Total posts: 7,093
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Then why do you INSIST on asking me what I believe? Is it because you expected a SPECIFIC answer?
Not at all and if you don't have anything to add and I haven't misunderstood anything I am actually done asking about your beliefs.
It’s fundamentally impossible to find meaning in something that’s inherently meaningless and that’s a fact.
Actually it's super easy, barely an inconvenience. I actually think most if not all humans do exactly that and I have yet in this interaction heard anything to change my mind. You can say "but it isn't really meaningful at all" all you want but I am fulfilled and have direction anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Ok let's start with my primary axiom again. I am experiencing something. Getting input from this experience and from nowhere else it is expedient to operate as though the input were genuine.
That's it. I build from there.
You say you aren't advocating that there is any intrinsic meaning or that there is a god but that if there isn't a god then there is also no meaning.
I say so what? I still do things and care about stuff so what difference does it make to me if there is meaning or not according to the definitions you insist on.
If doing things and caring about stuff for my own self determined reasons even purely emotional ones is a part of your definition of the word nihilist then sure but again the words you use are not going to change my view and I personally find things meaningful and that is absolutely a matter of opinion.
Do we have any more to discuss? Do you have any further questions or clarification about your views? I tried very hard not to overstate your case by assuming that you were advocating that any god(s) or intrinsic meaning do actually exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Reward and punishment isn’t nebulous.
They are if you cannot be certain what form they will take or how one goes about following the rules to receive each.
By the by I'm sorry if I'm reading more into your argument than you mean to say. I just don't see what specifically about a mindless universe equals nihilism.
Are you asking how I avoid the problem of soft nihilism? That there is no inherent meaning in the universe? I don't want to put wards in your mouth but if that is what you are asking then my answer, ironically, is the same as yours. I just make up some shit and find meaning in that. Like family and love and happiness, not just for me but for everyone and yes to some degree justice in a much as my worldview allows for justice. That is perhaps the only difference between a hard nihilist and literally every other viewpoint and since true nihilism would necessitate not caring about anything enough to argue over I don't expect to find any here and I'm not sure that viewpoint is even something a sabe human can maintain. We seem to need meaning even if it is only something we are pretending to have.
Created:
-->
@Soluminsanis
Theists are a bit of a mixed bag as I'm sure atheists are. What Ido I like best in general? I suppose it is the passion and endurance with which they offer their arguments. You can really have a good long conversation with one.
It is only fair however to offer a small criticism as well with the caveat that you can't really claim all theists do anything. That in mind I have noticed that a lot of religions and particularly apologetics associated with them will often slip a "and thinking themselves wise they became fools" clause into their rhetoric one way or another so that any criticism becomes more proof in their view. This inoculation against any argument that doesn't reaffirm what is already believed gets in the way of honest discourse.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Still if you cannot prove that god agrees with your moral intuition (don't steal/don't murder/don't lie etc) and instead values only marital prowessWhy does the former require proof and the latter doesn’t? 🤔
I don't think you are grasping my most basic criticism of your argument. I know there are people and I know they care about things and behave in ways. That does not need to be demonstrated.
At this point I am not really asking you to demonstrate your god but only why you would believe in something so nebulous that you cannot demonstrate even to yourself and how you justify your method of determining how you ought to behave that in any way resolves the issue of meaning (or at least perceived meaning) that you seem to be saying (through implication when you claim the only two possible positions are theism and nihilism) I must be having trouble with.
Failing that you could admit, to yourself if not to me, that you do not actually have an argument.
Now not having an argument is not in itself a problem but when you seem to imply that my life cannot have meaning (by implication when you claim that the only two possible positions are theism or nihilism) without being able to demonstrate any more meaning in yours, well that is kind of an unfair double standard and you might look to see how you can resolve the flaws in your own beliefs before demanding that I defend mine to you.
So far the best argument I've really heard from you is that a universe without any god(s) would in your opinion be meaningless and confusing and upsetting. That isn't a very strong argument as the universe is under no special obligation to provide you with meaning or answers or comfort. I think you mostly get those things from other humans. You definitely get them in an observable measurable way from people more often than from gods.
