metaphysics
Fred Well, when I ponder the infinite whether for time or space I tend to think of the mind bewildering qualities of the life that we lead and live and how the day to day lives that we have here are vastly unimportant. This could lead to cynicism and negativity and nihilism, but for me they lead to awe and amazement about the truly amazing gifts that I have been given for these fleeting moments that we call our lives. If anyone really thinks about these things I do not understand how so many can doubt the existence of God.
bob - The universe is infinitely complex. That's a fact that is impossible for any thinking person to avoid. But how does postulating some phantasmagorical creator make it any more comprehensible? Any more likely?
fred - It depends on your concept of the divine. If you cannot wrap your mind around the need for such a concept and insist that somehow God must be manlike, then you may be confused, others are less so. Suffer as you must.
bob - I don't insist that God must be anything Fred since the concept makes absolutely no sense to me. I know the universe exists. I know I exist. Heck, I'm even fairly certain that you exist. But God? What is that? A figment of man's imagination. One that has inspired the best and the worst in us, but a product of pure lunacy nonetheless.
Somebody wrote - I tend to agree. Humans are so egotistical that they cannot accept that there measely existence is going to be snuffed out.
So they invent a god, the afterlife.... heaven and hell... then come the Marvelous Muftis, Rabid Rabbi's, Predatory Priests, and Nuns who get none... all telling us how we should live our live according to their banal interpretations of some so called sacred scripts handed down to them by God, the Son of God, and Bezelbub.
bob - fred smith wrote: It depends on your concept of the divine. If you cannot wrap your mind around the need for such a concept and insist that somehow God must be manlike, then you may be confused, others are less so. Suffer as you must.
I am not sure what you meant by "need" here Fred. Do you mean the "logical" need for a being which created the universe, but whose existence but was not in itself created by any other thing? If that is what you meant, why can't it be that the universe itself is that thing?
The other thing I wanted to mention is that I suffer much LESS since giving up entirely on the concept of god. It always seemed vaguely nuts to me but when I even admitted to the possibility of God as some sort of all knowing being that sat in judgement of my thoughts and actions I tended to feel a bit paranoid. Paranoid and confrontational at the same time. Like the kid who challenges his parents just because it feels good.
These days, mostly as a result of reading about buddhism, I feel that man is esssentially good and that living in accordance with that basic nature is what will make you happy. There is no heaven and no hell but the ones you create inside yourself with the way you think, talk and behave. You can achieve greater peace of mind by simply watching yourself very closely and asking yourself whether or not what you are thinking, saying or doing is likely to lead to long term happiness. It's pretty simple. Getting into the habit of cussing to yourself about every minor annoyance isn't likely to contribute to your long time happiness. Nor is creating bad feelings with the people in your life because you can't control your temper. Replacing your negative thoughts, emotions, and behaviours with positive ones however will contribute to your long term happiness. There is no need for a God in any of this, and I have never suffered less than since I adopted this basic attitude toward life. There may be an afterlife. There may not be. What I know for sure is that there is this life and it makes sense to enjoy it as much as I can by trying to build a web of affectionate, respectful, fun - heck maybe even a wee bit naughty - relationships around myself while I am here.
butcher boy wrote - bob wrote: These are all facts that I can observe. It would however require faith to believe that there is some God behind all of this. I don't see the point.
The point is that is is both impossible to prove God exists or that God does not exist. Therefor the claim either that God exists or that God does not exist must be based on an article of 'faith'.
Suppose I told you there is an invisible dragon in my garage? You probably wouldn't believe me because the default assumption is that invisible dragons don’t exist. This assumption isn’t born out of faith. It’s merely an inductive inference we make based on experience. The same is true with the existence of gods.
butcher boy - I understand both the Easter Bunny and the Dragon examples but think that they represent something different. It is possible that we have merely invented the God figure for our own sanity and to explain certain things we can't understand, despite much thought and reflection. I'm not so sure the same can be said for the idea of the Easter Bunny or the invisible dragon. I am one of those 'not too sure variety' although at the moment I probably lean more towards a belief than a non-belief. Why? Well I like to believe that I really do choose to do my actions. I cannot reconcile myself to the idea that I am just a very complicated piece of machinery that seems to have free will, but in fact does not. Without free will I cannot see any value in morality since whether something is moral or not will really have no effect on what we do anyway. Perhaps this is just another side to the egotistical human that STV talks of above. Anyway after that bit of rambling, I'm thinking that only the existence of a God can allow me out of the trap of determinism, and as I don't really like being in that trap, then I am tending towards belief in God rather than belief in nothing. (I don't think the Easter Bunny or the invisibkle dragon help in this regard )
bob - The universe is infinitely complex. That's a fact that is impossible for any thinking person to avoid. But how does postulating some phantasmagorical creator make it any more comprehensible? Any more likely?
