and "evil."

Without wishing to sound like a 'new-wave spiritualist' or equally 'far-out' drug induced space maniac, I firmly believe that we are a part of the Universe in a non-emotional matter-of-fact kind of way. The more I look at the stars, the more I read about the wonder of life itself the more I become convinced that our being here is not part of a plan. It has nothing to do with creationism, not evolution (because I'm not convinced by that reasoning either) or purpose. We just are!

Click to expand...

I don't quite understand your comment about evolution. Do you mean you doubt that humans and other animals have evolved over the millennia?

I agree that we have a choice to do good or bad, but I can not, and will not, agree that our actions are preplanned by 'a Supreme Being' or 'God'. Our actions belong to ourselves.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of religions that would agree with you.

I have also become (almost) convinced that this whole good v/s bad concept allows a lot of A-holes to behave even worse - convinced that they will not be punished as harshly as they should because of this whole religious debate going on in the world, and of course the PC-police.

Adhering to the law, showing proper respect and accepting the fact that we are mammals who will die no matter what is enough for me.

For the longest time I romanticized about spirituality and religious notions. I dreamed of a better place - maybe even heaven. Until I realized that there is no better heaven than Planet Earth, no bigger wonder than being right here, right now.

Click to expand...

Another poster I know around here would say there's no reason to accept that we'll die no matter what, because science will find a way!

Melisande said:

Without wishing to sound like a 'new-wave spiritualist' or equally 'far-out' drug induced space maniac, I firmly believe that we are a part of the Universe in a non-emotional matter-of-fact kind of way.

Click to expand...

I think it was Carl Sagan who said that we are the universe experiencing itself. And he was right.

kuwisdelu said:

Another poster I know around here would say there's no reason to accept that we'll die no matter what, because science will find a way!

Click to expand...

And I would tend to agree with Zoombie.

kuwisdelu said:

Although you mention the Amazon, you do seem to be basing all this mostly on Abrahamic religions. There are plenty of belief systems that are not evangelical and do not tie together their deities with the notion of "good" and "evil."

There are plenty of religions that would agree with you.

Click to expand...

Well, like I said, there are about as many belief systems out there as there are villages. I just tried to make a point that these different points of views can be shared by a small group, or a large one. I can be political or divine. Whichever, it seems to me that the further a thought can spread, the more followers it will have. Like the Abrahamic religions for instance.

But simply because there are billions of followers to those religions does not make them right... just popular. But on the same token, these particular religions - the Abrahamic ones - have become so fractioned today, so disparate that sometimes they equal the tribal ones from the Amazon. Equally far apart in interpretation and execution.

Which once again leads me to believe that every religion on Earth is created by man (i.e. us humans) to try and explain either shortcomings, hardships, losses, wishes, dreams or the very fact that we are afraid of dying in the sense that then our lives will be lost and that we didn't have a purpose here.

But what if our life has the purpose to be lived, enjoyed and accomplished but once, here and now? What is wrong with that? Wouldn't that make us (in general) more aware of all that is wonderful about being here -now?

I am still convinced that if we take care to live with awareness about how fortunate we are to have even gotten this one gift, things would be better for us as a species all together. Instead of dreaming about something that we will (or even ought to - terrible thought) receive once our life here is over.

Melisande said:

But what if our life has the purpose to be lived, enjoyed and accomplished but once, here and now? What is wrong with that? Wouldn't that make us (in general) more aware of all that is wonderful about being here -now?

I am still convinced that if we take care to live with awareness about how fortunate we are to have even gotten this one gift, things would be better for us as a species all together. Instead of dreaming about something that we will (or even ought to - terrible thought) receive once our life here is over.

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but all I'm saying is there are plenty of religions with which that point of view does not conflict. Not all religions have an afterlife or use it to assign meaning to this life. There exist religious people with the same outlook as you.

Furthermore, if you say life's purpose is to be lived, enjoyed, and accomplished... well, that's all well and good, but how? If you say it's up to you, then many people will still search for how they want to do that, and many will find the structure of religion alluring.

kuwisdelu said:

I understand what you're saying, but all I'm saying is there are plenty of religions with which that point of view does not conflict. Not all religions have an afterlife or use it to assign meaning to this life. There exist religious people with the same outlook as you.