I hope you understand that this is all a constructive criticism.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
@Soluminsanis
-->@Stephen
Let's be real here I am just a human with limited resources and information. If any all knowing all powerful being exists and his end goal is my belief then he must both know how to convince everyone on earth and be capable of the feet. Let's even assume that only those who seek in faith will find the truth then we would still expect all people of faith to arrive at the same conclusions and that simply isn't what we observe.
How much effort have you put into reaching out to other deities? If you put no effort into seeking the buddha why would you expect to reach enlightenment? I'm afraid that there are just to many conflicting stories and opinions within Christianity for me to figure out who has the "right" faith. When you add in all the other religions and all of their various sects I simply don't have enough time in this life to fairly evaluate them all in even a fairly cursory manner let alone with the kind of life long introspection that most people of faith seem to be suggesting as necessary for any real understanding. I'm sorry but if believers cannot even work out among each other what "truth" you will "know" through "faith" then I'm not sure what you expect from me."if you put in no effort to know Jesus, why should he reach out to you?"
Let's be real here I am just a human with limited resources and information. If any all knowing all powerful being exists and his end goal is my belief then he must both know how to convince everyone on earth and be capable of the feet. Let's even assume that only those who seek in faith will find the truth then we would still expect all people of faith to arrive at the same conclusions and that simply isn't what we observe.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
If you already have a perfect knowledge of something, there is no need to apply failth, Faith, as I've said, is applied to things which are unseen, but which are true without our knowledge of it. Plenty of unknowns out there that can be known. Start there with faith, and if it is not true, you will have no resulting knowledge.
How is anyone supposed to apply faith in only true things before you know what is true and why on earth would you ask about things when you already know the truth of the matter?
I'm not sure how I could ever follow your prescribed method and to complicate matters I have been given similar instructions from people previously who would immediately add that the book of mormon is not the truth by any definition but particularly not from a religious one.
If one can "ask in faith" and arrive at Mormonism and also the southern Baptist movement and also at Islam and also at buddhism or jainism or taoism or wiccan practice or scientology or any of hundreds or even thousands of religions around the world how would I as an outsider ever determine which of you is correct, or indeed if any of you are?
Do you have any arguments that rely on sufficient independently verifiable evidence rather than faith? It would really help me in evaluating your claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?Pascal's Mugging.
Indeed do you shoot for the best heaven or try to avoid the worst hell? The spiritual equivalent of being all in or hedging your bets.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Because if not sorry it makes the action have meaning if he is.
I cannot begin to tell you how unhelpful this circular reasoning is.
How do you know there is meaning? Because people are punished (in some as yet undefined way after we are unable to observe him to determine if he is in fact punished).
How do you know people are punished (in some as yet undefined way after we are unable to observe him to determine if he is in fact punished)? Because there is meaning.
Do you see how the this is a problem?
Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?No because one of the many rules of logic is you can’t prove a negative.
Well you can prove some negatives but you are correct that depending on our definition of "Odin" it is an unfalsifiable proposition. Still if you cannot prove that god agrees with your moral intuition (don't steal/don't murder/don't lie etc) and instead values only marital prowess then how can you justify not stealing and killing?
I'm not trying to judge you or initiate a gotcha here I am just pointing out, at length, that you have the same problem of justifying your actions that I do the only difference is that I am not trying to solve any mystery by appeals to a larger mystery.
IF you cannot be certain what some god(s) expectations of you THEN you are still forced to use you own personal moral intuition to discern right from wrong.
IF you are forced to use your personal moral intuition THEN you must still have some good working standard for what is right and wrong.
This standard, being based on your own personal moral intuition, must by definition be subjective to you.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Faith must be expressed in only things which are already true, or it is not faith.
Ask in faith
Why are you smuggling in this new definition of faith? How do you ask in faith about something you are unclear about the truth of if you can only ever Express faith about things you already know are true?
This raises more questions than it answers and we haven't even touched on what a holy ghost is or how you know there is one.
Created:
-->
@Soluminsanis
I don't have a problem with fun. Just thought I would promote a little empathy too. Feel welcome to stay and participate though if you like.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Sorry for what?Engaging in activity that can lead to punishment.
Firstly... that's it? Sorry because there will be punishment? Not sorry for stealing? Or threatening and possibly hurting people but just sorry that there will be retribution?
Secondly... what punishment? From whom? If we as human beings do not hold this hypothetical bank robber responsible what leads you to believe he will be held accountable at all?
