So, a lot of the dynamics of the debate are in some ways unstated or assumed, because they're, in effect, an aspect of the collective psyche, not a matter of individual choice. — Wayfarer
Whereas a proper sacramental relationship is defined in terms of 'I-thou' (pace Martin Buber) - again, a relationship with a real being or power, not simply an abstract philosophical concept. — Wayfarer
Which leads to another underlying dynamic, which is that in the pre-modern world, the Universe was intuitively felt to be alive — Wayfarer
Whereas the overwhelming feeling of modernity is that of exile, otherness, separation, being cast out into a meaningless universe as a result of chance - a theme underlying a lot of 20th Century literature and drama. It is the plight of modernity. — Wayfarer
Again, this is a consequence of the way in which the whole issue was posed by Christian orthodoxy: that God exists, and you either believe it (yes = saved) or don't (no = damned). So it's understandable to wish to side-step the entire dilemma! — Wayfarer
It's also interesting to contrast this with the formulation of the Buddhist 'middle way' principle: — Wayfarer
Does the Empire State building exist? In our everyday experience at human scale the practical sensible answer is obviously yes. But if we look closer at what physics tells us a more accurate answer seems to be that 99.99% of Empire State building doesn't exist according to our definition of existence. — Jake
Does the space which makes up most of the Empire State building exist? — Jake
So what we can learn using only observation of reality led by scientific experts is that the question of existence is no where near as simple as almost all God debates assume it to be. Most of reality can not be neatly filed in to either an "exists" or "doesn't exist" box. — Jake
I hear you continually claim that there are many "Proofs" for god and none against it. — whollyrolling
What I'm claiming is:
- there are many proofs that a first cause exists — Devans99
There are absolutely NO PROOFS that a first cause exists. — Frank Apisa
Those all have promises with their premises, such as "Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another" — Terrapin Station
Everything is put in motion by something else. — Devans99
Terrapin Station
8.6k
↪Frank Apisa
There are proofs in the sense of:
(1) If P, then there is a first cause.
(2) P
(c) Therefore, there is a first cause.
Which goes to show us just how much value proofs are. — Terrapin Station
Terrapin Station
8.6k
Everything is put in motion by something else. — Devans99
There's no way to know whether that's the case or not. — Terrapin Station
There are no arguments and no counter arguments concerning something that is impossible to determine — whollyrolling
There is no evidence of what you call first cause — whollyrolling
There are numerous extensive and intensive methods of observing reality and describing its contents and its laws, yet no god or grand cause has ever been demonstrated. — whollyrolling
All motion can be traced back to the Big Bang. — Devans99
Devans99
1.6k
↪Terrapin Station
Everything is moving apart from everything else so everything must have once been one. We have evidence of this from the redshifts of galaxies and the CMB radiation.
Even the leading multiple universe theory (eternal inflation) posits afirst movement. — Devans99
Devans99
1.6k
↪Frank Apisa
I'm not sure what are you implying? — Devans99
I would phrase it that most of the time we don't think things through for ourselves but rather reference some authority, typically some slice of the group consensus. — Jake
There are numerous extensive and intensive methods of observing reality and describing its contents and its laws, yet no god or grand cause has ever been demonstrated. — whollyrolling
It isn't that way by design, it's that way by ignorance of its design. When conducted properly, it should be objective, or as close to objectivity as possible with the information available. — whollyrolling
But it [science] isn't conceptually a failure, it's rather a good idea. — whollyrolling
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.