Searching for GOD...

[Leonard James]

My reason tells me nothing of the sort, Len.

Then your reasoning ability is very different from mine! I can't believe something and not believe it at the same time.

[torridon]

But some people are just made mystical. I wasn't taught to be pagan, or pantheist, or animist, or anything remotely like that. Until I became a pagan my mum believed paganism was akin to satanism.

I realise that my brain might be wired a bit squiffy. Someone suggested I might have a type of synaesthesia. I realise none of this has to originate without myself.

But you have to realise that not only can I reason my way out of it, I don't actually want to. I like my living spirituality. Why would I want to change it?

 

Bravo

[wigginhall]

LJ and Shaker

Not only will people of different faiths living in the UK with its mainly fair and open society realise its benefits, but also the real and provable excitement of usable technology, evidence of probes landing on comets and so on will surely make younger people understand that that is far, far more exciting than chasing the ever-elusive shadows of inexplicable, mystical stuff.

That's true, and hopefully it will negate the nonsense they are taught to believe.

But some people are just made mystical. I wasn't taught to be pagan, or pantheist, or animist, or anything remotely like that. Until I became a pagan my mum believed paganism was akin to satanism.

I realise that my brain might be wired a bit squiffy. Someone suggested I might have a type of synaesthesia. I realise none of this has to originate without myself.

But you have to realise that not only can I reason my way out of it, I don't actually want to. I like my living spirituality. Why would I want to change it?

 

Me too, babes.  If someone starts to tell me to use reason and technology more, yawn.  Or sometimes, fuck off, stop seeing me as an image of you.

[Ricky Spanish]

I've heard that we, well not we, we. But the We that matter are searching for:

Gold.

Oil.

And Dumb ass cunts who will believe anything their preachers, rabbis and imans shove down their throats because they are as thick as pig-shit and just chant the mantra to prove it to us lesser mortals that we are inferior...

Oh hang on, I might have got that the wrong way round!!

[Rhiannon]

My reason tells me nothing of the sort, Len.

Then your reasoning ability is very different from mine! I can't believe something and not believe it at the same time.

Neither can I.

I can however experience things without knowing what their source is.

[Rhiannon]

LJ and Shaker

Not only will people of different faiths living in the UK with its mainly fair and open society realise its benefits, but also the real and provable excitement of usable technology, evidence of probes landing on comets and so on will surely make younger people understand that that is far, far more exciting than chasing the ever-elusive shadows of inexplicable, mystical stuff.

That's true, and hopefully it will negate the nonsense they are taught to believe.

But some people are just made mystical. I wasn't taught to be pagan, or pantheist, or animist, or anything remotely like that. Until I became a pagan my mum believed paganism was akin to satanism.

I realise that my brain might be wired a bit squiffy. Someone suggested I might have a type of synaesthesia. I realise none of this has to originate without myself.

But you have to realise that not only can I reason my way out of it, I don't actually want to. I like my living spirituality. Why would I want to change it?

 

Me too, babes.  If someone starts to tell me to use reason and technology more, yawn.  Or sometimes, fuck off, stop seeing me as an image of you.

Yep, absolutely. Like there's a reality we can all be reasonable about.

[Leonard James]

My reason tells me nothing of the sort, Len.

Then your reasoning ability is very different from mine! I can't believe something and not believe it at the same time.

Neither can I.

I can however experience things without knowing what their source is.

Why on earth should you think their source could be anything other than you own brain? That is what I can't take in.

[Alan Burns]

I think you are mixing up two rather different ideas here - creativity and design. 

Most human creativity is really just cross-fertillisation of ideas from one media to another, such as when Darwin came up with his big idea, it was by applying thinking from a different discipline (economics) to the natural world; composers take inspiration from literature, and so forth.  But further to that it is intriguing to consider that quantum effects are increasingly becoming understood to have some signature at the level of biological systems and so perhaps maybe human creativity owes in some part to some level of quantum indeterminacy.

Intelligent design, on the other hand, implies a deliberate, guided, fashioning of something, which is in stark contrast to what any quantum indeterminacy would give you, which is essentially a random, unpredictable quality, not at all what you want if you are trying to design something particular.

