29 Nov 10
Originally posted by whodeyNot logical, emotional maybe, but not logical. One could suppose hypothetically our universe is one of many 'test tube' universes which some god merely observes.
It is logical to assume that God actually cares about his creation.
Why? Just look at what you have created in your lifetime. Things that you create are a reflection of who and what you are. Likewise, Biblically we are said to be created in the image of God. What you create speaks volumes as to who and what you are. It indicates your intelligence le ...[text shortened]... m and in which he has no interest. Why would he waste his time?
Sorry, I just don't buy it.
29 Nov 10
Originally posted by John W BoothI have no idea. But there must be some reason, and it could hardly be anything but psychological.
That's interesting. What "psychological factor" do you think is in play with me when I believe there is a God?
But thats not important. What is important is that you differentiate your beliefs from those of other theists, and I am not convinced that your grounds for doing so are valid.
You claim that there are psychological motivations for their beliefs but not yours, yet that doesn't prove that theirs are caused by the motivations you perceive. It only suggest that they might be.
If you can hold beliefs that have no psychological motivations, then surely so can they. How do you know that their beliefs, however intricate they may be, are not held in the same way that yours are ie without a known psychological motivation causing them.
29 Nov 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou've repeated this several times while ignoring my repeated answer to it. So we will leave it at that, I think.
What is important is that you differentiate your beliefs from those of other theists, and I am not convinced that your grounds for doing so are valid.
30 Nov 10
Originally posted by whodeyWhat he "cares" about? Maybe you need to speculate what nationality God is and declare whatever you decide it is to be a fact, deduced logically. Then you can factor in his cultural background and his upbringing. You have already decided to attribute human characteristics to God so you may as well go the whole hog.
Why would he observe what he cares nothing about?
30 Nov 10
Originally posted by John W BoothAre you saying that his creation could possibly be devoid of any of his characteristics? How so? For every thought there needs to first be present a point of reference.
What he "cares" about? Maybe you need to speculate what nationality God is and declare whatever you decide it is to be a fact, deduced logically. Then you can factor in his cultural background and his upbringing. You have already decided to attribute human characteristics to God so you may as well go the whole hog.
30 Nov 10
Originally posted by whodeyTo see what happens and compare results against other universes. Why is this hypothetical god's own business...perhaps so it learns to make improved universes afterwards(where what counts as an improvement to this god is open for speculation of course...note: I'm not assuming omniscience btw).
Why would he observe what he cares nothing about?
30 Nov 10
2 edits
Originally posted by vistesdI don't indulge in metaphysical speculation about the nature of the God I sense. All the metaphysical speculation I have across - along with all the theology, superstition, worship, codes of behaviour, prophecies attendant thereto - has struck me as unfouned and, more often than not, peculiarly specific and almost peversely far-fetched.
You strike me as arguing for rationality—or at least against counter-intuitive metaphysical speculation. So I am interested in why, epistemically, you conclude there is something that merits the label “god”—that is, what are some of your reason-giving considerations. If it’s just a “sense” or an intuition, fine.
As for claiming "knowledge", well I don't really do epistemology when it comes to the existence of a "God". It is just a 'sense', as you put it. I rarely give it much thought. Having trawled (to a degree anyway) through the literature of religions and found it all very fancilful, riddled with uncompromisingly undisguised signs of human weaknesses and wishful (albeit energizing and inspiring) groupthink, I am content with my own 'sense' and unpersuaded by the speculation.
All the creeds, assertions and claims that God has "communicated" with humans - at least those that I have encountered, which is all the main ones - have struck me as totally unconvincing - and perhaps more useful as a history of the human condition than anything metaphysical.
Just a 'sense' then, for me, that bubbles up to the surface from time to time when I meditate. However, it has no discernible effect on my behaviour, nor does it spawn any other 'beliefs', other than - as twhitehead has sort of pointed out - the belief that religion, theology, invented "certainties" about the afterlife and about "instructions" from God, and God's "love" and "wrath" and all the rest, are of no interest to me whatsoever as they strike me as a mixture of anthropology, psychiatry and the 'red pantaloons' (I mentioned earlier) and nothing much else.
30 Nov 10
1 edit
J.W.Booth, what facets of the universe are such that you require the introduction of some sort of god? I notice that you don't explicitly assign to this entity any traits (which is a good thing), but I hold that implicitly there are some characteristics which must be associated with such a deity in order that you arrive at the "picture" of the universe you have right now (for example: this deity is capable of creating universes perhaps; as opposed to some other entity which is constrained to dwell (unseen perhaps) within a necessarily extistent (and unique) universe)
Must it be true you hold this god has supernatural qualities?
30 Nov 10
Originally posted by AgergI am not sure that you or I can say that I "require" the 'sense' that I have. It doesn't fill any gap and it doesn't making anything 'work' or solve any problem. It doesn't affect what I do. So I don't see how I might have "required" it as such. meanwhile, I contend that 'religious' people "need" it.
J.W.Booth, what facets of the universe are such that you require the introduction of some sort of god?
And I contend that their needs lead to hundreds of intricate beliefs and behaviours. twhitehead contends that there is "no difference" between me with my 1 belief and them with their 100s of beliefs. I find that interesting.
What facets of the universe? Mmm. My 'sense' of God is not so specific. It doesn't go much beyond being what I would answer if I underwent a lie detector test (that I didn't want to fail)... "Do you believe there is a God?" "Yes". Can you prove it or explain it?" "No." Do you believe it has any implications for you or mankind?" "No".
30 Nov 10
Originally posted by AgergThe difference between this "deity" and this "entity", you mention, is not relevant to me, though. Because I don't speculate about God's nature I am unable to theorize about God's traits. I have no way of knowing what this God is "capable of" or to what degree it is "constrained".
for example: this deity is capable of creating universes perhaps; as opposed to some other entity which is constrained to dwell (unseen perhaps) within a necessarily extistent (and unique) universe)
30 Nov 10
When I say "require" in the sense that I did I mean that given two possible choices: A or B; in order to make a coherent account of some scenario or resolution to a problem; if one chooses A then so long as this person makes a rational choice, it was deemed by this person A be better fit than B (unless it was a 50-50 choice). In this sense, their views require A in order to gel properly (from their perspective of course).
30 Nov 10
Originally posted by John W BoothBut failing to introduce god (whatever it is) into your worldview would induce a discrepancy somewhere, otherwise you would have had no need to invoke such a thing. I'm interested in what the discrepancies are which are solved by inserting "god"
The difference between this "deity" and this "entity", you mention, is not relevant to me, though. Because I don't speculate about God's nature I am unable to theorize about God's traits. I have no way of knowing what this God is "capable of" or to what degree it is "constrained".