How The Modern World Makes Us Mentally Ill

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The last paragraph in particular rules out the 'high stakes' you keep on wittering about.

Not really since you have ruled out all or any spiritual experience without actually putting yourself in line for it.

I don't think your last paragraph at all pertinent. If you think there may be a god and avoid doing anything about it then you are taking a gamble. There is no more to be said.

I think also you are overlooking procrastination at embarking on something that may result in an encounter or a change of mind.

[Stranger]

Not really since you have ruled out all or any spiritual experience without actually putting yourself in line for it.

In what way could any sort of experience (let alone a subjective one) change the logic of what I said?

I don't think your last paragraph at all pertinent.

The first three words would seem to sum things up.

If you think there may be a god and avoid doing anything about it then you are taking a gamble. There is no more to be said.

Back to the mantra. 

Ignoring fantastical propositions that are supplied without any evidence or sound reasoning is a necessary part of sanity, let alone rationality. Yes, if said proposition is unfalsifiable, then it cannot (by definition) be 100% ruled out, so there is a (very small) chance that it is true and you can call that a 'gamble' if you want. However, it's a sound and rational one and one that is absolutely necessary to avoid being so open minded that your brain falls out (as somebody said).

I think also you are overlooking procrastination at embarking on something that may result in an encounter or a change of mind.

I think you're trying to convince yourself that other people are avoiding something....

[Sriram]

When buddhists go looking for the inner self, they find it is not there.  I think they are closer to the truth than most.

You are  cherry picking now!!    I can explain the Buddhist experience if you are interested in a more involved discussion on spirituality sometime.

[Rhiannon]

You are  cherry picking now!!    I can explain the Buddhist experience if you are interested in a more involved discussion on spirituality sometime.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta

[SusanDoris]

I know enough to know that evolution does not proceed according to any plan or purpose.

Thank you. could you then go a bit further and say how you think evolution 'proceeds'?

Edited:

If someone states that they don't see a purpose, how do you get the impression that they do?

From the content of other posts, and  also being subjective.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think you're trying to convince yourself that other people are avoiding something....

If someone thinks a god might exist but refuses to take it any further is inescapably avoiding something. That would come out as hopping from one excuse to another.

Pascals own view from his pensees.

''What say [the unbelievers] then? "Do we not see," say they, "that the brutes live and die like men, and Turks like Christians? They have their ceremonies, their prophets, their doctors, their saints, their monks, like us," etc. If you care but little to know the truth, that is enough to leave you in repose. But if you desire with all your heart to know it, it is not enough; look at it in detail. That would be sufficient for a question in philosophy; but not here, where everything is at stake. And yet, after a superficial reflection of this kind, we go to amuse ourselves, etc. Let us inquire of this same religion whether it does not give a reason for this obscurity; perhaps it will teach it to us''

[Gordon]

If someone thinks a god might exist but refuses to take it any further is inescapably avoiding something. That would come out as hopping from one excuse to another.

You don't seem to read what others have written: to date I have clearly stated that I see no good reasons (just plenty of bad ones) to think a God might exist so why would I expend any effort in making further enquiries?

Of course that doesn't mean I'm certain there is no God.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You don't seem to read what others have written: to date I have clearly stated that I see no good reasons (just plenty of bad ones) to think a God might exist so why would I expend any effort in making further enquiries?

Of course that doesn't mean I'm certain there is no God.

You seem to be hedging your bets,
And I have addressed this by stating you are taking a gamble given the stakes of God existing and you have not been able to rule god out.

[Sriram]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta

Yes...Anatma is a Theravada concept. Mahayana and Vajrayana (Tibetan) believe in souls and even gods and other higher level beings. 

[Rhiannon]

You seem to be hedging your bets,
And I have addressed this by stating you are taking a gamble given the stakes of God existing and you have not been able to rule god out.

What is the gamble here? What are the consequences of not finding god?

[wigginhall]

What is the gamble here? What are the consequences of not finding god?

I notice that Pascal says 'everything is at stake', in that quote by Vlad.  Presumably, this refers to hell and damnation.  So I am being asked to gamble on a God who is prepared to damn me for eternity if I pick the wrong choice - he's making you an offer you can't refuse.   It's all warm and fuzzy, isn't it?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What is the gamble here? What are the consequences of not finding god?

That question presupposes a risk that even after a search there is no discovery.
A question that would be more apposite given my argument thus far is what are the consequences of not searching.

[Nearly Sane]

What is the gamble here? What are the consequences of not finding god?

