Atheism and the Celestial Teapot!

[torridon]

First of all there is the sense of alienation abroad in the world. When Douglas Adams talked about puddles fitting holes in the ground he either misunderstood, was ignorant of or wanted to deliberately forget that religion is about dealing with alienation. Just as acquisitive materialism deals with spending one's way out of thinking about it...without actually dealing with it.

So a sense of alienation is part of the evidence.

That's just anthropomorphism.  Have astronomers studying interstellar nebulae noticed some nebulae to be alienated ? Have ecologists discovered alienated frogs in the jungles of south America ? I think you are trying to define God in terms of a projection of the needs of the human psyche which is probably fair enough from a psychologist's point of view but says nothing about the objective existential nature of God independent of this one particular species of African ape.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That's just anthropomorphism.  Have astronomers studying interstellar nebulae noticed some nebulae to be alienated ? Have ecologists discovered alienated frogs in the jungles of south America ? I think you are trying to define God in terms of a projection of the needs of the human psyche which is probably fair enough from a psychologist's point of view but says nothing about the objective existential nature of God independent of this one particular species of African ape.

Irrelevant since you are fallaciously linking scale with existence of.
People are alienated and perform actions around that alienation. This leads to the loss of species which is significant but more importantly real

Secondly God is portrayed once again in your piece as a psychological crutch for the needy.
That certainly is not the picture gleaned from the biographies of at least Christian and Jewish converts to God.

Your objection on this score is therefore blown somewhat and is itself an act of wilful ignorance.

[Walter]

do you blindly pull words out of bag like a bingo caller?

[Walter]

Define 'being' in this context, then.

Trouble is, we can say nothing about the nature of the being that would lend itself to observation and hence evidence.  We can say nothing about its location, mass, nature, speed, structure, provenance, substance or any of the properties that could be identified to characterise a being's existence.  How can a being be said to exist if it has no measurable existential properties ?

sounds a bit like you are describing dark matter

[torridon]

Irrelevant since you are fallaciously linking scale with existence of.
People are alienated and perform actions around that alienation. This leads to the loss of species which is significant but more importantly real

Eh ?

Can anyone translate Vladerian into English please ?

Secondly God is portrayed once again in your piece as a psychological crutch for the needy.
That certainly is not the picture gleaned from the biographies of at least Christian and Jewish converts to God.

Eerm, well it was you that brought up alienation, a psychological state, as a form of evidence. But that fits with my theory of God as a projection of human needs and desires; it always struck me that kindly people believe in a loving god, nasty people believe in a vengeful god, jihadists believe in a god that will reward their destruction of infidels in paradise and so forth.  People create a god to suit their individual psychological profile.

[bluehillside Retd.]

torri,

Can anyone translate Vladerian into English please ?

Ah, the age-old mystery: is the apparent gibberish of Vladdish hiding deep and cogent meaning, or is it just - well - gibberish?

Me, I reckon his relentless misunderstandings of the terms he attempts and the re-invention of words to suit his purpose (see "atheism". "philosophical materialism", "scientism" etc) is Vlad "speaking in tongues".

Oh hang on though, that is gibberish isn't it.

Oh well.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Eh ?

Can anyone translate Vladerian into English please ?

Eerm, well it was you that brought up alienation, a psychological state, as a form of evidence. But that fits with my theory of God as a projection of human needs and desires; it always struck me that kindly people believe in a loving god, nasty people believe in a vengeful god, jihadists believe in a god that will reward their destruction of infidels in paradise and so forth.  People create a god to suit their individual psychological profile.

Yes, alienation is a psychological state but the effects of it can be seen on a global scale.

In terms of projection of human needs you seem to be specially pleading A need for God or some view other than your reductionism. That unlike sex or a good meal a need for God is a special need that goes unmet and is somehow a special false need or a bad need. But hey I feel you maybe building up to a Darwinian finale.......You know the one about everything being ultimately about getting your leg over.

[torridon]

torri,

Ah, the age-old mystery: is the apparent gibberish of Vladdish hiding deep and cogent meaning, or is it just - well - gibberish?

Me, I reckon his relentless misunderstandings of the terms he attempts and the re-invention of words to suit his purpose (see "atheism". "philosophical materialism", "scientism" etc) is Vlad "speaking in tongues".

Oh hang on though, that is gibberish isn't it.

Oh well.

