God? It is Only in the Brain

[Skepdick]

Well at a certain level everything is an idea that you and I talk about because from our perspective everything comes from our minds. However our's is not the only (or best) perspective.

Any perspective you can't actually assume by relocating yourself in spacetime is only imagined.

For example - you can't actually view Earth from Jupiter. Because you can't get to Jupiter.

This is the "armchair" part of philosophy. You never actually leave said armchair while participating in this activity.

So best not to delude ourselves. Even if the "best" perspective is the one outside the Universe, sitting right next to God.

[LuckyR]

Well at a certain level everything is an idea that you and I talk about because from our perspective everything comes from our minds. However our's is not the only (or best) perspective.

Any perspective you can't actually assume by relocating yourself in spacetime is only imagined.

For example - you can't actually view Earth from Jupiter. Because you can't get to Jupiter.

This is the "armchair" part of philosophy. You never actually leave said armchair while participating in this activity.

So best not to delude ourselves. Even if the "best" perspective is the one outside the Universe, sitting right next to God.

Exactly. This is a Philosophy Forum, if you can't imagine here, then where? That's what we're here to do.

[Skepdick]

Exactly. This is a Philosophy Forum, if you can't imagine here, then where? That's what we're here to do.

So imagine then.

Imagine that objects and objectification are human activities.

The world doesn't come pre-objectified.

[Atla]

You are a philosophical gnat and ultracrepidarian trying to outsmart Russell.

You are too primal and emotional as driven by an evolutionary default to insist on the above grasping on your dogmatic philosophical realism which is grounded on an illusion.

Why are possibilities not perspectives?

Russell was concessionary in raising the issue as a 'possibility'.

Nah VA, you're the primal and emotional ultracrepidarian gnat, crippled by some evolutionary default defence mechanism which makes you run away from the real world.

I simply pointed out that you were lying about Russell, he wasn't talking about perspectives but possibilities. And how do you know he was concessionary. He wasn't dedicated to anti-realism like you are, he was somewhere in between, more towards anti-realism in his early years and more towards realism in his later years.

Within ANTI-philosophical_realism it certain [99.9%] there is no philosophical_realism-objective-apple at all, there are only psychological perturbations in the brain with the emergence and realization of a human-based FSK objective apple.

Yes but how likely is anti-philosophical realism to be correct? 3%?

[Atla]

Why it is so important?
At least in one way, the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

Or rather, Muslims will just laugh at your philosophy, and never seriously consider it, because why would they.
The rest of the world might more seriously consider it though, which could turn them into fragile solipsists who will treat even their family as mere cartoon figures in their mind. Everyone becoming antisocial and living in their heads. And once the world has gone insane and on the brink of collapse, the Muslims can come in and conquer it more unopposed.

(Luckily, this won't happen as the rest of the world will just laugh, too.)

[Veritas Aequitas]

Your posting is internally consistent, I'll give you that. However, it suffers from a lack of considering different perspectives. Sure, if one is pondering whether simple physical (objective) objects exist, then upping the complexity ante to considering inter-subjectively entities, is a bridge too far and thus the two may blend together into various levels of uncertainty.

However, from the perspective of the universe, which supercedes and predates the brightest philosopher you can quote, let alone you and me, there is a fundamental difference between a physical object and a human construct.

Lack of perspective??

I have deliberated the issues in the common sense, conventional, scientific and various perspectives.
There is no question of uncertainty [not 100%] on the perspectives [models] I raised.
The various conclusions raised can be verified and justified as true and objective [subject to degrees] upon the conditions of the Qualified perspectives [Framework and System].

It is only within the common sense perspective that an apple is an apple .. is an apple and no other.
But within the science-chemistry, it is objective and true that 'apple' is a cluster of molecules, atom, particles, quarks.
Within QM, it is objective and true that 'apple' could be a bundle of waves or particles subject to the observers participation.

Within ANTI-philosophical_realism there is no philosophical_realism-objective-apple at all, there are only psychological perturbations in the brain.

It is also within ANTI-philosophical_realism there is no philosophical_realism-objective-God there are only psychological perturbations in the brain.

Reality is a human "construct".....note;
Reality: Emergence & Realization Prior to Perceiving, Knowing & Describing
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40145
There is no pre-existing things awaiting humans to "discover" them.