Thirdly... let's say there is a higher power and it doesn't give a fig about killing or stealing or any of that. Let's say it is Odin and the only way to get the reward you seem to be so concerned with is to die bravely in combat? Can you prove that Odin doesn't exist and that you must be more violent in order to be rewarded?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Please justify splitting hairs.
Sorry for what? Seeking rewards? I thought that was what you are advocating for. Perhaps you are not being specific enough.
Here is the same question with the offending word removed and I don't see how it changes what I'm asking overmuch.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Sorry for what? Seeking personal rewards? I thought that was what you are advocating for. Perhaps you are not being specific enough.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
The standard is you should live in a way that garners reward.
So is being a bank robber an ethical lifestyle then? Why or why not? It is certainly a lifestyle built around garnering personal reward.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Because it details a consequence not a standard. Live what way? Why? What is the end goal? Just to avoid punishment and garner rewards?
I don't care what punishment I am threatened with I still view human wellbeing as the end goal of ethics. If a man threatens to torcher me if I don't kill you it doesn't become ethical to do so. By the same rationale it is not more ethical to save your life if I am promised a million dollars to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
You haven't explained how punishment or reward equals meaning. Please explain.Yes I have, you’re starting a circle by asking me the same question twice.
I have seen no adequate explanation. Perhaps you could put your argument into some other form. Perhaps a logical syllogism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
You haven't explained how punishment or reward equals meaning. Please explain.
I'm not sure what you mean by demonstrate my ethics. I have told you my preferred standard. I can hardly use anyone else's. If you mean demonstrate their superiority to some other ethical standard you are begging a question. Superior in what sense? If you mean demonstrate that I care about human wellbeing I'm not sure what I can do beyond saying honestly that I do. If you mean something else please by all means let me know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Is your highest ethical priority your own personal wellbeing?My highest ethical priority is simply being ethical.
Great. A+ idea. Now how do you determine what is ethical?
I am not mocking you.Then why’d you mention a cosmic hall monitor?
It could as easily be a regular hall monitor. Unless being perceived to be ethical is your highest ethical priority then someone(thing) judging you is not what actually makes an action ethical. If you don't like the impression of god I have gotten from your posts (that of some cosmic hall monitor who spanks the guilty) perhaps you should reevaluate how you discuss the matter.
whether or not someone is looking does not have any effect on the ethical content of your actions.Please take your own advice here, if you’re not going to demonstrate your definition of ethics then you can’t make an argument for it.
I have a personally preferred standard. It is human wellbeing. My best guess of why I care about human wellbeing is that as a human it is evolutionarily beneficial for me to promote human wellbeing so genes that promote this behavior are moreprevelent in humans than not but even if that is not why I feel this way I still do feel this way. I am not actually claiming to know definitively however.
On a separate note I am starting to think you are conflating moral pronouncements for a moral standard.What makes you think that?
That when I ask about morality your answers usually contain something to the effect of don't kill, don't steal, don't lie. These are moral pronouncements not the standard they are built on. You have not shared the underlying reason it is in your opinion wrong to kill. For me it is wellbeing. I am looking for the measurement. Your highest ethical concern. The thing you are trying to accomplish by being "good" whatever it is that you believe that to be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
There seems to be no sufficient evidence to suggest you will experience anything post mortum whatsoever.Then“it’s fair to question why do we care if the universe is so uncaring, after all aren’t we at our core extensions of the universe?”
IF the universe doesn't give the impression that it cares AND people give the impression that they do care THEN we are left with the impression that people care despite the universe not because of it.
IF you cannot care about things without knowing why you care THEN I may have some bad news for you since many whys don't have an answer within the limits of human epistemology.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I do not consider something right or wrong solely based on how it would benefit me.We clearly have different views on the words right and wrong so if you’re gonna use your version of it in your argument then I request that you prove it.
I don't care what standard you use your actions do not become more ethical based on how they benefit you unless nothing takes ethical priority over your own self gratification. Is your highest ethical priority your own personal wellbeing?
I also do not consider something more or less correct dependent upon whether or not some cosmic hall monitor is paying attention.Don’t mock me.
