And yet, by your plan, we’ll need a new one. Or maybe some new group of elitists. But for sure, somebody’s going to have to invent the mythical “god” with which you hope to replace the real One. So you’ll have a Pope…just not one that’s beholden to any truth.Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 12:05 amIn a way we "invent" all our ideas. I believe Plato "invented" the idea of the Form of the Good, the True and the Beautiful.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 4:39 pmThat’s about as useless an idea as I can possibly imagine. We lack a “god,” so we invent one, because we really know none exists, but we might find it, in some way, “useful” to believe in untrue things?seeds wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 4:12 pm
Well, the fact of the matter is that pretty much all concepts of God are "psychological constructs," but, yes, Belinda, you nailed it.
Furthermore, the new construct (just like the old ones) doesn't even have to be true.
No, it just needs to make more sense than those that preceded it.
_______
And which new “Pope” gets to design this conception of “god” to which we’re all so passionately going to buy in, even while knowing it’s a crock? And what gives us such confidence that this new “Pope” will be a good boy, and design for us the kind of “god” that will serve our purposes rather than his own?
Oh, here he is.
Authorities, such as popes who claim to speak on behalf of God ,are becoming defunct, as Nietzsche noted.
theodicy
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 23019
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: theodicy
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7891
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: theodicy
Ah, of course: a "condition".
Reading this is like encountering a hybrid intertwining of Meno and Ecmandu over at ILP.
If you know what I mean.
We're done, Seeds.
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10528
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: theidiocy
That to me seems accurate, but that does not also mean that whatever you see, hear, smell, taste, feel actually exists beyond just that qualia sensation, right?uwot wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 8:59 pmWe know the limits of our absolute knowledge. This was nailed down by Parmenides and Descartes - at any given moment we know that whatever experience we are having, it exists. Whatever you see, hear, smell, taste or feel, whatever sense of Belindaness you currently have - that absolutely exists. The thing is, as Parmenides and Descartes discovered, nothing absolute follows from that.
So, if I have an apple in my hand, I bite into it and smell it and state that I am absolutely certain that I have an apple in my hand, I am in fact wrong to make that statement. A more accurate statement would be that I am almost certain that I have an apple in my hand!
-
- Posts: 5121
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm
Re: theodicy
Please see Wittgenstein's response to Moore's 'Here is a Hand' thesis.
theidiocy
Personally I'm happy to accept the most obvious explanation until I have reason to doubt it. But you are quite right, there are alternative explanations for experiences of apples, the probabilities of which are not zero so we cannot be 100% certain of any explanation.attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:32 amSo, if I have an apple in my hand, I bite into it and smell it and state that I am absolutely certain that I have an apple in my hand, I am in fact wrong to make that statement. A more accurate statement would be that I am almost certain that I have an apple in my hand!
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10528
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: theidiocy
Of course. I don't think people believe me when I state I have the same level of certainty with that apple to there being an intelligence to the construct of what we perceive as reality...but then who gives a shit.uwot wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 5:20 amPersonally I'm happy to accept the most obvious explanation until I have reason to doubt it. But you are quite right, there are alternative explanations for experiences of apples, the probabilities of which are not zero so we cannot be 100% certain of any explanation.attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:32 amSo, if I have an apple in my hand, I bite into it and smell it and state that I am absolutely certain that I have an apple in my hand, I am in fact wrong to make that statement. A more accurate statement would be that I am almost certain that I have an apple in my hand!
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10528
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: theodicy
Post a link or it because I'm really really busy trying to save the planet from Satan man I can't believe they referred to Lucifer as Satan, bloody cheek.promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 5:04 am Please see Wittgenstein's response to Moore's 'Here is a Hand' thesis.
Re: theodicy
There are dissenting sects that are at least moderately successful in their democratic regimes. However I agree that some elite group or individual will gain power unless we fight back .Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 1:16 amAnd yet, by your plan, we’ll need a new one. Or maybe some new group of elitists. But for sure, somebody’s going to have to invent the mythical “god” with which you hope to replace the real One. So you’ll have a Pope…just not one that’s beholden to any truth.Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 12:05 amIn a way we "invent" all our ideas. I believe Plato "invented" the idea of the Form of the Good, the True and the Beautiful.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 4:39 pm
That’s about as useless an idea as I can possibly imagine. We lack a “god,” so we invent one, because we really know none exists, but we might find it, in some way, “useful” to believe in untrue things?
