| Subject: Thanks Don |
Author:
Damoclese
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 07/ 4/02 10:18pm
In reply to:
Don
's message, "Hi Damoclese," on 07/ 2/02 2:35pm
>Hi Damoclese,
>
>Long time since we talked. To put in more simple terms
>to me. Anything in the future that
>may or may not happen is a belief statement. I can say
>I have 4 fingers. That is a truth
>statement and showable as such. To say I will have 4
>fingers 5 minutes from now is a
>belief statement. I must wait 5 minutes for the
>statement to be true. Point of reference that
>is nasty but works. 9-11. Anything that is a
>prediction is a belief statement. It may happen
>it may not happen. Any thing in the past is also a
>belief statement. Can I bring the past
>back to the present and show it? NO. No one can. It is
>just the way life is. Evidence does
>not constitute fact. For as Wade so grandly put it in
>defense of the bible is that any and all
>sets of data can have more than one explanation. Some
>are just more believable than
>others. Emphasis on the word belief. Some conclusions
>are more rational than others, but
>there still remain other possibilities no mater how
>crazy and ridiculous.
I agree. I don't think the future can be known, because if it is known at that instant the knower (if he has free will) is endowed with the ability to change that future. (making it not known)
>
>
>Hence God may exist, god may not exist. No you do not
>have to take sides. You are not
>forced to make a choice. To make such a choice is to
>proclaim a final conciliation from a
>set of data. You can’t do that as other possibilities
>do exist. Math implicates different
>dimensions so in what one will god exist? I don’t
>know, we will have to wait and see.
>People that proclaim a god are doing nothing but
>proclaiming a final conclusion. They are
>just as off the mark. They have nothing but beliefs to
>go by but as usual they refuse to
>recognize other possibilities, so they shut down the
>brain in that regard. They are self
>blinded for they refuse to consider the alternative of
>NO god.
That is very true for some people. Some Christians consider the idea of no God, but only from the point of view of the absolute that God exists. It is usually steeped in rhetoric like "If there was no God, how could we have morals?" and the like. That really isn't genuine questioning but rather fishing for a conclusion in my book.
>
>
>This is the problem with theist. They constantly
>confuse believing with knowing. They
>are quick to say they KNOW when all they do is
>believe. I believe the chair will not move
>when I go to sit in it. Knowing that the chair did not
>move is sitting in it. That is the
>difference. I believe the sun will raise tomorrow is a
>truth statement. I know the sun will
>raise tomorrow is false. We have to wait for the sun
>to raise to make it a truth statement.
>One of these day in billions of years the sun will
>not raise, or a comet will do a total job
>on the earth.
Yes, I think we have very similar beliefs as to what constitutes knowledge and what differentiates it from belief. Inference is a prickly pear, though there are some commonly accepted rules for what would make a "good inference".
>
>
>Knowledge can be shown. Beliefs can not be shown,
>beliefs are opinions, knowledge is
>not an opinion.
I wholly agree. I think that the word opinion falls within a greater scope of things than most people consider it to apply to.
>
>
>All the details about Unicorns will never prove a
>Unicorn. Until you show a unicorn all
>you have is myth. Until you show a god all you have is
>myth. Until you show James
>Bond all you have is a movie or myth. The statement
>“water is on this earth” is a true
>statement but limited. When the earth stops to exist
>then the statement is void. Will the
>earth stop to exist--yes at some time. No one can show
>an absolute truth. An other myth
>put to bed. An absolute truth must be true in all
>situations. Find one exception and the
>absolute truth becomes “conditional” truth. Some say
>math is absolute truth but math is a
>personal mental concept and not shown to be true after
>you die. Will math work in all
>dimensions? We don’t know all the dimensions so how
>can we say. It is said that god will
>not change -- Show one change and that statement
>become false. The bible god has
>changed, we are no longer killing animals as a
>sacrifice to such a god...just give your
>money.
I think that we need to assume that there are absolutes in order to have any sort of productive conversation, but I wholly acknowledge that there well may not be. If there are absolutes they seem to be absolute without any sort of dependency on the systems of which they affect. I being a part of the system they affect cannot ever say with certainty that absoloutes exist, hence, all we have is weighted speculation about what they are. (note however that I think some specualtion is clearly more reasonable than others)
>
>
>What pisses me off Damoclese is this concept is so
>simple that any 8 year old can learn it
>and it. It is nothing new..thousands of years old. So
>how come I did not? This is not a big
>mystery, not high tech. not advanced science. Simple
>words and simple ideas. Theist
>know this to be true but they fight with themselves so
>they make silly statements that just
>don’t hold up because their foundation is fictitious.
It is very difficult to escape from the perceptions and values instilled in us from an early age. Most of the time if you are brought up religious, religious you shall stay. Very few people ever escape the system, and often it is the case that it takes personal tragedy and things that cause dissonance to happen before people change their minds about anything. Some might arrive there purely through logic, but I'd imagine these are a minority for there is always a way to logically justify anything, but it doesn't matter if the first premise is useless.
>
>If you say that a god belief makes you a better person
>then I think you should be able to
>show that. 1) you are a better person 2) how does a
>god belief do that.
I think that's reasonable, but I think it is really in the eyes of the beholder as to how good the person is. I've met very few people with particularly low opinions of themselves and how they have changed over the years. I think the truth of the matter is; all people want to think they they have become better people.
>
>Answer to 1) By comparing your self to others or by
>comparing self to your self and
>marking your progress. Both are subjective but the
>first is to say --look at all the sinners
>that I am not--criticizing others as bad. Look how
>back ward they are and I am not. The
>other is to be self critical and self analytical.
>When you feel that you are filled with an
>unlimited perfect god and all your sins are
>meaningless because you are forgiven then
>there is nothing to analyze or to be self critical
>about. Self proclaimed blindness at best.
That's true, but still you face the personal bias of the teller.
>
>Answer to 2) You will have to show that this god
>beliefs works for all in the same way.
>You can’t do that for there are many god beliefs, many
>cultures and many experiences so
>there is not any ONE god belief that is right. Again
>one can only speak from a subjective
>point of view regarding god and that is limiting
>because all other beliefs are denied as
>evil or non-effectual. A person becomes silly as they
>rush to defend a non-defendable
>position. And pressed to the limits insanity sets in.
I agree. One should expect some sort of convergence if they all believe in the same God who promises the same things to each person.
>
>Nice talking to you Damoclese. I enjoy your writings
>and ideas.
Thanks.
Damoclese
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 