What we tend to dislike about certain people is not their actual (finite and imperfect) love, power, or knowledge, but their ways of expressing their love, their lust for and/or abuse of their power, and their arrogance about their knowledge.How come religious people like God when these same qualities are disliked when in their comrades at an infinitely smaller scale? — TheMadFool
Omnipotent — TheMadFool
How come religious people like God when these same qualities are disliked when in their comrades at an infinitely smaller scale? — TheMadFool
Dawkins speaks scoffingly of a personal God, as though it were entirely obvious exactly what this might mean. He seems to imagine God, if not exactly with a white beard, then at least as some kind of chap, however supersized. He asks how this chap can speak to billions of people simultaneously, which is rather like wondering why, if Tony Blair is an octopus, he has only two arms. For Judeo-Christianity, God is not a person in the sense that Al Gore arguably is. Nor is he a principle, an entity, or ‘existent’: in one sense of that word it would be perfectly coherent for religious types to claim that God does not in fact exist. He is, rather, the condition of possibility of any entity whatsoever, including ourselves. He is the answer to why there is something rather than nothing. God and the universe do not add up to two, any more than my envy and my left foot constitute a pair of objects.
How come religious people like God when these same qualities are disliked when in their comrades at an infinitely smaller scale? — TheMadFool
How come religious people like God when these same qualities are disliked when in their comrades at an infinitely smaller scale? — TheMadFool
Because "He" never interacts with any body in reality. Not the way "actual" dictators do. — Swan
One concept that looks a little bad for God in the “God or Dictator” argument is the damnation to eternal Hell. — PhilosophyAttempter
The god/dictator is their best self, their inner truth. — joshua
What I find odd is the combo of love + power + knowledge as the target of your questioning. I'd like to have as much of that well-blended trinity as I can get. And I'd like people with power to have knowledge and love. And I'd like people with knowledge and love to have power. — joshua
So they project what they imagine it must mean, and then criticize the projection. — Wayfarer
Case in point: Terry Eagleton's review of Dawkin's The God Delusion (which is the review that drew me to internet forums in the first place) — Wayfarer
Just what is it, exactly, that you suppose omnipotent means? If merely an unlimited physical ability, then go think some more. — tim wood
What we tend to dislike about certain people is not their actual (finite and imperfect) love, power, or knowledge, but their ways of expressing their love, their lust for and/or abuse of their power, and their arrogance about their knowledge. — aletheist
I'll ask you to view the issue from the perspective of Aristotle's golden mean and the Buddha's middle path. Excess is considered a vice and not a virtue. — TheMadFool
One x in the logic of : if x then dislike, is, well, too-muchness. In my opinion and I'm hoping to be proven wrong, not even the best of virtues can withstand the fall caused by too-muchness. Love is good but too much love is self explanatory. — TheMadFool
How come religious people like God when these same qualities are disliked when in their comrades at an infinitely smaller scale? — TheMadFool
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.