I am not mocking you. I am being as honest as I possibly can be. Regardless of the standard you use unless your highest ethical priority is what others (or even just one other) think of you then whether or not someone is looking does not have any effect on the ethical content of your actions.
On a separate note I am starting to think you are conflating moral pronouncements for a moral standard. Upholding dignity or justice or promoting welfare are all ethical standards. You shouldn't kill people all willy nilly is a moral pronouncement.
A moral standard allows us to make ethical determinations. Moral pronouncements are just a list of dictates to follow by rote and without personal ethical consideration or reflection.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
No, it MEANS I don’t know if I will experience punishment or reward.
There seems to be no sufficient evidence to suggest you will experience anything post mortum whatsoever. Nothing good. Nothing bad. Just nothing. You know, exactly what you experienced before you were born.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
How do you determine whether or not someone, once you have distinguished them from a book, knows what is true?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
What does asking someone something have to do with the bible? The bible is not a someone.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Excellent point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I do not consider something right or wrong solely based on how it would benefit me. I find that a very selfish philosophy although I may have misunderstood what you are saying.
I also do not consider something more or less correct dependent upon whether or not some cosmic hall monitor is paying attention. It seems like an abdication of moral responsibility when the adult thing to do is to take responsibility for one's own actions.
I invite any correction if I have somehow misunderstood.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
It is not self explanatory to me but since you find it so obvious surely you can explain the link.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Faith must be expressed in only things which are already true, or it is not faith.
And how do we determine if a thing is true?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
In order for our lives to have meaning we need to be punished or rewarded in some capacity otherwise it’s fair to question why do we care if the universe is so uncaring, after all aren’t we at our core extensions of the universe?
Ok why? What do punishment and reward even have to do with meaning?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Only if I’m arguing in favor of Him which I’m not.
Then I'm not sure what you are arguing. If you can decide what that is and communicate it then get back to me.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I try to let people self-identify.
This seems like a wiser policy than trying to put a label on a human that you may or may not fully understand (probably not fully if we are being honest).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
what possible reason is there to think that god(s) care about us or anything?I said nothing of God in my last post.
Unless you have stopped believing in one it is still pertinent to the conversation.
And absent any concrete reason to think that any god(s) care about anything how does this help you avoid the trap of nihilism that you assume I must be falling victim to?When did I say you fell victim to nihilism?
When you suggested that the only possible alternative to theism is nihilism. How exactly do we come to the conclusion that some god(s) by necessity provide any purpose?
Created:
Maybe, sometimes, when someone says they believe a thing, even a thing we ourselves think of as obviously and intuitively incorrect, they are just being honest and they really do believe.
Perhaps the better approach, assuming you know what they believe at all, is to ask why they believe it and take the conversation from there.
Maybe you could even set up some kind of quid pro quo dialogue where we tell each other what we believe and why and see if there is any common ground between our ideas or legitimate criticisms, of either idea to be sure, but most especially our own if we do in fact want to have strong well considered beliefs.
Perhaps this is as good a place as any to start that conversation so if you aren't sure about someone's point if view involved, by all means starting with mine, please ask them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Why would you want to "educate people about it"?Doesn't that just teach people how to be racists?
More to the point do you have to preserve a racial slur and by extension its offensive meaning in order to teach about the existence and history of racial slurs and the moral and ethical issues surrounding them?
Created:
-->
@FLRW
That seems like the act of a right bastard.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Rehabilitation. Cut down on repeat offenders. Horrifying but not necessarily more so than any given penal system at its worst.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
IF the right to life trumps the right to bodily autonomy THEN failure to donate a kidney is immoral.If you have two kidneys you're automatically a MONSTER.
More to the point you are a monster if you do not make your blood/bone marrow/kidney/liver/womb available up to the point at which a doctor (who presumably is moral and therefore will err on the side of using your body if the exact point is unclear) determines it would endanger your life in order to maintain the bodies and lives of others even if this process takes eighteen years or more of your life with serious physical mental and financial consequences to you.
Created:
Posted in:
(IFF) GOOD = HEAVEN (AND) HEAVEN = HAPPINESS (AND) GOOD = HAPPINESS (AND) HEROIN = HAPPINESS (THEN) HEROIN = GOODHeroin may equal happiness but happiness doesn’t equal heroin just like apples equals fruits but fruits doesn’t equal apples.
