Searching for GOD...

[Sebastian Toe]

How amazing? 1, 4, 8.5 , 1 000 000?

Only four choices?
How amazing is Jesus?
3.4, 666, 5894, 2.3 billion?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The evolutionary process is remarkable, when eventually science has discovered how it all came about, I doubt god had anything to do with it.

When eventually science has discovered how it all came about?

Scientism Alert

[SusanDoris]

What in the name of  Simon Cowell's left earlobe is a 'totally integrated person'? And what is 'spirituality' that is integrated by this person? And why is it 'important', and what is your evidence for these claims?

My normalroutine on a Monday afternoon (in term time) is swimming, but having been told I cannot go swimming for two weeks after this wretched shingles has gone, I have time to have a go at answering your post! I care nothing for Simon cowell, by the way, let alone any ear lobes he may have.
Integrated: the definition includes a large number of synonyms, of which unified might be the closest, I suppose. What I am talking about is a person with all his/her ideas contained in his/her brain with no odd bits floating about independently; a person with no detached arms, legs, internal organs carried around in a plastic bag; a person fortunate enough not to be a split personality,. Although of course the physical person would still be one whole.
Spirituality: As most of  us know, this idea remains without any objective definition, but in my opinion it is not for the sole use of those with
religious beliefs and can refer to the aesthetic aspect of people’s characters.
Importance: It is important in my opinion to understand that there are no invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable spirits, souls,etc floating around, either in or out of a living human person. To believe that there are takes the believer on a hiding to nothing. I think it is important to understand that a living brain is required for any idea of such ideas as spirit to be thought of, but this understanding makes life so much richer and more exciting, when humans know that it is ther
Evolved human brain thinking this, not some disembodied mind/god that sends messages into it from! – well, no believer has ever come up with anything even faintly credible as to where!
Evidence: Evidence for the existence, i.e. the objective type of evidence, remains at zero for any spirit/soul/god and the probability of such objective evidence turning up before I die is so vanishingly small that I do not spend time waiting or hoping that it will.

As always, the proviso that some spirit/soul/godmight suddenly put in an appearance has to be stated, but at my age, I don’t feel the need to mention this every time!   

[Walt Zingmatilder]

[quote author=SusanDoris link=topic=10333.msg692189#msg692189 date=1504532640there are no invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable spirits, souls,etc floating around, either in or out of a living human person. To believe that there are takes the believer on a hiding to nothing. I think it is important to understand that a living brain is required for any idea of such ideas as spirit to be thought of, but this understanding makes life so much richer and more exciting, when humans know that it is ther
Evolved human brain thinking this, not some disembodied mind/god that sends messages into it from! – well, no believer has ever come up with anything even faintly credible as to where!
Evidence: Evidence for the existence, i.e. the objective type of evidence, remains at zero for any spirit/soul/god and the probability of such objective evidence turning up before I die is so vanishingly small that I do not spend time waiting or hoping that it will.

As always, the proviso that some spirit/soul/godmight suddenly put in an appearance has to be stated, but at my age, I don’t feel the need to mention this every time!
[/quote]
Severa

My normalroutine on a Monday afternoon (in term time) is swimming, but having been told I cannot go swimming for two weeks after this wretched shingles has gone, I have time to have a go at answering your post! I care nothing for Simon cowell, by the way, let alone any ear lobes he may have.
Integrated: the definition includes a large number of synonyms, of which unified might be the closest, I suppose. What I am talking about is a person with all his/her ideas contained in his/her brain with no odd bits floating about independently; a person with no detached arms, legs, internal organs carried around in a plastic bag; a person fortunate enough not to be a split personality,. Although of course the physical person would still be one whole.
Spirituality: As most of  us know, this idea remains without any objective definition, but in my opinion it is not for the sole use of those with
religious beliefs and can refer to the aesthetic aspect of people’s characters.
Importance: It is important in my opinion to understand that there are no invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable spirits, souls,etc floating around, either in or out of a living human person. To believe that there are takes the believer on a hiding to nothing. I think it is important to understand that a living brain is required for any idea of such ideas as spirit to be thought of, but this understanding makes life so much richer and more exciting, when humans know that it is ther
Evolved human brain thinking this, not some disembodied mind/god that sends messages into it from! – well, no believer has ever come up with anything even faintly credible as to where!
Evidence: Evidence for the existence, i.e. the objective type of evidence, remains at zero for any spirit/soul/god and the probability of such objective evidence turning up before I die is so vanishingly small that I do not spend time waiting or hoping that it will.