I fully agree that intelligent design can't be brought about by something which is driven from a random unpredictable source.  Intelligent design is driven by a desire to reach a specific goal, which requires specific deliberate steps to reach that goal.  If quantum indeterminancy was truly random, it would not be the driving force, but indeterminate just means there is no discernable cause.  There could well be a cause which is not random, but just can't be discerned.

[Leonard James]

There could well be a cause which is not random, but just can't be discerned.

Quite! It can't be discerned, so we can't know anything about it. All we can truthfully say is that we don't know the cause at the moment.

[Sassy]

There's always some excuse of one sort or another isn't there, Alan? This time the assertion treadmill cranks out that there are alleged witnesses on camera but curiously never any of these so-called events they're supposed to have witnessed.

Which in the age of small, portable HD camcorders and - even more - camera phones in almost every pocket is somewhat suspicious to me.

Then there is always the fact you have a strong aversion to any truth that does not support your own beliefs...

If Jesus Christ, walked up to you and introduced himself, then performed many miracles in front of your eyes you would hate it and deny any truth to it... Wake up to yourself and smell the coffee... If you can admit to yourself what coffee smells like...

[Sassy]

There's always some excuse of one sort or another isn't there, Alan? This time the assertion treadmill cranks out that there are alleged witnesses on camera but curiously never any of these so-called events they're supposed to have witnessed.

Which in the age of small, portable HD camcorders and - even more - camera phones in almost every pocket is somewhat suspicious to me.

Oh that's easily answered! Miracles don't show up on camera because they are supernatural. 

I think you will find that it is vampires that do not show up on cameras...

[Alan Burns]

LJ and Shaker

Not only will people of different faiths living in the UK with its mainly fair and open society realise its benefits, but also the real and provable excitement of usable technology, evidence of probes landing on comets and so on will surely make younger people understand that that is far, far more exciting than chasing the ever-elusive shadows of inexplicable, mystical stuff.

That's true, and hopefully it will negate the nonsense they are taught to believe.

I have always had a fascination of science and technology, but I can verify that it all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder and awe of knowing God.

[Sassy]

Funny how so called 'miracles' never have any proper verification!

Well how do you describe the events in your old house?

What verification is there that you didn't write on the wall?

[Sriram]

My reason tells me nothing of the sort, Len.

Then your reasoning ability is very different from mine! I can't believe something and not believe it at the same time.

Neither can I.

I can however experience things without knowing what their source is.

Why on earth should you think their source could be anything other than you own brain? That is what I can't take in.

How you can attribute everything to the brain ...I can't understand.  The brain is just a piece of flesh and is a part of the human system. It did not create the human system.

DNA is responsible for the creation of the brain and other systems.  What is responsible for the existence of DNA and how does it have the capacity of creating such a complex system, we don't know. 

The only explanation you could possibly have is 'chance' and evolutionary processes...which again explains 'how' something happens but not 'why'.  The first cause is still unknown.

I believe that just as complex computers have evolved from simple systems through the intervention of human intelligence....so also the human biology has evolved through the intervention of some superior intelligence that works from within our minds.

We may not  know what this superior intelligence is and we might use anthropomorphic models to understand it......but that does not eliminate the existence of this unknown elemental intelligence.

[Leonard James]

I have always had a fascination of science and technology, but I can verify that it all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder and awe of knowing God.

Not so! It all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder of believing you know God.

[Leonard James]

How you can attribute everything to the brain ...I can't understand.  The brain is just a piece of flesh and is a part of the human system. It did not create the human system.

Because the brain is the seat of everything we sense. We have no other organ to perceive with.

DNA is responsible for the creation of the brain and other systems.  What is responsible for the existence of DNA and how does it have the capacity of creating such a complex system, we don't know. 

Science has a very good knowledge of how it all came about perfectly naturally, even though the precise details are not yet known.

The only explanation you could possibly have is 'chance' and evolutionary processes...which again explains 'how' something happens but not 'why'.  The first cause is still unknown.

Quite! So don't let's waste time in guesses, let's look for it scientifically.

I believe that just as complex computers have evolved from simple systems through the intervention of human intelligence....so also the human biology has evolved through the intervention of some superior intelligence that works from within our minds.

I know you do ... but there is no reason to believe your belief is anything more than the normal functioning of the brain.

We may not  know what this superior intelligence is and we might use anthropomorphic models to understand it......but that does not eliminate the existence of this unknown elemental intelligence.

