How the fuck would I know? What I know is, God IS our REALITY or - your point 2. is external to our reality but has control over it. Whether 'God' extends to the entire fucking universe is waaay beyond my knowledge!Logik wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:25 pmYou are still telling me what you DON'T agree with. Still very apophatic.attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:22 pm Yes you have the right to call me a wanker again in capital letters.. I don't agree with everything within definitions of pantheism or panetheism. Can we return to your original inquiry about the two points and how to distinguish them? Or are you still digging for a fight?
The way I use the word "Universe" is "everything that exists and that is potentially knowable (even if not yet known) by humans".
And so if God exists, then God exists within the Universe.
If God exists then God can be studied via the scientific method.
So try again. I am not arguing about the definitions of pantheism or panetheism. I am asking you a yes or no question.
Are God and Universe different entities?
What attracted you to philosophy?
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10012
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Because the way you conceptualise God is no different to reality!attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:28 pm How the fuck would I know? What I know is, God IS our REALITY or - your point 2. is external to our reality but has control over it.
If you can't draw any distinctions between "God" and "Reality" then you are speaking about the same fucking thing using different words!
Wait, are you saying that God exists within the universe and that the Universe may be bigger than God?attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:28 pm Whether 'God' extends to the entire fucking universe is waaay beyond my knowledge!
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10012
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
You were the one questioning on your point 2. Whether God was an external agent to reality. I stated from the outset that God IS reality.Logik wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:30 pmBecause the way you conceptualise God is no different to reality!attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:28 pm How the fuck would I know? What I know is, God IS our REALITY or - your point 2. is external to our reality but has control over it.
If you can't draw any distinctions between "God" and "Reality" then you are speaking about the same fucking thing using different words!
Hey, I didn't even think you agreed that God exists...so if you are actually an atheist, your logik is way off the mark. But yes, I think God is a part of the universe - the part that consists of our reality.Logik wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:30 pmOK, so you are agreeing that God exists within the universe and that the Universe is bigger than God?attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:28 pm Whether 'God' extends to the entire fucking universe is waaay beyond my knowledge!
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
OK, but when I asked you whether you use the words "God", "reality" and "Universe" interchangeably you said "no".attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:35 pm You were the one questioning on your point 2. Whether God was an external agent to reality. I stated from the outset that God IS reality.
So I have no idea what to make of this!
I am an agnostic. On matters of God and knowledge.attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:28 pm Hey, I didn't even think you agreed that God exists...so if you are actually an atheist, your logik is way off the mark.
You are confusing me. You said:attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:35 pm But yes, I think God is a part of the universe - the part that consists of our reality.
1. God IS reality.
2. God is part of the universe.
So reality is part of the universe? This is a taxonomy I have never encountered before...
I use the words "reality" and "universe" interchangeably/synonymously. And I use both words to mean "everything that exists and that is currently known AND potentially knowable (in future) by humans."
I also use the words "exists" and "knowable" synonymously.
In this context if God exists, then God is knowable even if currently unknown.
-
- Posts: 5182
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Yes, exactly. It is either. And for some it may be the one, while for others it is the other.Logik wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 11:42 amSo you could think of this place of a support group of sorts? Or a drug den. I can't be sure.
Either participating on this forum is helping our addiction; or we are heading for anhedonia.
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
I am going with drug den.commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 4:38 pm Yes, exactly. It is either. And for some it may be the one, while for others it is the other.
-
- Posts: 5182
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
For the moment, please allow me to change the discussion about God’s existence to an analogous one. Let me say some things about spirits.
I can say, “Spirits exist”, but I cannot prove they exist. I can believe they exist. I can hope they exist. I can guess they exist.
But I cannot prove they exist. I cannot perceive spirits using any of my 5 senses. I cannot observe spirits.
I cannot use any tools to locate them. I cannot use any kind of x-ray, CT scan or MRI to detect them.
I cannot weigh them, measure them or catch them in a net. There’s no test I can perform that can identify spirits.
I just cannot know for sure whether spirits exist. To the best of my knowledge, no actual spirit has ever been found.
In other words, spirits might exist. Or they might not. My belief can be either that they exist or not. But my thought can only be that the existence of spirits is unknowable.
How is it different with any immaterial entity, such as God?