fred - It depends on your concept of the divine. If you cannot wrap your mind around the need for such a concept and insist that somehow God must be manlike, then you may be confused, others are less so. Suffer as you must.
bob - I don't insist that God must be anything Fred since the concept makes absolutely no sense to me. I know the universe exists. I know I exist. Heck, I'm even fairly certain that you exist. But God? What is that? A figment of man's imagination. One that has inspired the best and the worst in us, but a product of pure lunacy nonetheless.
Somebody wrote - I tend to agree. Humans are so egotistical that they cannot accept that there measely existence is going to be snuffed out.
So they invent a god, the afterlife.... heaven and hell... then come the Marvelous Muftis, Rabid Rabbi's, Predatory Priests, and Nuns who get none... all telling us how we should live our live according to their banal interpretations of some so called sacred scripts handed down to them by God, the Son of God, and Bezelbub.
bob - fred smith wrote: It depends on your concept of the divine. If you cannot wrap your mind around the need for such a concept and insist that somehow God must be manlike, then you may be confused, others are less so. Suffer as you must.
I am not sure what you meant by "need" here Fred. Do you mean the "logical" need for a being which created the universe, but whose existence but was not in itself created by any other thing? If that is what you meant, why can't it be that the universe itself is that thing?
The other thing I wanted to mention is that I suffer much LESS since giving up entirely on the concept of god. It always seemed vaguely nuts to me but when I even admitted to the possibility of God as some sort of all knowing being that sat in judgement of my thoughts and actions I tended to feel a bit paranoid. Paranoid and confrontational at the same time. Like the kid who challenges his parents just because it feels good.
These days, mostly as a result of reading about buddhism, I feel that man is esssentially good and that living in accordance with that basic nature is what will make you happy. There is no heaven and no hell but the ones you create inside yourself with the way you think, talk and behave. You can achieve greater peace of mind by simply watching yourself very closely and asking yourself whether or not what you are thinking, saying or doing is likely to lead to long term happiness. It's pretty simple. Getting into the habit of cussing to yourself about every minor annoyance isn't likely to contribute to your long time happiness. Nor is creating bad feelings with the people in your life because you can't control your temper. Replacing your negative thoughts, emotions, and behaviours with positive ones however will contribute to your long term happiness. There is no need for a God in any of this, and I have never suffered less than since I adopted this basic attitude toward life. There may be an afterlife. There may not be. What I know for sure is that there is this life and it makes sense to enjoy it as much as I can by trying to build a web of affectionate, respectful, fun - heck maybe even a wee bit naughty - relationships around myself while I am here.
butcher boy wrote - bob wrote: These are all facts that I can observe. It would however require faith to believe that there is some God behind all of this. I don't see the point.
The point is that is is both impossible to prove God exists or that God does not exist. Therefor the claim either that God exists or that God does not exist must be based on an article of 'faith'.
Suppose I told you there is an invisible dragon in my garage? You probably wouldn't believe me because the default assumption is that invisible dragons don’t exist. This assumption isn’t born out of faith. It’s merely an inductive inference we make based on experience. The same is true with the existence of gods.
butcher boy - I understand both the Easter Bunny and the Dragon examples but think that they represent something different. It is possible that we have merely invented the God figure for our own sanity and to explain certain things we can't understand, despite much thought and reflection. I'm not so sure the same can be said for the idea of the Easter Bunny or the invisible dragon. I am one of those 'not too sure variety' although at the moment I probably lean more towards a belief than a non-belief. Why? Well I like to believe that I really do choose to do my actions. I cannot reconcile myself to the idea that I am just a very complicated piece of machinery that seems to have free will, but in fact does not. Without free will I cannot see any value in morality since whether something is moral or not will really have no effect on what we do anyway. Perhaps this is just another side to the egotistical human that STV talks of above. Anyway after that bit of rambling, I'm thinking that only the existence of a God can allow me out of the trap of determinism, and as I don't really like being in that trap, then I am tending towards belief in God rather than belief in nothing. (I don't think the Easter Bunny or the invisibkle dragon help in this regard )
posted by david at 9:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home