Searching for GOD...

[Gordon]

Somebody who probably went through thhe stages of God not being empirically detected and then somehow being
A bad argument was Augustine.
Having his experience of God he realised that his by now encýclopedic collection of non christian argument was merely a caseload of excuse for and evidence of dodging God.
He must have fancied himself as a dispassionate observer and tthinker but found out that as far as God is concerned that  isnt the case.

Perhaps that was just him though, Vlad, and that maybe he had an inherent predisposing weakness for thinking 'god' that won out in the end. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

A bit like people who believe they have seen mermaids must therefore believe everyone else to be mermaid-dodging 

Direct me to numerous antimermaid and amermaid sites. Mermaidethics forums conferences and rallies by celebrity New Amermaidists. Take me to massive and ancient Mermaidists temples and Cathedrals.Show me the great Mermaidian contribution to philosophy
.............demonstrate that there is so much more to a mermaid than a creature with a fascinating top half and fishes tail. Show me a mermaid or at least gospels,scripure and epistles about mermaids........
.........and then,perhaps, we can talk about equivalence.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Perhaps that was just him though, Vlad, and that maybe he had an inherent predisposing weakness for thinking 'god' that won out in the end.

You mean as well as his predisosition and famous record for dodging the christian god.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Perhaps that was just him though, Vlad,

Perhaps its most people.

[torridon]

Direct me to numerous antimermaid and amermaid sites. Mermaidethics forums conferences and rallies by celebrity New Amermaidists. Take me to massive and ancient Mermaidists temples and Cathedrals.Show me the great Mermaidian contribution to philosophy
.............demonstrate that there is so much more to a mermaid than a creature with a fascinating top half and fishes tail. Show me a mermaid or at least gospels,scripure and epistles about mermaids........
.........and then,perhaps, we can talk about equivalence.

Perhaps the numbers of amermaidists would be in relation to the numbers of mermaidists.  People holding to mermaidism are few in number.  The number of myth debunkers relates to the number of myth believers.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Perhaps the numbers of amermaidists would be in relation to the numbers of mermaidists.  People holding to mermaidism are few in number.  The number of myth debunkers relates to the number of myth believers.

I think others though would argue that most people are amermaidists and I would agree.
What is more difficult to FATHOM....gettit?....are those people who express being mystified that people who are amermaidists are not also atheists.

I would have thoight the answer was obvious.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

https://youtu.be/CD96RQ1-wnY

[torridon]

Very nice, that 

[Gordon]

Perhaps its most people.

I think that perhaps most people have something that they are inherently drawn towards: a kind of personal affectation if you will.

For some it seems that sport fulfils their personal needs (doing it or watching it), I'd say motorcycles and guitars work for me (though not at the same time), and for others it could be a religion of some sort - and the suitably hooked on whatever (especially if they have been involved for many years and encouraged to participate as youngsters) will defend or rationalise their particular obsession against naysayers.

So, for me, that some consider football to be interesting, or that motorcycles are dangerous and should be avoided, or that religious beliefs are perfectly rational and can provide personal comfort, is no great surprise - but people are strange, as those well known philosophers The Doors once observed.

That some people are motorcycle-dodging is shameful - perhaps you too, Vlad, are a motor-cycle dodger (unless, of course, you are already one of us)!         

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think that perhaps most people have something that they are inherently drawn towards: a kind of personal affectation if you will.

For some it seems that sport fulfils their personal needs (doing it or watching it), I'd say motorcycles and guitars work for me (though not at the same time), and for others it could be a religion of some sort - and the suitably hooked on whatever (especially if they have been involved for many years and encouraged to participate as youngsters) will defend or rationalise their particular obsession against naysayers.

So, for me, that some consider football to be interesting, or that motorcycles are dangerous and should be avoided, or that religious beliefs are perfectly rational and can provide personal comfort, is no great surprise - but people are strange, as those well known philosophers The Doors once observed.

That some people are motorcycle-dodging is shameful - perhaps you too, Vlad, are a motor-cycle dodger (unless, of course, you are already one of us)!       