I'm thinking smokescreen; it's his penchant to create cover out of carefully crafted confusion; something like zebra stripes confuse lions; either way I don't know why he hasn't yet changed his moniker to Vlad the Impenetrable as I think that would suit nicely

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm thinking smokescreen; it's his penchant to create cover out of carefully crafted confusion; something like zebra stripes confuse lions;

If your thinking of yourself and Hillside as lions then I'm afraid it's got to be Lenny and Clarence.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

It is down to the people who make positive claims for things like the existence of god who have to provide the proof, not those of us who don't think it exists as there is no evidence to substantiate its existence.

So if you are claiming that there is no evidence to substantiate the existence of God, why are you asking for proof?

What exactly are you looking for?

[wigginhall]

Alienation as evidence for God?  Wow, that's a new one, and no better than the others.   It's only evidence if you first assume that there is a God, and that we have become alienated from him.   But just being alienated in the Marxist or Satrean sense might tell us something about human society and psychology.  Reaching into my creaky memory, Marx argued that relations between humans have been replaced by relations between things, which has been an influential idea.

[Maeght]

Alienation as evidence for God?

I've been struggling to work that out too.

[wigginhall]

In fact, ironically, Marx argues that religion is a result of human alienation from their own existence and from nature, so that their estrangement is mirrored in religious images;  religion 'is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality'.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Alienation as evidence for God?  Wow, that's a new one, and no better than the others.   It's only evidence if you first assume that there is a God, and that we have become alienated from him.   But just being alienated in the Marxist or Satrean sense might tell us something about human society and psychology.  Reaching into my creaky memory, Marx argued that relations between humans have been replaced by relations between things, which has been an influential idea.

But you can't become alienated from nature since we are nature. So it must be something else we are alienated against

[wigginhall]

But you can't become alienated from nature since we are nature. So it must be something else we are alienated against

Well,  capitalism is part of nature, but it tends to reduce humans to things.  Or if you take Sartre's view of 'bad faith',  humans are very capable of projecting a false image of themselves, and even believing in it.   It seems quite 'natural' to be become estranged from oneself or others; no God required.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Well,  capitalism is part of nature, but it tends to reduce humans to things.  Or if you take Sartre's view of 'bad faith',  humans are very capable of projecting a false image of themselves, and even believing in it.   It seems quite 'natural' to be become estranged from oneself or others; no God required.

Again if it is natural where is the problem with it?....You know, the problem people recognise with it.

[Walter]

Vlad
if you feel alienated have you ever thought it might be because you have illogical thought processes that aggravate people who don't?

[wigginhall]

Again if it is natural where is the problem with it?....You know, the problem people recognise with it.

Eh?  I can't believe that you are saying that the natural is good.   That is the naturalistic fallacy, or ought/is.  Plenty of natural things are lousy.   If people get depressed, it's no good saying, ah well, it's natural. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Eh?  I can't believe that you are saying that the natural is good.   That is the naturalistic fallacy, or ought/is.  Plenty of natural things are lousy.   If people get depressed, it's no good saying, ah well, it's natural.

Are you saying alienation is a problem or not Wigginhall?
If you are in what context is it a problem? Nature does not recognise the lousy nor the problematical so in a natural sense there can be no alienation. Therefore I put it to you again.......in what context is there alienation?

[Gordon]

Are you saying alienation is a problem or not Wigginhall?
If you are in what context is it a problem? Nature does not recognise the lousy nor the problematical so in a natural sense there can be no alienation. Therefore I put it to you again.......in what context is there alienation?

Correct me if I'm wrong, Vlad, but isn't this alienation idea yours?

[wigginhall]

Are you saying alienation is a problem or not Wigginhall?
If you are in what context is it a problem? Nature does not recognise the lousy nor the problematical so in a natural sense there can be no alienation. Therefore I put it to you again.......in what context is there alienation?

Hang on.  You are the one who's saying that alienation is evidence for God, not me.   So what do you mean by it? 

[Walter]

Vlad

you brought it up in the first place and its still makes no sense, so let it drop PLEASE

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Hang on.  You are the one who's saying that alienation is evidence for God, not me.   So what do you mean by it?

You seemed quite happy to go along with it for a few posts. What's your problem?

[wigginhall]

You seemed quite happy to go along with it for a few posts. What's your problem?

The problem is that you always try to reverse arguments.  You put forward a position, but then demand that someone else justify theirs.     

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The problem is that you always try to reverse arguments.  You put forward a position, but then demand that someone else justify theirs.   

No I'm perfectly consistent in that alienation is not a concept or experience drawn from nature it is something we are therefore experiencing in the supernatural........just like matter cannot be moral or immoral but humans can be super materially.