Furthermore, if you say life's purpose is to be lived, enjoyed, and accomplished... well, that's all well and good, but how? If you say it's up to you, then many people will still search for how they want to do that, and many will find the structure of religion alluring.

Click to expand...

Sat Nam! (literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)

Yep.

Blessings,

Siri Kirpal

kuwisdelu said:

Furthermore, if you say life's purpose is to be lived, enjoyed, and accomplished... well, that's all well and good, but how? If you say it's up to you, then many people will still search for how they want to do that, and many will find the structure of religion alluring.

Click to expand...

You are right, of course. There are a lot of people who have a hard time figuring this (one) life out, and they search for something else.

But shouldn't this one life be enough? Oughtn't this one life (the one we can be certain of as long as we are here) be the one we own? The one we are grateful too? The one and only we are indebted to? The ONE life we owe to ourselves not to mess up?

Why is this not taught in schools? Why is this not pointed out as important? WHY is this life secondary to the thought that we might do better next time? These are questions that are important for me to even begin to understand people of any kind of belief that supports life after death.

Life is hard! Suck it up and move on.

Melisande said:

But shouldn't this one life be enough? Oughtn't this one life (the one we can be certain of as long as we are here) be the one we own? The one we are grateful too? The one and only we are indebted to? The ONE life we owe to ourselves not to mess up?

Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you're saying, but maybe I'm missing something, or you're not clearly communicating what you mean, or maybe I'm not.

You seem to be centering on this "afterlife" issue, but what I meant to point out is that there are plenty of religions that do not overly concern themselves with the afterlife. Do you have philosophical issues with such religions as well?

Why is this not taught in schools? Why is this not pointed out as important?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by "this."

Do you mean why is it not taught that this life is the only one and therefore we shouldn't mess it up?

Well, because that's just one philosophy of life. Plenty of schools do teach philosophy courses, in which students are generally exposed to more than one such philosophy about how to live. I definitely remember enjoying the existentialism unit in my senior high school English course, for small example.

WHY is this life secondary to the thought that we might do better next time? These are questions that are important for me to even begin to understand people of any kind of belief that supports life after death.

Click to expand...

I'm hesitant to call it "my religion" — since my own beliefs are ever-changing and very much my own — but the tradition of my people does have an afterlife. But in our traditions, it's not our own afterlife that we are concerned about. Rather, it's our ancestors. We are concerned about the afterlife to the extent that we wish to honor and celebrate and remember our ancestors, and they may continue to be with us and give us their wisdom and strength.

Even outside the trappings of religion, I think that's something most people would understand: the desire that our loved ones are never really gone from us, if we remember them, and hold them in our hearts.

If you are only talking about "do X in this life, so you can be rewarded with Y in the next," then that doesn't really strike a chord with me, either, like you. But lots of religions aren't like that (even if some of the most popular ones are — or can be reduced to that by some sects).

Sat Nam! (literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)

Seconding the wild, strange idea that NOT all religions are focused on the afterlife. (Even those that believe in one, and not all do.)

Seconding the wild, even stranger notion that religions do NOT detract from enjoying this life...or living this life well. (Though some do in their more fanatic disguises.)

Yeah, the bit about "Why is this not taught in schools?" is vague. And seems not to account for the wild strange notion that teaching any philosophy as the ONE and ONLY truth in schools isn't acceptable. (Except in some private and parochial schools.)

Blessings,

Siri Kirpal (who remembers a time when the bad guys were communists and not religious people)

kuwisdelu said:

I'm not quite sure what you're saying, but maybe I'm missing something, or you're not clearly communicating what you mean, or maybe I'm not.

You seem to be centering on this "afterlife" issue, but what I meant to point out is that there are plenty of religions that do not overly concern themselves with the afterlife. Do you have philosophical issues with such religions as well?



I'm not sure what you mean by "this."

Do you mean why is it not taught that this life is the only one and therefore we shouldn't mess it up?

Well, because that's just one philosophy of life. Plenty of schools do teach philosophy courses, in which students are generally exposed to more than one such philosophy about how to live. I definitely remember enjoying the existentialism unit in my senior high school English course, for small example.



