What's it all about...............Alfie

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think it is high time to go back to the question that propelled us to Religionethics in the first place......................What is IT......ALL about?

Of course I realise that not all may have been called to that question .........that there are gate keepers who think we should not bother with such a question and gate it.

And others who think there is no It or no all that the world is just pieces with no unification possible.

What then is people's position on the question....."what is it all about"?

[ekim]

It might be to change the question to 'what am I all about?' i.e Know thyself.

[Sebastian Toe]

What then is people's position on the question....."what is it all about"?

What's yours?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What's yours?

Goddidit.................but what he did and how he did it is for the finding out.

Any chance of you getting on the stage of contributing or are you feeling a little funny?

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

Goddidit.................but what he did and how he did it is for the finding out.

Any chance of you getting on the stage of contributing or are you feeling a little funny?

Isn't Goddidit more of response to the question, why is there something rather than nothing?

Doesn't seem to make much sense in answer to a what's it all about type question.

[Aruntraveller]

At the risk of being chunsternated I'll enter my thoughts.

I think that what I am looking for, if we are talking about R&E (because the board does, I suspect, fulfil several different needs in some if not all posters) is the answer to the big 'why' and 'What' questions.

You know 'Why are we here?' 'What is our purpose?' 'Do we have a purpose?' (Oh look a Do question).

And Goddidit just doesn't cut it for me.

The reasons it doesn't cut it are many and varied, but the main one as far as I am concerned is that God is far too anthropomorphic for my liking. Ah but you'll say - that is the only way we can comprehend him.

I reject that - maybe at one time in our history. But not now when our knowledge has expanded so much in every single area you can name - I think the human race is able to understand many more things in the abstract than they once had the ability to do.

The human imagination is a powerful tool, and the sheer breadth and depth of it represented throughout all cultures; leads me to the conclusion that religions are just that; the human imagination trying to make sense of our existence. However to cling to the outmoded thoughts of religions created two thousand years ago shows a perversity in the face of facts that testifies to that other thing required for the enjoyment of literature, films, drama and that is suspension of disbelief. I am willing to do that for art - but for religion, which potentially has much more far-reaching consequences I am not prepared to do it.

[Sebastian Toe]

 the question....."what is it all about"?

Goddidit.

That's it? Wow, deep and insightful as ever.

Any chance of you getting on the stage of contributing or are you feeling a little funny?

Well it's obvious that you got on stage  - after it wore off!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That's it? Wow, deep and insightful as ever.

No....there's the bit you editted out.

[torridon]

I think it is high time to go back to the question that propelled us to Religionethics in the first place......................What is IT......ALL about?

Of course I realise that not all may have been called to that question .........that there are gate keepers who think we should not bother with such a question and gate it.

And others who think there is no It or no all that the world is just pieces with no unification possible.

What then is people's position on the question....."what is it all about"?

Thermodynamics.

Universe goes bang, gravity induces islands of complexity, life is the process that breaks down complex sugars in keeping with the overall universal tendency to heat death.

Not a very anthropocentric view, granted, but that is the sort of conclusion that looms when we stop thinking it is all about us.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

At the risk of being chunsternated I'll enter my thoughts.

I think that what I am looking for, if we are talking about R&E (because the board does, I suspect, fulfil several different needs in some if not all posters) is the answer to the big 'why' and 'What' questions.

You know 'Why are we here?' 'What is our purpose?' 'Do we have a purpose?' (Oh look a Do question).

And Goddidit just doesn't cut it for me.

The reasons it doesn't cut it are many and varied, but the main one as far as I am concerned is that God is far too anthropomorphic for my liking. Ah but you'll say - that is the only way we can comprehend him.

I reject that - maybe at one time in our history. But not now when our knowledge has expanded so much in every single area you can name - I think the human race is able to understand many more things in the abstract than they once had the ability to do.

The human imagination is a powerful tool, and the sheer breadth and depth of it represented throughout all cultures; leads me to the conclusion that religions are just that; the human imagination trying to make sense of our existence. However to cling to the outmoded thoughts of religions created two thousand years ago shows a perversity in the face of facts that testifies to that other thing required for the enjoyment of literature, films, drama and that is suspension of disbelief. I am willing to do that for art - but for religion, which potentially has much more far-reaching consequences I am not prepared to do it.

Now that's a post.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Isn't Goddidit more of response to the question, why is there something rather than nothing?

Doesn't seem to make much sense in answer to a what's it all about type question.

Yes, I kind of half put it in because it was Sebastian Toe and I like to shock him now and then.

I admit that a statement such as Goddidit as an answer to whats it all about? is in the same kind of category as nature did it.

My line of distinction though in this affair is not atheist vs Theist but those who think ''what's it all about'' to be a valid question and those who don't. Those who think there is an ''all'' or an ''it'' and those who don't and are ''non  newtonian' on the question of the universe.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Thermodynamics.

Universe goes bang, gravity induces islands of complexity, life is the process that breaks down complex sugars in keeping with the overall universal tendency to heat death.

Not a very anthropocentric view, granted, but that is the sort of conclusion that looms when we stop thinking it is all about us.