And which new “Pope” gets to design this conception of “god” to which we’re all so passionately going to buy in, even while knowing it’s a crock? And what gives us such confidence that this new “Pope” will be a good boy, and design for us the kind of “god” that will serve our purposes rather than his own?
Oh, here he is.
Authorities, such as popes who claim to speak on behalf of God ,are becoming defunct, as Nietzsche noted.
As for what is to be "invented", that is done and dusted. The basic message of the Golden Rule is traditional all around the world and has been so for nearly three millennia within an assortment of mythical traditions. Most individuals are already oriented towards the Platonic Big Three.
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 23019
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: theodicy
You’re missing the point.Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 11:40 amThere are dissenting sects that are at least moderately successful in their democratic regimes. However I agree that some elite group or individual will gain power unless we fight back .Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 1:16 amAnd yet, by your plan, we’ll need a new one. Or maybe some new group of elitists. But for sure, somebody’s going to have to invent the mythical “god” with which you hope to replace the real One. So you’ll have a Pope…just not one that’s beholden to any truth.
It’s your “invented god” idea that is going to hand power to the despot. Once you give a person or an elite power to tell people what their “god” is, you’ve handed them all the power they’re ever going to need.\
Actually, the GR is not universal, and not invented. It’s Christian, in the first place, and in the second, not at all the same as the so-called “Negative Golden Rule” of, say, Buddhism. So you’ve just got that dead wrong.As for what is to be "invented", that is done and dusted. The basic message of the Golden Rule is traditional all around the world and has been so for nearly three millennia within an assortment of mythical traditions.
I think PN once had an article on this…
Re: theodicy
You are confused.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 1:53 pm Actually, the GR is not universal, and not invented. It’s Christian, in the first place, and in the second, not at all the same as the so-called “Negative Golden Rule” of, say, Buddhism. So you’ve just got that dead wrong.
I think PN once had an article on this…
If it is Christian as you claim , then how can it not be invented?
IN any event is was well second hand before josh ben josef is supposed to have said it.
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 23019
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: theodicy
“Invented” means “created by humans.”Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:00 pmYou are confused.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 1:53 pm Actually, the GR is not universal, and not invented. It’s Christian, in the first place, and in the second, not at all the same as the so-called “Negative Golden Rule” of, say, Buddhism. So you’ve just got that dead wrong.
I think PN once had an article on this…
If it is Christian as you claim , then how can it not be invented?
Anyway, go and read the article, if you want the whole explanation of that.
Re: theodicy
In that case it was "invented" by Confucius, as it is at least as old as him.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:06 pm“Invented” means “created by humans.”Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:00 pmYou are confused.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 1:53 pm Actually, the GR is not universal, and not invented. It’s Christian, in the first place, and in the second, not at all the same as the so-called “Negative Golden Rule” of, say, Buddhism. So you’ve just got that dead wrong.
I think PN once had an article on this…
If it is Christian as you claim , then how can it not be invented?
Anyway, go and read the article, if you want the whole explanation of that.
Try reading another book!
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 23019
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: theodicy
Again, it was not. As I recall, all these objections were already met in the article. You really should read it.Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:08 pmIn that case it was "invented" by Confucius, as it is at least as old as him.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:06 pm“Invented” means “created by humans.”
Anyway, go and read the article, if you want the whole explanation of that.
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10528
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: theodicy
The Golden Rule? Who cares anyway!Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 4:41 pmAgain, it was not. As I recall, all these objections were already met in the article. You really should read it.Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:08 pmIn that case it was "invented" by Confucius, as it is at least as old as him.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:06 pm
“Invented” means “created by humans.”
Anyway, go and read the article, if you want the whole explanation of that.
It is not rocket science for a person to look down at his child and say "Hey, don't do to others what you wouldn't want done to yourself." - there's probably countless people going back through time that thought that one up!!
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 23019
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: theodicy
The article lists the various alleged “GR’s.” Check it out.attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 12:53 amThe Golden Rule? Who cares anyway!Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 4:41 pmAgain, it was not. As I recall, all these objections were already met in the article. You really should read it.
It is not rocket science for a person to look down at his child and say "Hey, don't do to others what you wouldn't want done to yourself." - there's probably countless people going back through time that thought that one up!!