I'm hesitant to call it "my religion" — since my own beliefs are ever-changing and very much my own — but the tradition of my people does have an afterlife. But in our traditions, it's not our own afterlife that we are concerned about. Rather, it's our ancestors. We are concerned about the afterlife to the extent that we wish to honor and celebrate and remember our ancestors, and they may continue to be with us and give us their wisdom and strength.

Even outside the trappings of religion, I think that's something most people would understand: the desire that our loved ones are never really gone from us, if we remember them, and hold them in our hearts.

If you are only talking about "do X in this life, so you can be rewarded with Y in the next," then that doesn't really strike a chord with me, either, like you. But lots of religions aren't like that (even if some of the most popular ones are — or can be reduced to that by some sects).

Click to expand...

I guess that I was trying to convey is the fact that there are a few major (Abrahamic) religions, followed and obeyed by billions, who teach that the life we have today is basically insignificant to the life we will receive after death, if we follow some basic rules of these different - but then again quite similar - set of religious rules.

You are right - my logic and emotion is flawed because I have based my reasoning on basically three predominant religions, not putting in account all the ones who do not share this specific point of view. I ask you to accept my lack of education in all the other belief-systems who state something else.

What I wanted - and failed at - to point out, however, is the fact that there is a sort of death worship going on in many belief systems, even leaving the Abrahamic ones, as you yourself have pointed out, by mentioning your ancestors. Please understand that I am in no way trying to criticize or undermine any kind of belief here. Neither yours nor anybody else's. I am simply trying to understand a reasoning that is incomprehensible to me. When a person is gone; it is over in my book. To remember our loved ones is a good thing. To revere them - maybe not so good - because then our loved ones almost become divine.

Worship of the dead - even a loved one, or ancestor, can (and I am not saying does) create a false sense of our lives here - now.

ColoradoGuy said:

The components of our physical bodies are immortal. The molecules were are made of were forged in the early universe billions of years ago. As Joni Mitchell wrote: "We are stardust." All of us have within us molecules that previously may have spent time in a primordial bacterium, an ancient sea slug, a dinosaur or two, and some past mammals -- maybe even humans.

Some take comfort in that. I do.

Click to expand...

Stumbling into this half-cocked. (yes, that is a recognised expression, honestly)

I suppose there is some comfort in that. Not for me. But I can see why it might have appeal.


We live. At some stage, some might gain a sense that it's more biologically efficient to be nice to people. Some don't. Both die.


Main thing is children, partner, food, art, more art, wine, sleep, - did I mention food?

But shouldn't this one life be enough? Oughtn't this one life (the one we can be certain of as long as we are here) be the one we own?

Click to expand...

The components of our physical bodies are immortal...Some take comfort in that. I do.

Click to expand...

I hear both of these, but I'm not at peace with any of it yet. See my signature.

Melisande said:

What I wanted - and failed at - to point out, however, is the fact that there is a sort of death worship going on in many belief systems, even leaving the Abrahamic ones, as you yourself have pointed out, by mentioning your ancestors.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it death worship. That seems to imply something completely different to me.

Please understand that I am in no way trying to criticize or undermine any kind of belief here. Neither yours nor anybody else's. I am simply trying to understand a reasoning that is incomprehensible to me. When a person is gone; it is over in my book. To remember our loved ones is a good thing.

Click to expand...

If you remember someone, then it's not really over is it?

If we remember someone, are they really gone?

These aren't even religious questions. More like philosophy. If you can't understand these ideas, then your confusion strikes me more as a difference in philosophy and perspective than in religion.

To revere them - maybe not so good - because then our loved ones almost become divine.

Click to expand...

Is that necessarily problematic?

Worship of the dead - even a loved one, or ancestor, can (and I am not saying does) create a false sense of our lives here - now.

Click to expand...

Imagine someone who has just lost a loved one, and cannot move on in life. This person is not religious, but is simply obsessed with the loss, and it begins to affect their everyday life.

Is this what you mean by "create a false sense of our lives here - now"?

Simply believing in an afterlife does not necessarily lead to obsessing over it. And it seems to me that it's certainly possible to become obsessed with death or the dead without religion.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to believe that anything that distracts from the "here - now" of our lives is bad. That's certainly one way to view life. I happen to believe it's often wise and important to look beyond the here and now. There's a saying that I love. "We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors. We borrow it from our children." It's important to look forward, but likewise, it can be easy to get lost without also looking back.