Why it is so important?
At least in one way, the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

If you believe there is no philosophical difference between a physical object and a human construct (idea), then I'll guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

That is not the case.

I do believe, at the common sense perspective, there is a difference between what is a physical object, say a table and the thought [idea] of a table.

There is a difference between 'constructing the reality of an apple' and 'constructing the idea [thought] of an apple.'

My point is, that the table or apple exists, its existence cannot be absolutely independent of the human conditions.
The claim that reality and things [e.g. apple] exist absolutely independent of the human conditions [e.g. you as a philosophical realist] is not tenable nor realistic. Such a claim is illusory.
Can you prove your positive claim that an apple exists independent of the human conditions?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Why it is so important?
At least in one way, the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

Or rather, Muslims will just laugh at your philosophy, and never seriously consider it, because why would they.
The rest of the world might more seriously consider it though, which could turn them into fragile solipsists who will treat even their family as mere cartoon figures in their mind. Everyone becoming antisocial and living in their heads. And once the world has gone insane and on the brink of collapse, the Muslims can come in and conquer it more unopposed.

(Luckily, this won't happen as the rest of the world will just laugh, too.)

Again, you are a philosophical gnat and ultracrepidarian on this matter.
How much do you know about Islam to be so confident of your views above?

I had spent 3 years full time researching Islam and studying basic Arabic, to give reasonable views on Islam.

[Iwannaplato]

Again, you are a philosophical gnat and ultracrepidarian on this matter.
How much do you know about Islam to be so confident of your views above?

I had spent 3 years full time researching Islam and studying basic Arabic, to give reasonable views on Islam.

Fine. So, what did you find, that you can share with us, that shows that your texts will change the minds of a significant number of Muslims?
Have you changed any Muslim minds yet? Can you show us how you know this?
IOW it would be rational for us to wonder if your conclusion that your texts will change Muslim minds falls within the empirical-rational.

Because for us this change in the minds of so many Muslims is a mere noumenon. We cannot experience this change you are talking about so confidently. Neither directly nor indirectly.

Can you experience it directly?

[Atla]

Why it is so important?
At least in one way, the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

Or rather, Muslims will just laugh at your philosophy, and never seriously consider it, because why would they.
The rest of the world might more seriously consider it though, which could turn them into fragile solipsists who will treat even their family as mere cartoon figures in their mind. Everyone becoming antisocial and living in their heads. And once the world has gone insane and on the brink of collapse, the Muslims can come in and conquer it more unopposed.

(Luckily, this won't happen as the rest of the world will just laugh, too.)

Again, you are a philosophical gnat and ultracrepidarian on this matter.
How much do you know about Islam to be so confident of your views above?

I had spent 3 years full time researching Islam and studying basic Arabic, to give reasonable views on Islam.

You want to present a very complex and nonsensical/self-contradictory philosophical take to them, that not even you understand. Which could make them quite a lot more confused by trapping them in their heads, which is an unnatural state, so they'll probably have a lot more visions about Allah. And they may just skip the "science" part entirely so there won't be any refuting Allah either.
But they'll just laugh and reject your philosophy outright, because you want to take away their Allah.

A better trick would be just to stick to realism + science. Science can't find Allah but can find the Moon and tables. Make Islamic countries more scientifically educated then, and it will automatically erode their Allah belief somewhat.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Again, you are a philosophical gnat and ultracrepidarian on this matter.
How much do you know about Islam to be so confident of your views above?

I had spent 3 years full time researching Islam and studying basic Arabic, to give reasonable views on Islam.

Fine. So, what did you find, that you can share with us, that shows that your texts will change the minds of a significant number of Muslims?
Have you changed any Muslim minds yet? Can you show us how you know this?
IOW it would be rational for us to wonder if your conclusion that your texts will change Muslim minds falls within the empirical-rational.

Because for us this change in the minds of so many Muslims is a mere noumenon. We cannot experience this change you are talking about so confidently. Neither directly nor indirectly.

Can you experience it directly?

As I had stated many times,
I'd put the ALL the 6236 verses of the Quran [the Constitution of Islam] in one column in Excel and analyze them over more than 1400 themes [variables] across, giving attention to all critical words among the more than 77,000 words.

A Muslim is one who is covenanted [Mithaq (میثاق) ] with Allah with a promise of eternal life in paradise; as an obligation of the covenant ALL Muslims must comply with ALL the commands in the Quran to the best of their abilities or else they will end up in Hell or do not merit the greater rewards promised.