As always, the proviso that some spirit/soul/godmight suddenly put in an appearance has to be stated, but at my age, I don’t feel the need to mention this every time!   

positive assertions here all which need justification.
No immeasurable things floating about? What about memes. How do you intend to measure them?

[Sebastian Toe]

What about memes. How do you intend to measure them?

By using a Vlad-stick.
The answer will likely be one of the following.
1, 4, 8.5 , 1 000 000.
No?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

By using a Vlad-stick.

I guess that makes memes absolutely humongous then

[Sebastian Toe]

I guess that makes memes absolutely humongous then

...in your head maybe!

[Nearly Sane]

My normalroutine on a Monday afternoon (in term time) is swimming, but having been told I cannot go swimming for two weeks after this wretched shingles has gone, I have time to have a go at answering your post! I care nothing for Simon cowell, by the way, let alone any ear lobes he may have.
Integrated: the definition includes a large number of synonyms, of which unified might be the closest, I suppose. What I am talking about is a person with all his/her ideas contained in his/her brain with no odd bits floating about independently; a person with no detached arms, legs, internal organs carried around in a plastic bag; a person fortunate enough not to be a split personality,. Although of course the physical person would still be one whole.

Sorry, that just reads like random waffle - in what way does the above address what a 'totally integrated person' is? Are you saying that what it amounts to is not having a split personality?

Spirituality: As most of  us know, this idea remains without any objective definition, but in my opinion it is not for the sole use of those with
religious beliefs and can refer to the aesthetic aspect of people’s characters.

What is the  'aesthetic aspect of people's character'? And in what way might it exist to not be 'totally integrated'?

Importance: It is important in my opinion to understand that there are no invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable spirits, souls,etc floating around, either in or out of a living human person. To believe that there are takes the believer on a hiding to nothing. I think it is important to understand that a living brain is required for any idea of such ideas as spirit to be thought of, but this understanding makes life so much richer and more exciting, when humans know that it is ther
Evolved human brain thinking this, not some disembodied mind/god that sends messages into it from! – well, no believer has ever come up with anything even faintly credible as to where!

I don't understand why you take the time to debunk some other idea rather than justify why you think the 'aesthetic aspect of people's character' is important in terms of being a 'totally integrated person'. Perhaps you should try and just justify your own position?

Evidence: Evidence for the existence, i.e. the objective type of evidence, remains at zero for any spirit/soul/god and the probability of such objective evidence turning up before I die is so vanishingly small that I do not spend time waiting or hoping that it will.

As always, the proviso that some spirit/soul/godmight suddenly put in an appearance has to be stated, but at my age, I don’t feel the need to mention this every time!

Except I was asking for evidence of your own claim  about 'spirituality' being an important aspect of a 'totally integrated person', not about some other claim by other people. So where is the evidence for your claim?

[wigginhall]

And this incredible organ with all its mysterious complexity is automatically generated from the blueprint information contained in a microscopic molecule.

I just wondered if any of the non believers ever doubt the ability of a blind, aimless evolutionary process to produce such an amazingly complex and meaningful entity.

There is strong evidence that evolution produced the eye, or I should say, the various types of eye.   Put it this way, I don't feel incredulous about that, why should I about the brain?  But maybe you think  that God made the eye, because after all, molecules can't see, so how could a collection of molecules? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There is strong evidence that evolution produced the eye,

Therefore no God?

[Nearly Sane]

There is strong evidence that evolution produced the eye, or I should say, the various types of eye.   Put it this way, I don't feel incredulous about that, why should I about the brain?  But maybe you think  that God made the eye, because after all, molecules can't see, so how could a collection of molecules? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

While true, aren't the previous posts about the brain?

[wigginhall]

While true, aren't the previous posts about the brain?

Well, that's why I made the comparison.   I don't feel incredulous about the eye having evolved, so why the incredulity about the brain?   OK, the brain is more complex, but then the eye is more complex than a bacterium.