With all due respect the faith hobby analogy is fairly week.
You say you are a motor cycle hobbyist and yet that is obviously set against your atheism which is something altogether more serious.
I have hobbies Gordon and although I dont share yours mine are distantly related to yours being partially mechanical in nature.

[Sriram]

Said Sriram, (ironically) dissecting and labelling humanity into two types. In fact, for years I tended towards your 'zoom-out' type of mind-set, which certainly provided what I thought were 'revelations' at the time, though on further investigation these proved to be inconclusive and no great guide to life. Aldous Huxley attempted the kind of synthesis you are talking about in his "Perennial Philosophy". This really ends up being simply vacuous.
Now, I won't deny that it is just possible that there is a "Somebodaddy deity/spiritual something" beneath all the "Nobodaddy" deities of the world, but these all differ so markedly in kind that I don't see much possibility of universal agreement. Deities can be immanent, transcendent or both. They can be prescriptive and interventionist, or simply distant and unconcerned. Or they can be the equivalent of the Oz aborigine Tikalick the Frog.

However, your analogy of zoom-in and zoom-out is useful. I'd express it as wide-angle lens and microscope. The trouble with the former is a mind becomes so 'spaced-out' as to be useless at ordinary social interaction and practicality: the trouble with the latter is the 'locked microscope effect', whereby a mind is unable to function except in the often trivial analysis of minutiae. Our minds need to be trained to move smoothly between both functions.

Its not about some big daddy up there. You must get rid of the Christian baggage.  It is about developing ourselves in such a way as to reach higher levels of consciousness. There is another term for this. Getting civilized! We are already managing to achieve this to  an extent.  So, the idea isn't as alien to the Western world as some might think.

People with a Zoom-Out mind can manage to understand the Zoom-In thinking to an extent, but the other way around seems to be very difficult. Putting ideas together and seeing similarities is not as easy as it sounds. It is not just about collating lots of information together. It is about a change in perspective.   

[Gordon]

With all due respect the faith hobby analogy is fairly week.
You say you are a motor cycle hobbyist and yet that is obviously set against your atheism which is something altogether more serious.
I have hobbies Gordon and although I dont share yours mine are distantly related to yours being partially mechanical in nature.

Don't be silly: my motorcycling has nothing to do with my atheism any more than my liking for marmalade has anything to do with my atheism: and who says that atheism is more serious than motorcycling?

I think that one could indeed equate faith with a hobby: getting together with like-minded enthusiasts, having special traditions and even special clothes and bespoke terminology: golf enthusiasts show similar traits.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Don't be silly: my motorcycling has nothing to do with my atheism any more than my liking for marmalade has anything to do with my atheism: and who says that atheism is more serious than motorcycling?

I think that one could indeed equate faith with a hobby: getting together with like-minded enthusiasts, having special traditions and even special clothes and bespoke terminology: golf enthusiasts show similar traits.

Where did you get the idea that I linked your atheism with your motor cycling?

If you are saying that Motorcycling is more important than your world view then Im sorry you are the most shallow of people......

Besides...you know what they say about motorbikes...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Its not about some big daddy up there. You must get rid of the Christian baggage.

Steady on old chap thats the kind of baggage stopping me from believing in the caste system.

[Gordon]

Where did you get the idea that I linked your atheism with your motor cycling?

It was where you said 'You say you are a motor cycle hobbyist and yet that is obviously set against your atheism which is something altogether more serious' - where I'd say your 'set against' choice of word indicates you are in this sentence linking motorcycling with atheism by comparing them when you opined that the latter is 'altogether more serious' than the former.

Perhaps you didn't take the trouble to actually read what you wrote before posting.

If you are saying that Motorcycling is more important than your world view then Im sorry you are the most shallow of people......

I'm not: it was your comparison, and I was just asking on what authority you were able to claim that atheism is more serious than motorcycling: if course, if you are a motorcycle-dodger you'll never know, even though motorcycles definitely do exist and are easily accessed (with sufficient dosh and a suitable license). 

Besides...you know what they say about motorbikes...