The fact is the majority of the 1.5 billion Muslim are not aware they are covenanted [contracted] with Allah to obey all the commands to the best of their abilities.

However, if only 20% of Muslims are aware of their covenanted obligations, that is 300 million Muslims with such contractual “us vs them” attitude which can lead to ‘hating’ by those who are prone to hate. The problem is those who are experts on the Quran [clergies] generally understand their covenanted status and thus influenced their flocks.

More than 55% of the 6236 verses has negative elements [hate, violence, dehumanizing, condemnation, etc.] against non-Muslims in their main holy book.

Here is one critical verse in the Quran;

• Quran 5:33 [Pickthall] The only reward
  of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger
  and strive after corruption [fasadin] in the land
  will be that they will be killed or crucified,
  or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off,
  or will be expelled out of the land.
  Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;

The term 'fasadin' [فساد ] in Arabic use can refer from the threat to the religion which can range from the strongest to the slightest which include blasphemy to even being a non-believer.
This is expressed in the Ahadiths and commentaries by their Clergies.

The fact is, as it had happened and is happening, very good [compliant and obedient] Muslims who are aware [fully understand the terms of their contract with God] of their contractual [covenanted] duty will strive to obey the above commands [5:33] from their God to ensure they maximized the rewards as promised.

If only 20% of Muslims are fully aware of their contractual duty as by themselves or influenced by their experts, [that's 300 million ] these Muslims will not hesitate to comply with 5:33 [as a contractual duty] to ensure they do not go to Hell and will reap the highest rewards.
300 million!! and it only took 20 participants or may be supporters and financials of <50 overall to do a 911.

I have also taken certified courses in Islamic Terrorism and their plans include getting WMDs within the various terrorists organizations.

This evidence of compliance with 5:33 and its associated verses of 'do violence to non-believers' is so evident.
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
49,939 incidents with many fatalities since 911.

Your views or counter?

[Iwannaplato]

Your views or counter?

He said they would ignore your work. You asserted.

At least in one way, the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

It will convince theists, in particular Muslim.......

No, qualifications.

Your response to me had to do with the problems with Islam and what Muslims have done and may/will do. That is irrelevant to what Atla was laughing at and what I wrote about.

So, again.....
Fine. So, what did you find, that you can share with us, that shows that your texts will change the minds of a significant number of Muslims?
Have you changed any Muslim minds yet? Can you show us how you know this?
IOW it would be rational for us to wonder if your conclusion that your texts will change Muslim minds falls within the empirical-rational.

Because for us this change in the minds of so many Muslims is a mere noumenon. We cannot experience this change you are talking about so confidently. Neither directly nor indirectly.

Can you experience it directly?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Your views or counter?

He said they would ignore your work. You asserted.

At least in one way, the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

It will convince theists, in particular Muslim.......

No, qualifications.

Your response to me had to do with the problems with Islam and what Muslims have done and may/will do. That is irrelevant to what Atla was laughing at and what I wrote about.

So, again.....
Fine. So, what did you find, that you can share with us, that shows that your texts will change the minds of a significant number of Muslims?
Have you changed any Muslim minds yet? Can you show us how you know this?
IOW it would be rational for us to wonder if your conclusion that your texts will change Muslim minds falls within the empirical-rational.

Because for us this change in the minds of so many Muslims is a mere noumenon. We cannot experience this change you are talking about so confidently. Neither directly nor indirectly.

Can you experience it directly?

From testimonials from the Web, there are already evidences that many Muslims has changed their mind because they understood their God is a false and an evil God.

Btw, I had never expected theists will change their mind en masse at present [due to their present state of mind] but rather in the future when they are more rational inclined and exposed to rational arguments [God is only in the brain as verified and justified via a credible FSK] that it is impossible for God to exist as real.

On the other hand, to insist on the illusory idea that God and reality exists independent of mind will only enable the belief in God to persist in the future and enabling theists [Muslims] to create havoc on Earth based on their evil ideology.

[Iwannaplato]

From testimonials from the Web, there are already evidences that many Muslims has changed their mind because they understood their God is a false and an evil God.

from your texts?

Btw, I had never expected theists will change their mind en masse at present [due to their present state of mind] but rather in the future when they are more rational inclined and exposed to rational arguments [God is only in the brain as verified and justified via a credible FSK] that it is impossible for God to exist as real.