As usual Torridon, the epitome of a ruthless reductionism.
I'd take my hat off to you if it hadn't already been reduced to something more ,,,,reduced.

[torridon]

As usual Torridon, the epitome of a ruthless reductionism.
I'd take my hat off to you if it hadn't already been reduced to something more ,,,,reduced.

I like to get to the bottom of things; everything else is just stamp collecting 

[Gonnagle]

Dear Vlad,

I admit that a statement such as Goddidit as an answer to whats it all about? is in the same kind of category as nature did it.

God is nature, God is supernatural, but only if you think nature is super.

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed."

Nature, the simple fact that it all works, mind blowing!! and as science advances the more mind blowing it becomes.

God did do it, the how? the why? I will leave that to the scientists.

Dear Torridon,

Why did the Universe go bang?

Dear Trent,

'What is our purpose?' 'Do we have a purpose?

Nice to see an atheist asking this question, "just is" is for me a cop out.

Gonnagle.

[wigginhall]

At the moment, I'm typing this, then I'm off to t'shops for some dinner.  Is there supposed to be some 'it' or some 'all' which I should be worried about?   It sounds too intellectual to me.  I'm happy with the details of life. 

[Nearly Sane]

At the moment, I'm typing this, then I'm off to t'shops for some dinner.  Is there supposed to be some 'it' or some 'all' which I should be worried about?   It sounds too intellectual to me.  I'm happy with the details of life.

when I was younger, so much younger than today. I liked the big questions, lots of whys and hows, and who won the FA Cup in 1927, but I 'm with wigginhall, as I age those things seem superfluous, a remnant of an arrogant youth, not really seeking knowledge but thinking I already knew it. Now the world has shrunk to the quotidian and seems so much more meaningful for its small absurdity.

[wigginhall]

when I was younger, so much younger than today. I liked the big questions, lots of whys and hows, and who won the FA Cup in 1927, but o'm with wigginhall, as I age those things seem superfluous, a remnant of an arrogant youth, not really seeking knowledge but thinking I already knew it. Now the world has shrunk to the quotidian and seems so much more meaningful for its small absurdity.

Very good point about thinking I already knew it.  I've given up really.   A good Zen story - a Western visitor to a monastery is brilliant at solving koans, but his teacher says, 'interesting, but not Zen'.    Eventually, he gets it wrong, and his teacher says, yes, true Zen.   As far as I can see, in my limited experience, he made two errors: thinking that there was a problem to be solved, and thinking that he'd found the solution.   But human, all too human. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

At the moment, I'm typing this, then I'm off to t'shops for some dinner.  Is there supposed to be some 'it' or some 'all' which I should be worried about?   It sounds too intellectual to me.  I'm happy with the details of life.

Are you therefore sneering at those whom for whom getting the details of life isn't enough?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Very good point about thinking I already knew it.  I've given up really.   A good Zen story - a Western visitor to a monastery is brilliant at solving koans, but his teacher says, 'interesting, but not Zen'.    Eventually, he gets it wrong, and his teacher says, yes, true Zen.   As far as I can see, in my limited experience, he made two errors: thinking that there was a problem to be solved, and thinking that he'd found the solution.   But human, all too human.

Is the word ''Zen'' being used shamanically here?

[Nearly Sane]

Very good point about thinking I already knew it.  I've given up really.   A good Zen story - a Western visitor to a monastery is brilliant at solving koans, but his teacher says, 'interesting, but not Zen'.    Eventually, he gets it wrong, and his teacher says, yes, true Zen.   As far as I can see, in my limited experience, he made two errors: thinking that there was a problem to be solved, and thinking that he'd found the solution.   But human, all too human.

When I was about 15, a couple of friends and came up with with Suss Law (the pun dates this pretty precisely) which was you only have it sussed when you know you can't have it sussed. For a group of the acne brigade, I still don't think that it's that bad but it once again has that mythical 'it' appearing as does the thread title

[wigginhall]

When I was about 15, a couple of friends and came up with with Suss Law (the pun dates this pretty precisely) which was you only have it sussed when you know you can't have it sussed. For a group of the acne brigade, I still don't think that it's that bad but it once again has that mythical 'it' appearing as does the thread title

Yes, it's the 'it' that makes people miserable.  Byron Katie has a ton of stuff about this, but even then, she has a kind of agenda. 

[wigginhall]

Are you therefore sneering at those whom for whom getting the details of life isn't enough?

Are you therefore trolling?

[SqueakyVoice]

The universe is a competition between Arrgleflotsam The Great and Hignu The Ocelot to see whether Arrgleflotsam can create the more black holes than Hignu can create species of beetles.

Hignu's losing atm, but Arrgleflotsam hasn't fully reckoned on his black holes collapsing into one another yet...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

When I was about 15, a couple of friends and came up with with Suss Law (the pun dates this pretty precisely) which was you only have it sussed when you know you can't have it sussed. For a group of the acne brigade, I still don't think that it's that bad but it once again has that mythical 'it' appearing as does the thread title

When did you find that ''it'' was mythical rather than something you didn't want to bother about?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Are you therefore trolling?

Is that a serene Zen response?