I can say, “Spirits exist”, but I cannot prove they exist. I can believe they exist. I can hope they exist. I can guess they exist.
But I cannot prove they exist. I cannot perceive spirits using any of my 5 senses. I cannot observe spirits.
I cannot use any tools to locate them. I cannot use any kind of x-ray, CT scan or MRI to detect them.
I cannot weigh them, measure them or catch them in a net. There’s no test I can perform that can identify spirits.
I just cannot know for sure whether spirits exist. To the best of my knowledge, no actual spirit has ever been found.
In other words, spirits might exist. Or they might not. My belief can be either that they exist or not. But my thought can only be that the existence of spirits is unknowable.
How is it different with any immaterial entity, such as God?
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Suppose all spirits went extinct tomorrow because. Bad spirit-flu going around!commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Dec 31, 2018 2:58 am For the moment, please allow me to change the discussion about God’s existence to an analogous one. Let me say some things about spirits.
I can say, “Spirits exist”, but I cannot prove they exist. I can believe they exist. I can hope they exist. I can guess they exist.
But I cannot prove they exist. I cannot perceive spirits using any of my 5 senses. I cannot observe spirits.
I cannot use any tools to locate them. I cannot use any kind of x-ray, CT scan or MRI to detect them.
I cannot weigh them, measure them or catch them in a net. There’s no test I can perform that can identify spirits.
I just cannot know for sure whether spirits exist. To the best of my knowledge, no actual spirit has ever been found.
In other words, spirits might exist. Or they might not. My belief can be either that they exist or not. But my thought can only be that the existence of spirits is unknowable.
How is it different with any immaterial entity, such as God?
Suppose God died too. Choked on an olive. Freak accident!
How would our experience of reality change in their absence?
-
- Posts: 5182
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Interesting question. If there were no change, we would surmise that neither God nor spirits exist, or rather that neither interacts with reality. If there were a change, we would be inclined to conclude that either God or spirits or both exist, supposing as we did.
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
And if you can’t predict (a priori) what might actually change in practice then it is safe to conclude that you don’t have a meaningful conception of God or spirits.commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Dec 31, 2018 3:37 amInteresting question. If there were no change, we would surmise that neither God nor spirits exist, or rather that neither interacts with reality. If there were a change, we would be inclined to conclude that either God or spirits or both exist, supposing as we did.
-
- Posts: 5182
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Exactly!Logik wrote: ↑Mon Dec 31, 2018 3:45 amAnd if you can’t predict (a priori) what might actually change in practice then it is safe to conclude that you don’t have a meaningful conception of God or spirits.commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Dec 31, 2018 3:37 amInteresting question. If there were no change, we would surmise that neither God nor spirits exist, or rather that neither interacts with reality. If there were a change, we would be inclined to conclude that either God or spirits or both exist, supposing as we did.
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
7, being an introvert by nature thought a lot.commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:58 pm How old were you when you first became interested in phil osophy? Where were you when that happened? What would you like to say about your initiation to philosophy?
by 16 thought of Solipsism is all i can know. then 5 yrs later learned of Descarte in college and that he thought the same thing (then added-backslide from my view later).
I suspect introverts by their nature are more apt to "think" and so more Philosophy minded than extroverts.
but individuals trump therer introversion/extroversion - and so speaking generally here, individuality trumps this to a degree.
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Any distinction between a solipsist, atheist and theist is only linguistic. There is no empirical distinction.gaffo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:00 am 7, being an introvert by nature thought a lot.
by 16 thought of Solipsism is all i can know. then 5 yrs later learned of Descarte in college and that he thought the same thing (then added-backslide from my view later).
I suspect introverts by their nature are more apt to "think" and so more Philosophy minded than extroverts.
but individuals trump therer introversion/extroversion - and so speaking generally here, individuality trumps this to a degree.
Thought experiment: suppose you changed your mind tomorrow and you stopped being a solipsist. How would your behaviour change? How would the way you carry yourself in the world change?
-
- Posts: 5182
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: What attracted you to philosophy?
Demonstrate one.commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Jan 08, 2019 1:36 amI find this intriguing. How is it that there is no empirical distinction between a theist and either of the other two?
Better yet. Determine somebody’s beliefs empirically, rather than through conversational means.