Well, then the texts won't change Muslim minds.
I actually think people can change their minds in part due to reading things. Generally other factors must be present, when it comes to core beliefs.
but this

the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

seemed like hubris.

[Veritas Aequitas]

From testimonials from the Web, there are already evidences that many Muslims has changed their mind because they understood their God is a false and an evil God.

from your texts?

Btw, I had never expected theists will change their mind en masse at present [due to their present state of mind] but rather in the future when they are more rational inclined and exposed to rational arguments [God is only in the brain as verified and justified via a credible FSK] that it is impossible for God to exist as real.

Well, then the texts won't change Muslim minds.
I actually think people can change their minds in part due to reading things. Generally other factors must be present, when it comes to core beliefs.
but this

the above will convince theists (in particular Muslims) there is no objectively real God that had sent commands via a prophet to kill non-believers or giving sanction for Muslims to exterminate the human species.

seemed like hubris.

Hubris?

In principle and theoretical, it is a possibility based on the arguments and evidences I have presented.
If not, why not?

On a small scale, note the mass suicide re
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown
believing they will end up in heaven.

[bahman]

Would that Atheists tended to stop at "Well, I, personally, don't have any evidence of God." How nice if they were than honest, moral and truthful. But many are not. Many want to go on to say, "...you can't have any evidence either," or even "Nobody can ever have any evidence," or "God does not exist."
What else can one make of a claim like that of Dawkins, that Theism is a "delusion." (his word, famously) Or what about when Hitchens goes about claiming it "poisons everything." Lovely. The desire of Atheists to evangelize their disbelief is considerable. And their patience with the idea that some people do not share their personal ignorance is often zero.

But Atheist dogma requires evidence. And they have none. So their disbelief is ideological, not merely personal. It's a dogma, based on nothing in particular, that they want to spread. They love to mock anybody who believes there even might be a God, and call them "unscientific" or "irrational" -- all the while, being absolutely unscientific and irrational themselves.

It is so philosophical immature to ask a not-a-theist to show evidence [empirical-rational] why they are not-a-theist.

Being critical thinkers, rational and wise, the reason why non-theists are deliberately not-a-theist(s) is because there are no direct evidences [empirical-rational] to convince them that God exists as real, e.g. the moon [and the like] is real based on empirical-rational evidence that can be verified and justified by a human-based scientific FSK as real and true.

God and spiritual beings are not the subject of human-based scientific FSK.

As a non-theist I have provided sound argument why 'It is impossible for God to exist as real"
It is Impossible for God to be Real
viewtopic.php?t=40229
You have not countered this argument.

No, your argument does not sound. I countered it but you don't pay attention to my counter argument.

I have also explained why theism is delusional, i.e. God is an illusion [albeit useful illusion] and that there are many cases of the mentally ill who insisted they have personal experiences of a God but somehow do not make such claims when they have taken the correct medicine to cure their delusion.
e.g.
Ramachandran, the Temporal Lobes and God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIiIsDIkDtg

There are cases where those who suffer brain damage and therefrom experience God or Godlike experiences;
My stroke of insight | Jill Bolte Taylor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU&t=8s

Older People Hold Stronger Belief in God
https://www.livescience.com/19971-belie ... m-age.html
because as one grow older, the neurons that inhibit irrationality e.g. God existence, atrophied.

Experiences of God can also be trigger with a "God Helmet" using magnetic waves directed a certain parts of the brain.
Dr. Persinger's God Helmet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YPOTaUyvA0

There are so much evidence that drugs, hallucinogens and other chemicals that can trigger the experience of the being of God, thus leading many to believe in theism.
Navy SEAL Takes DMT and Meets God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL7cc_v_S34

The Mystery of DMT "God Encounter" Experiences
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUOtrLM6LwY
"More that 50% of atheists who take DMT no longer identify as atheists"

DMT: The Spirit Molecule
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwZqVqbkyLM&t=22s

Seeing the Brain 'seeing-God'
viewtopic.php?t=40337

I was once a theist for a long time and personally, have had god-linked altered states of consciousness; later I discovered they were all in the brain; there is no real God out there outside the human brain.

There are loads of other evidences that demonstrate the belief in God [theism] is due to happenings in the human brain.

Views??

Perhaps you need to face God. Until then you have to wait for it.