And in the absence of a description of the god thing  that makes sense or a way to find it, this is a sort of deaf dumb and blind man's buff seeking a non existent snark in a dark room

[Nearly Sane]

That question presupposes a risk that even after a search there is no discovery.
A question that would be more apposite given my argument thus far is what are the consequences of not searching.

Searching being here undefined and god also not defined in any meaningful way, your entire approach is meaningless.

[Stranger]

If someone thinks a god might exist but refuses to take it any further is inescapably avoiding something. That would come out as hopping from one excuse to another.

Do stop being stupid and read what has been written to you.

If I am avoiding god, then you are avoiding vengeful fairies, aliens that control your thoughts, spaghetti monsters, vampires, werewolves, other gods, ghosts, orbiting teapots, invisible purple unicorns, and every other crazy, unfalsifiable nonsense that has ever been invented as well as all the other nonsense that we haven't got around to inventing.

To refer to people as avoiding things just because they cannot be falsified and therefore totally ruled out, is madness.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Searching being here undefined and god also not defined in any meaningful way, your entire approach is meaningless.

First of all I think we can include research into gods. Dawkins argument about not needing to know Leprechology precludes a search and seeks to discourage it in others. If one is of the ''this is only the preserve of nutters with halitosis I needn't trouble myself with it''persuasion as I was then Dawkins is in danger of adding a bit of celebrity authority.

God, Sane is precisely the thing you want to find out about and therefore a full definition from the outside rather than one discovered is not logical.

[Nearly Sane]

First of all I think we can include research into gods. Dawkins argument about not needing to know Leprechology precludes a search and seeks to discourage it in others. If one is of the ''this is only the preserve of nutters with halitosis I needn't trouble myself with it'' as I was then Dawkins is in danger of adding a bit of celebrity authority.

God, Sane is precisely the thing you want to find out about and therefore a full definition from the outside rather than one discovered is not logical.

Did any of that make sense in your head?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Do stop being stupid and read what has been written to you.

If I am avoiding god, then you are avoiding vengeful fairies, aliens that control your thoughts, spaghetti monsters, vampires, werewolves, other gods, ghosts, orbiting teapots, invisible purple unicorns, and every other crazy, unfalsifiable nonsense that has ever been invented as well as all the other nonsense that we haven't got around to inventing.

Dandy and assertive. Please state why vengeful fairies, aliens that control your thoughts, spaghetti monsters, vampires, werewolves, other gods, ghosts, orbiting teapots, invisible purple unicorns, are crazy, then state why God is crazy.

Then state why multiverse isn't or quantum theory isn't or string theory after all was it not one quantum boy who said 'your idea is crazy but is it crazy enough?''

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Did any of that make sense in your head?

Sorry for outside read outset.

''Gentlemen we are not going to explore Van Dieman's land because we do not have detailed maps of it''

[Stranger]

God, Sane is precisely the thing you want to find out about and therefore a full definition from the outside rather than one discovered is not logical.

Right, so you're saying that we need to somehow find out about something that hasn't been defined, for which there is no evidence, and no sound arguments...

(Insanity)²

[Stranger]

Dandy and assertive. Please state why vengeful fairies, aliens that control your thoughts, spaghetti monsters, vampires, werewolves, other gods, ghosts, orbiting teapots, invisible purple unicorns, are crazy, then state why God is crazy.

There is no reason at all to think any of them are real.

Then state why multiverse isn't or quantum theory isn't or string theory after all was it not one quantum boy who said 'your idea is crazy but is it crazy enough?''

Quantum theory is one of the best tested theories in the history of science.

String theory is one of the attempts to unify quantum theory with general relativity (another extremely well tested theory).

I've explained about multiverses several times and can't be arsed to do it again as you never seem to pay any attention anyway...

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry for outside read outset.

''Gentlemen we are not going to explore Van Dieman's land because we do not have detailed maps of it''

Oh, Vlad takes begging the question for .0000001 of a penny

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There is no reason at all to think any of them are real.

From what I've seen from your refutations of the reasons they all end in we don't know.

However there has to be some working out for why Ghosts etc are crazy......let's see it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Oh, Vlad takes begging the question for .0000001 of a penjy

Beg pardon?
All i'm saying is that god is not merely his definition. That is what we hope to get to know once we have discovered him or definitely proved naturalism.

[Nearly Sane]

Beg pardon?
All i'm saying is that god is not merely his definition. That is what we hope to get to know once we have discovered him or definitely proved naturalism.

And Vlad doubles down on his begging the question, and adds in some straw.