[wigginhall]

Therefore no God?

Eh?  Who said that?   Well, you did, of course.   

[Nearly Sane]

Well, that's why I made the comparison.   I don't feel incredulous about the eye having evolved, so why the incredulity about the brain?   OK, the brain is more complex, but then the eye is more complex than a bacterium.

Fair enough.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Eh?  Who said that?   Well, you did, of course.

It's a question Wiggs.

[Enki]

Therefore no God?

No, just no need for God.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No, just no need for God.

Oh.......like Brobat toilet cleaner.

[wigginhall]

It's a question Wiggs.

Well, enki has provided the Laplace type reply, supposedly to Napoleon, I have no need of that hypothesis.   This doesn't imply that there is no God, just that he is not required in the calculations.

[Enki]

Oh.......like Brobat toilet cleaner.

Don't know about that.

However the evolution of the eye can be explained without recourse to any input from any god. That doesn't mean that a god doesn't exist, of course, but, if you propose one, then I would ask for clear evidence of how he was involved in the process, or give your detailed evidence for another process which created the eye highlighting the necessary elements which depend on the involvement of a god. Failing that, I can only assume that the process doesn't need a god at all, which is what I said.

[Shaker]

Don't know about that.

However the evolution of the eye can be explained without recourse to any input from any god. That doesn't mean that a god doesn't exist, of course, but, if you propose one, then I would ask for clear evidence of how he was involved in the process, or give your detailed evidence for another process which created the eye highlighting the necessary elements which depend on the involvement of a god. Failing that, I can only assume that the process doesn't need a god at all, which is what I said.

Indeed.

A pseudo-explanation (which doesn't even meet the criteria of a hypothesis) which has absolutely zero explanatory power is the fifth wheel on the cart - it takes up space, does absolutely nothing and can be dispensed with.

[SusanDoris]

NS #21,857
I have had to write this on a document. When I went to answer, the ‘This page can’t be displayed) notice came up again.

No, that’s not what I said at all.    My total person includes my ideas and all aspects of my personality which are given names In order that we humans can talk about them,  how they are similar and how they differ.
If you don’t know what the aesthetic side of people’s characters is, then I can’t help! Since we humans have had an aesthetic sense since our evolution – of which cave wall paintings are clear evidence– then it must have been and still is a very, probably vitally important survival trait. If you think that having an aesthetic sense needs justification when it is clearly a trait that is constantly selected for, then I am surprised. There is no need for anyone to ‘claim’ this, it remains evident in the human species.
By the way,what is it that you think I was debunking?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Don't know about that.

However the evolution of the eye can be explained without recourse to any input from any god. That doesn't mean that a god doesn't exist, of course, but, if you propose one, then I would ask for clear evidence of how he was involved in the process, or give your detailed evidence for another process which created the eye highlighting the necessary elements which depend on the involvement of a god. Failing that, I can only assume that the process doesn't need a god at all, which is what I said.

I have no trouble with nature strutting it's funky stuff Enki. Only the deistic notion of a God forbidden ever to influence nature......

What if Brian Greene is right though and we are in a simulated universe?

[Enki]

I have no trouble with nature strutting it's funky stuff Enki. Only the deistic notion of a God forbidden ever to influence nature......

What if Brian Greene is right though and we are in a simulated universe?

That's up to you. The notion of a god being forbidden ever to influence nature would, at the very least, presuppose a belief in such a god. As the idea of a deistic or theistic god holds no traction as far as I am concerned, that statement holds no significance to me.

A simulated universe is possible, of course, but I still wouldn't be enthusiastic about worshipping Brian Greene's pimply teenager in a garage as its creator.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

A simulated universe is possible, of course, but I still wouldn't be enthusiastic about worshipping Brian Greene's pimply teenager in a garage as its creator.

That's just you making God in your own image

[ippy]

Therefore no God?

Vlad, just open up YouTube and ask for Richard Dawkins explanation of the evolution of eyes, there's more than one type of eye, he explains it in the very simplest of terms, it's also interesting to follow the evolution of the brain as I can remember acquiring the ability to cook allowed us humans to gain a lot more sustenance from our food which in turn boosted our brain development, have a read about it especially R D's input on this subject.

ippy