Philosophy Now Forum

Where the logic in anyone's existence? God(s) or otherwise? Where's the logic in having a universe, or anything? Why not just let nil/null/Nada/nothing/nuttin' be?

thedoc wrote:

Harbal wrote:I don't have any beliefs regarding God and I''ve never found myself starting to sway on hearing anyone else's. I don't care what you say, you know as well as I do that it is absolutely pointless arguing about the existence of God.

Unless you have seen the evidence for yourself and have not rejected it.

Whether you admit to a belief about God or not, is not important, you do have some idea about the existence of God, and that is what is important. Call it a belief, or not, as you like.

I like that you added "and have not rejected it", which I suspect may refer to those like me. What you, I and the ancients have talked about appears to be the same thing; we had peak experiences. There is no doubt in my mind that if anything like a deity exists then such peak experiences are related to it/them.

Still, as I mentioned earlier, if a hundred people all have the same experience there will be a broad range of reports. So I am unwilling to jump into the slipstream of belief based on the scanty evidence of just two PEs, neither of which were under my control in the slightest, almost like positive seizures. What changed for me is that I now have a fairly open mind about there being "something more", but cannot take seriously the anthropomorphised deities of religions.

Deities are typical of the kind of anthropomorphised metaphors used by the ancients to describe phenomena in lieu of the scientific method. Our tendency has always (understandably) been to confuse the filtered perceptions of our evolved human senses with "the thing itself", the noumena. So, what we experienced during our peak experiences as an unbelievable sense of unconditional love was not necessarily love as we know it, but something that we interpret as total unconditional love - like the benign indifference we have for our pet goldfish :))

Greta wrote:

thedoc wrote:

Harbal wrote:I don't have any beliefs regarding God and I''ve never found myself starting to sway on hearing anyone else's. I don't care what you say, you know as well as I do that it is absolutely pointless arguing about the existence of God.

Unless you have seen the evidence for yourself and have not rejected it.

Whether you admit to a belief about God or not, is not important, you do have some idea about the existence of God, and that is what is important. Call it a belief, or not, as you like.

I like that you added "and have not rejected it", which I suspect may refer to those like me. What you, I and the ancients have talked about appears to be the same thing; we had peak experiences. There is no doubt in my mind that if anything like a deity exists then such peak experiences are related to it/them.

Still, as I mentioned earlier, if a hundred people all have the same experience there will be a broad range of reports. So I am unwilling to jump into the slipstream of belief based on the scanty evidence of just two PEs, neither of which were under my control in the slightest, almost like positive seizures. What changed for me is that I now have a fairly open mind about there being "something more", but cannot take seriously the anthropomorphised deities of religions.

Deities are typical of the kind of anthropomorphised metaphors used by the ancients to describe phenomena in lieu of the scientific method. Our tendency has always (understandably) been to confuse the filtered perceptions of our evolved human senses with "the thing itself", the noumena. So, what we experienced during our peak experiences as an unbelievable sense of unconditional love was not necessarily love as we know it, but something that we interpret as total unconditional love - like the benign indifference we have for our pet goldfish )

I believe that I have stated before that I don't expect others to be convinced by an experience that I had, I'm just trying to explain why I believe as I do.

thedoc wrote:
Whether you admit to a belief about God or not, is not important, you do have some idea about the existence of God, and that is what is important. Call it a belief, or not, as you like.

What do you mean?

Harbal wrote:

thedoc wrote: Whether you admit to a belief about God or not, is not important, you do have some idea about the existence of God, and that is what is important. Call it a belief, or not, as you like.

What do you mean?

I mean exactly what I have posted, nothing more or less, you have an opinion about the existence of God, and that is all that I am saying. You and others may label is as you see fit, and I agree there is no point in arguing about it, but expressing the idea can be instructive.

thedoc wrote:
I mean exactly what I have posted, nothing more or less, you have an opinion about the existence of God, and that is all that I am saying. You and others may label is as you see fit, and I agree there is no point in arguing about it, but expressing the idea can be instructive.

I've got opinions about the subject of God but I don't think I've got any about God. Have I expressed an opinion about God? If I have, I can't remember what it was.

Harbal wrote:

thedoc wrote:
I mean exactly what I have posted, nothing more or less, you have an opinion about the existence of God, and that is all that I am saying. You and others may label is as you see fit, and I agree there is no point in arguing about it, but expressing the idea can be instructive.

I've got opinions about the subject of God but I don't think I've got any about God. Have I expressed an opinion about God? If I have, I can't remember what it was.

I believe this qualifies, it was on this thread on the previous page,

"

Harbal wrote: It's not that I think God doesn't exist, it's that I don't think he does exist, there's a difference."

Isn't a belief and an opinion very similar?

thedoc wrote:
"

Harbal wrote: It's not that I think God doesn't exist, it's that I don't think he does exist, there's a difference."