I would never be so daft as to deny the possibility of such an intelligence, and will obviously accept it when I am presented with any reliable evidence for it.

[Gordon]

How you can attribute everything to the brain ...I can't understand.  The brain is just a piece of flesh and is a part of the human system. It did not create the human system.

So you don't understand - so an 'I don't know' would be a sufficient and reasonable position to take.

DNA is responsible for the creation of the brain and other systems.  What is responsible for the existence of DNA and how does it have the capacity of creating such a complex system, we don't know.

Perhaps 'responsible' is a loaded term in this context, if it is being used to imply purpose, but 'don't know' is fine.   

The only explanation you could possibly have is 'chance' and evolutionary processes...which again explains 'how' something happens but not 'why'.  The first cause is still unknown.

Not sure that 'why' is valid question here.

I believe that just as complex computers have evolved from simple systems through the intervention of human intelligence....so also the human biology has evolved through the intervention of some superior intelligence that works from within our minds.

We may not  know what this superior intelligence is and we might use anthropomorphic models to understand it......but that does not eliminate the existence of this unknown elemental intelligence.

Argument from incredulity and ignorance. 

[Alan Burns]

I have always had a fascination of science and technology, but I can verify that it all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder and awe of knowing God.

Not so! It all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder of believing you know God.

Len, God is real.  More real than anything I perceive through my human senses.  God has made Himself known by becoming part of me.  You will most likely write this off as total delusion, but there are many others with the same insight.

[Rhiannon]

AB, that is how it seems to you. It feels very real, I know. But it isn't something you can know objectively. It's not something that exists outside of you beyond what is your own experience of reality.

[Leonard James]

I have always had a fascination of science and technology, but I can verify that it all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder and awe of knowing God.

Not so! It all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder of believing you know God.

Len, God is real.  More real than anything I perceive through my human senses.  God has made Himself known by becoming part of me.  You will most likely write this off as total delusion, but there are many others with the same insight.

And does that never give you cause to wonder why so very few people (compared to those that don't) experience that feeling?

[Alan Burns]

Argument from incredulity and ignorance.

Gordon,
It seems to be a common trait for many posters on this forum to reply to something they disagree with by applying a trivial label like the one you use above instead of offering an intelligently thought out, logical response.  I know you wrote other responses within your post, but it does not add anything to your arguments by applying these meaningless labels.

[Alan Burns]

I have always had a fascination of science and technology, but I can verify that it all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder and awe of knowing God.

Not so! It all pales into insignificance compared to the wonder of believing you know God.

Len, God is real.  More real than anything I perceive through my human senses.  God has made Himself known by becoming part of me.  You will most likely write this off as total delusion, but there are many others with the same insight.

And does that never give you cause to wonder why so very few people (compared to those that don't) experience that feeling?

I just wish that you, and indeed everyone else, could experience it too. 

[Shaker]

Actually Alan those "meaningless labels" do have meanings - rather concrete and specific meanings for certain modes of fallacious thinking. That's why terms were created and why people continue to employ them - because people can still identify the same irrational fallacies being wheeled out by people such as yourself.

I can understand that you dislike being informed that so much of what you trot out is sheer fallacy, but don't try and wriggle out of it by claiming that when people accurately identify your fallacies it's "meaningless." It isn't.

[Gordon]

Argument from incredulity and ignorance.

Gordon,
It seems to be a common trait for many posters on this forum to reply to something they disagree with by applying a trivial label like the one you use above instead of offering an intelligently thought out, logical response.  I know you wrote other responses within your post, but it does not add anything to your arguments by applying these meaningless labels.

I'd say that citing fallacies to point out instances of poor or absent reasoning saves adding to the meaningless waffle that we sometimes see here, such as in the paragraph that I was responded to when making the above comment.

[Alan Burns]

Argument from incredulity and ignorance.

Gordon,
It seems to be a common trait for many posters on this forum to reply to something they disagree with by applying a trivial label like the one you use above instead of offering an intelligently thought out, logical response.  I know you wrote other responses within your post, but it does not add anything to your arguments by applying these meaningless labels.

I'd say that citing fallacies to point out instances of poor or absent reasoning saves adding to the meaningless waffle that we sometimes see here, such as in the paragraph that I was responded to when making the above comment.

I just felt that Sriram wrote an intelligent well thought out observation that deserved a better response.