Yep: they say bikes are great fun, that the noisier they are the more fun they are, and also that the sheer joy of blasting away from traffic lights whilst leaving numpties in pretendy sport-cars well behind is a delight that never fails to delight - oh and remember to put petrol in the tank, and always be wary of Honda Jazz drivers. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It was where you said 'You say you are a motor cycle hobbyist and yet that is obviously set against your atheism which is something altogether more serious' - where I'd say your 'set against' choice of word indicates you are in this sentence linking motorcycling with atheism by comparing them when you opined that the latter is 'altogether more serious' than the former.

Perhaps you didn't take the trouble to actually read what you wrote before posting.

I'm not: it was your comparison, and I was just asking on what authority you were able to claim that atheism is more serious than motorcycling: if course, if you are a motorcycle-dodger you'll never know, even though motorcycles definitely do exist and are easily accessed (with sufficient dosh and a suitable license). 

Yep: they say bikes are great fun, that the noisier they are the more fun they are, and also that the sheer joy of blasting away from traffic lights whilst leaving numpties in pretendy sport-cars well behind is a delight that never fails to delight - oh and remember to put petrol in the tank, and always be wary of Honda Jazz drivers.

How does the phrase set against mean linked. It doesnt and the clue is in the word against in other words motor cycling is your hobby and atheism is not

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yep: they say bikes are great fun, that the noisier they are the more fun they are, and also that the sheer joy of blasting away from traffic lights whilst leaving numpties in pretendy sport-cars well behind is a delight that never fails to delight - oh and remember to put petrol in the tank, and always be wary of Honda Jazz drivers.

Whatever floats your boat.

[Gordon]

How does the phrase set against mean linked. It doesnt and the clue is in the word against in other words motor cycling is your hobby and atheism is not

If I ask you 'how much to you like golf as set against football' am I not inviting you to make a comparison, and would your reply not involve you making a comparison?

[Dicky Underpants]

Its not about some big daddy up there. You must get rid of the Christian baggage. 

And you need not to take things so literally. I had qualified those odd phrases with the words "a spiritual something", which should have given you some idea of what I was getting at. In fact, the first expression "Old Nobodaddy" comes from William Blake, who used it to directly refute the idea of "a big daddy up there". But Blake was no atheist - and in fact most of his poetry is concerned with developing what you would call "the higher regions of consciousness". Likewise, the second expression "Somebodaddy" comes from George Bernard Shaw, who was using it to suggest that there might be some kind of impersonal "life-force" (akin perhaps to the Hindu prana) which was the source and sustainer of all living things. In this, he was doing exactly what you have been advocating  - to find underlying common links between the religious belief systems of the world. Aldous Huxley (as I said) also advocated this kind of 'ecumenism'.
I have parted company with these ways of thinking now. But I'm a firm believer in 'getting civilised' - as I suspect are most members of this forum. What I haven't lost faith in is the power of the arts - particularly great music - to 'raise consciousness', as you might put it. I would say that the performing arts are very much the West's form of yoga, and may be more valuable to us here (being home-grown) than trying the whole-sale adoption of systems of thought which have a long period of development elsewhere. We can all learn from each other, but 'changes in perspective' have to come about organically. And, if I may say so, you're doing your own bit to be divisive by partitioning off human beings in the way you seem to be. If those of a more scientific and analytical bent are 'doing it wrong', then perhaps a phrase of William Blake's might be useful "An error must be taken to its extreme before it can be combatted". Maybe that's a bit extreme in itself in these dangerous times, but people have to start from where they are.

[Sriram]

