Coming in late... but to get back to the topic proposed regarding the possibility that "god is just a logical fallacy". Some ruminative notions ~ Cows R Us!
I have tried, without much success, it would seem, to inject a book by Julian Jaynes called "The Origin Of Consciousness In The Breakdown Of The Bicameral Mind" into a number of threads that dealt with the nature of consciousness.
Some few years ago, I was writing a paper called "Obedience & Authority" and trying to determine the relationship between the two... for, very surely, one cannot exist without the other. I was wondering why we followed, when our leadership was often so grossly out of human tune.
I was thinking about Hitler, Stalin, Nixon, etc.... I waded through the usual Freud & Fromm & Skinner psychological claptrap without finding the palpable point of connection between the follower and the leader.
On my third reading of Jaynes' book, I realized that his thesis went a long way towards explaining this connection. Basically he postulates that we have internalized the leader's calls - the voices that we relied upon when we were primitive tribal primates. He combines pre-historical evidence with interpreted early literary/historical insinuations and some quantum sociology.
It is a convoluted and exquisitely simple explanation for the madness that we live through. I recommend it highly. It explains why god is just an easy excuse for what and why we are too weak to decide for ourselves. Pity so many people die in god's name.... It explains why we are pre-disposed towards obedience.
Actually, the Bible doesn't really 'say' that God exists in the sense of attempting to prove it. It more or less assumes it. It then goes about the business of establishing God's character.
I believe in God because I decided there seemed to be some kind of higher power. I'm not sure there's much solid proof of that beyond personal experience and seeing how things fit together.
I'm a Christian because the Bible convinced me that, if there was a God, this is what God must be like.
Pretty well all systems - theological, scientific, mathematical - come down to some basic starting points/assumptions/axioms that are the basic building blocks. At one point I studied some of the mathematical axioms that enable you to do things like count and add (but don't ask me the details, the notes are over 10 years old and I'd struggle to locate them). The whole point of axioms is that you don't prove them, you accept them.
Which is to say, I think whether or not you accept the existence of God is largely up to you.
I know for my part that choosing to accept is working out to be pretty magnificent so far. I can't imagine not having the richness of my life as it has been since making that choice, despite the terrible darkness I could maybe have avoided at times.
Originally posted by widgetInteresting.
Coming in late... but to get back to the topic proposed regarding the possibility that "god is just a logical fallacy". Some ruminative notions ~ Cows R Us!
I have tried, without much success, it would seem, to inject a book by Julian Jaynes called "The Origin Of Consciousness In The Breakdown Of The Bicameral Mind" into a number of threads that deal ...[text shortened]... ty so many people die in god's name.... It explains why we are pre-disposed towards obedience.
People can, of course, choose to obey many DIFFERENT things, not just God.
I could, if I was being mischievous, point out that the thesis more or less depends on the initial assumption that God does not exist, and seeks to explain why people created him. If you started with the assumption that God DOES exist, you could explain exactly the same phenomenon (the need for a leader) by postulating that we are all trying to find a substitute for the innate need we have to follow God. The call was internal to begin with and wasn't internalized, it was partially externalized.
But I'm not mischievous so I won't point that out. 😉
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by no1marauderMan is made of matter,
A watch is made of matter,
A duck is made of matter,
Therefore, a Duck = a Watch
A duck comes from an egg,
But a Watch = A Duck
Therefore, a watch comes from an egg.
Baboons are made of matter,
Therefore man = baboon
Baboons evolved from a rock
Therefore man evolved from a rock
But rocks have no brains
Therefore man has no brains
Therefore man invents evolution
Originally posted by widgetYou misunderstand me. I"m not suggesting there are fallacies in the theory.
Point out the fallacies to me after you have read the book.
I read a lot, always have. This book changed the way I thought about the world.
Cynic that I am by nature, this is a huge admission of illumination from beyond...
But really, the theory can't establish that God doesn't exist. It can only establish that there is a coherent explanation for how he was created IF he doesn't exist.
Given that starting point (axiom), I'm sure it's an excellent theory - even from the very small amount you've stated here it sounds entirely plausible.
And I think you're absolutely RIGHT that people use God as an excuse. In the same way that people say 'the Devil made me do it'.
But just because people frequently say things like that with no justification, does not translate into evidence that it isn't occasionally true. Maybe once in a while the Devil really does make someone do something. Maybe once in a while God is responsible for something.
I fully realize that what I'm saying is I'm not convinced of the proof of a negative - the non-existence of God is, if anything, harder to prove than his existence. That's just the way logic works, unfortunately.
I shall keep the book in mind, although I emphasize I can't make any promises to read it. I read a lot as well, but sadly that's at work and frankly most of my spare time I try to AVOID doing much reading as a reaction to that. If it ever comes out on CD then let me know!
Originally posted by orfeoI'd be more interested in a theory how he was created if he does exist.
You misunderstand me. I"m not suggesting there are fallacies in the theory.
But really, the theory can't establish that God doesn't exist. It can only establish that there is a coherent explanation for how he was created IF he doesn't exist.
Given that starting point (axiom), I'm sure it's an excellent theory - even from the very small amount you ...[text shortened]... to AVOID doing much reading as a reaction to that. If it ever comes out on CD then let me know!
Originally posted by widgetYes, I've tried to make this point in this forum as well. The concept of a creator/saviour god is a security blanket. Those who have chosen to 'believe' due to subjective experience are trying to reconcile the natural isolation of their consciousness. "Why am I?" and "Where will I go?" are questions the mind naturally presents...
It is a convoluted and exquisitely simple explanation for the madness that we live through. I recommend it highly. It explains why god is just an easy excuse for what and why we are too weak to decide for ourselves.