Isn't a belief and an opinion very similar?

OK, if you want to call that an opinion about God, rather than an opinion about the subject of God, I won't argue. However you categorise that opinion doesn't really matter. The point is, seeing as I don't think there is a God, I can't really have any opinions about him. I suppose I've got opinions about the character God, as per the Bible etc. but those opinions are more about the mind that is willing to accept that character as a real entity. My position is best described as a lack of belief. I would describe it as a passive thing, rather than an active, Dawkins style thing.
I can't seem to remember what it is that I'm trying to justify, so if I haven't managed to address it adequately -whatever it was- perhaps you could remind me.

Harbal wrote:

thedoc wrote:
"

Harbal wrote: It's not that I think God doesn't exist, it's that I don't think he does exist, there's a difference."

Isn't a belief and an opinion very similar?

OK, if you want to call that an opinion about God, rather than an opinion about the subject of God, I won't argue. However you categorise that opinion doesn't really matter. The point is, seeing as I don't think there is a God, I can't really have any opinions about him. I suppose I've got opinions about the character God, as per the Bible etc. but those opinions are more about the mind that is willing to accept that character as a real entity. My position is best described as a lack of belief. I would describe it as a passive thing, rather than an active, Dawkins style thing.
I can't seem to remember what it is that I'm trying to justify, so if I haven't managed to address it adequately -whatever it was- perhaps you could remind me.

I did not mean to suggest that opinion doesn't matter, I said that what you called it, (an opinion, idea, or a belief) is not as important as the fact that you have one of these, and express it so that others can understand what you are thinking. I have heard Atheists explain before that Atheism is not a belief, but a lack of belief, and that's OK, but as an Atheist you do have some idea about the existence or non-existence of God, and that is what I am interested in.

thedoc wrote: OK, but as an Atheist you do have some idea about the existence or non-existence of God, and that is what I am interested in.

Do you have to call me an atheist? It makes it sound as though I subscribe to a particular school of thought, which I don't. If someone tells me that God wants me to be this, that or the other, I will argue about it. I don't have any interest in arguing about whether or not such a thing as God exists.

thedoc wrote:I have heard Atheists explain before that Atheism is not a belief, but a lack of belief, and that's OK, but as an Atheist you do have some idea about the existence or non-existence of God, and that is what I am interested in.

What if we compare it this way: How much do you think about Santa? Do you contemplate the non-existence of Santa? Are you resistant to the idea of Santa? Now what if large groups of people developed a belief in Santa, and talked about it all the time. They might even interject Santa's name onto the dollar bill, and into various pledges and oaths. Would that change your thoughts, or whether you contemplate the non-existence of Santa? And what if people started labeling you as an atheisanta, and suggesting that you are a part of the whole idea, simply because you're alive? All this, even though you don't even see a point in thinking about Santa, other than debating with Santaists because it all seems so absurd to you?

Just havin' a little fun... but I think it's a valid way to consider another perspective.

Lacewing wrote: What if we compare it this way: How much do you think about Santa? Do you contemplate the non-existence of Santa? Are you resistant to the idea of Santa? Now what if large groups of people developed a belief in Santa, and talked about it all the time. They might even interject Santa's name onto the dollar bill, and into various pledges and oaths. Would that change your thoughts, or whether you contemplate the non-existence of Santa? And what if people started labeling you as an atheisanta, and suggesting that you are a part of the whole idea, simply because you're alive? All this, even though you don't even see a point in thinking about Santa, other than debating with Santaists because it all seems so absurd to you?

Just havin' a little fun... but I think it's a valid way to consider another perspective.

I think this is more or less what I've been trying to say. Thanks for coming to my rescue.

Harbal wrote:

thedoc wrote: OK, but as an Atheist you do have some idea about the existence or non-existence of God, and that is what I am interested in.

Do you have to call me an atheist? It makes it sound as though I subscribe to a particular school of thought, which I don't. If someone tells me that God wants me to be this, that or the other, I will argue about it. I don't have any interest in arguing about whether or not such a thing as God exists.

Sorry, but I was going by what I thought you were saying. Why don't you tell me what label, if any, you would prefer.

BTW, I consider myself a non-traditional Christian, and I will explain in more detail if you like.

thedoc wrote:I consider myself a non-traditional Christian, and I will explain in more detail if you like.

I certainly would like you to explain in more detail.

thedoc wrote: Sorry, but I was going by what I thought you were saying. Why don't you tell me what label, if any, you would prefer.

It seems a bit like putting a label on an empty bottle telling you what's not in it. I think my original point was that I usually base my beliefs on experience and I have no experience of anything that requires belief in God to explain it.

BTW, I consider myself a non-traditional Christian, and I will explain in more detail if you like.

OK.