And you need not to take things so literally. I had qualified those odd phrases with the words "a spiritual something", which should have given you some idea of what I was getting at. In fact, the first expression "Old Nobodaddy" comes from William Blake, who used it to directly refute the idea of "a big daddy up there". But Blake was no atheist - and in fact most of his poetry is concerned with developing what you would call "the higher regions of consciousness". Likewise, the second expression "Somebodaddy" comes from George Bernard Shaw, who was using it to suggest that there might be some kind of impersonal "life-force" (akin perhaps to the Hindu prana) which was the source and sustainer of all living things. In this, he was doing exactly what you have been advocating  - to find underlying common links between the religious belief systems of the world. Aldous Huxley (as I said) also advocated this kind of 'ecumenism'.
I have parted company with these ways of thinking now. But I'm a firm believer in 'getting civilised' - as I suspect are most members of this forum. What I haven't lost faith in is the power of the arts - particularly great music - to 'raise consciousness', as you might put it. I would say that the performing arts are very much the West's form of yoga, and may be more valuable to us here (being home-grown) than trying the whole-sale adoption of systems of thought which have a long period of development elsewhere. We can all learn from each other, but 'changes in perspective' have to come about organically. And, if I may say so, you're doing your own bit to be divisive by partitioning off human beings in the way you seem to be. If those of a more scientific and analytical bent are 'doing it wrong', then perhaps a phrase of William Blake's might be useful "An error must be taken to its extreme before it can be combatted". Maybe that's a bit extreme in itself in these dangerous times, but people have to start from where they are.

Regardless of how we 'understand' such matters, what is important is that we progress and develop in line with such subtle forces. Even if we don't understand gravity we nevertheless need to live in line with its force.

Being 'civilized' is what modern people advocate..which is fine. And most major religions and spiritualists advocate the same things in a different way.

'God' is both a carrot and a bogey man that helps us get there.

[Alan Burns]

Regardless of how we 'understand' such matters, what is important is that we progress and develop in line with such subtle forces. Even if we don't understand gravity we nevertheless need to live in line with its force.

Being 'civilized' is what modern people advocate..which is fine. And most major religions and spiritualists advocate the same things in a different way.

'God' is both a carrot and a bogey man that helps us get there.

But there is far more to the reality and purpose behind our existence than the aspiration to "be civilised".  I believe the awareness of our spiritual dimension here on earth gives us just a glimpse of the true reality which is our ultimate destination.  We cannot discern purpose and meaning behind our existence using our own limited mental faculties alone.  So we look to divine revelations from prophets and scripture, using our metal faculties to pray for discernment to distinguish man made attempts to seek God from God's own revelation.

There are a multitude of human attempts to seek ultimate reality, purpose and meaning, but there is only one truth, and we only have only one lifetime to find it.

[wigginhall]

Why is there always meaning behind our life, in religious frameworks?  This idea of behind seems phoney to me.  It suggests again that God plays hide and seek.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

But there is far more to the reality and purpose behind our existence than the aspiration to "be civilised".

So you assert. Of course to show purpose you’d first have to demonstrate something to decide on what the purpose would be, but no doubt you’ll get around to that eventually. 

I believe the awareness of our spiritual dimension here on earth gives us just a glimpse of the true reality which is our ultimate destination.  We cannot discern purpose and meaning behind our existence using our own limited mental faculties alone.  So we look to divine revelations from prophets and scripture, using our metal faculties to pray for discernment to distinguish man made attempts to seek God from God's own revelation.

A belief you are of course entitle entitled to hold, just as I am entitled to hold my belief about what leprechauns like best for breakfast. Provided neither of us is daft enough to overreach into thinking our respective faith beliefs must also be true for anyone else though, there’s no harm done I suppose. 

There are a multitude of human attempts to seek ultimate reality, purpose and meaning, but there is only one truth, and we only have only one lifetime to find it.

Oh dear. Not that many people in my experience would be so arrogant as to think they could find an “ultimate truth” even is such a thing existed, let alone that there is ultimate purpose and meaning rather than just the purpose and meaning we find for ourselves in our obscure and deeply insignificant corner of the universe.

Apart from all that though…

[Stranger]

We cannot discern purpose and meaning behind our existence using our own limited mental faculties alone.  So we look to divine revelations from prophets and scripture, using our metal faculties to pray for discernment to distinguish man made attempts to seek God from God's own revelation.

A recipe for self-deception. I'll ask again: why would a god that has an important message for us play stupid games of hide-and-seek? Why isn't it obvious to everyone?

[Alan Burns]

A recipe for self-deception. I'll ask again: why would a god that has an important message for us play stupid games of hide-and-seek? Why isn't it obvious to everyone?

There are a multitude of human ideas about how God should do things.
But we can't aspire to know the mind of God.