If fruit=happiness and apples=fruit then apples=happiness. I don't see a problem with this. Let us say legos also equal happiness. That just makes
LEGOS=HAPPINESS=GOOD=GOD
Equally valid to
HEROIN=HAPPINESS=GOOD=GOD
It doesn't invalidate either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
Then I won’t argue in favor of a being, you asked me what I believe and I told you, whether or not I can prove it is a separate narrative.
At the moment I would settle for knowing exactly what it is you are arguing for. You say you believe in theism which is very vague. You say you believe in some concept (possibly a being but maybe not) and that this somehow makes the universe less confusing for you. You also seem to be implying that if reality or at least some subset of reality that you label god chooses not to care about and judges us (or is mindless and so is incapable of caring) that it seems senseless to you that we would be able to care about anything or judge any actions or attitudes as preferable to any others (paraphrasing and only because you haven't actually explained in detail what about a mindless reality you find so upsetting) despite the fact that we clearly do care about things and judge some actions or attitudes as preferable to any others (observable fact) and no god(s) would seem to be in evidence (not an observable fact).
All this leaves me with more questions than answers. Firstly and just as an example if we are assuming some god(s) exists what possible reason is there to think that god(s) care about us or anything? And absent any concrete reason to think that any god(s) care about anything how does this help you avoid the trap of nihilism that you assume I must be falling victim to?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
The fine tuning argument says far more about the human propensity for seeing patterns in nature (whether meaningfull or even real) than it does about the universe. The SETI program discovered the first pulsars specifically because the regular "bursts" of energy they produced were mistakenly taken as a purposeful attempt at communication from some extra terrestrial intelligence but when investigated we found that the regular pulses were merely the result of large unstable stars whose spinning on their axis caused the constant stream of energy they were mindlessly emitting to register as regular "bursts" to the equipment available to the program.
I see no reason to doubt that if we were able to investigate sufficiently the apparent "design" of the universe is not equally simply a natural unguided phenomenon which we as pattern seekers are eagerly overinterpreting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
It seems like you are saying I think therefore I am in a way that you feel is more "you". If that is accurate we can leave it at that. If there is more to it or if you would like to further explore how this effects your thinking and beliefs however you are free to explain further.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I can however be certain that this is the only reality of which I am aware.Don't you have "dreams"?
Good point. I am also aware of a "reality" where I am awkwardly perched on roller skates while trying ineffectively to perform the duties associated with my dayjob for example. I cannot decisively prove that it isnot a real situation but it is not a "reality" which "exists" reliably or linearly or that gives me any actionable data. I'll let you know if that changes.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
why would God appear to you with your indifference?Who are you to tell God he does not speak?
IF some god(s) exist and IF said god(s) care if I believe they exist THEN the most expedient path to that out come would be a direct personal dialogue.
IF some god(s) exist and IF said god(s) are indifferent about my belief in them or unable to communicate with me THEN it is identical from my perspective to a total absence of god(s).
“Faith is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for, the EVIDENCE of things not seen.”
Faith, as used in this context, would seem to be a possible evidence for literally any position and therefore does not actually act as definitive (read sufficient) evidence for any.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Well elaborate means to add further explanation and/or information.
Specifically if by thinking being an expression of existence means more than "when I have a thought that thought exists" would like to know exactly what it does mean and perhaps even what it means for a thought to exist at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
IF we are not able to observe any other universes THEN we cannot use any other universe as evidence in our arguments.
P1 there are an infinite number of "possible" universes
P2 there is one observable universe
C the number of "possible" universes is absolutely unremarkable and unhelpful in discovering truths about this one.
On a separate note
P1 there are an infinite number of "possible" gods.
P2 there are no observable gods
C the number of "possible" gods is absolutely unremarkable and unhelpful in discovering truths of any kind.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Any concept is an expression of thought and therefore existence.My axiom if far more expansive.
I invite you to elaborate then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I believe that arguments stand or fall on their own and I am reluctant to share details on line. My identity is unimportant to assessing my most basic axiom or any of the arguments that follow from it.Claims of credentials and experience count for nothing.
That is perhaps going a little further than I would go but unfortunately for anyone having a discussion with me here you will have to draw on the credentials and experience that I have accrued here rather than any real life equivalents. That said you are correct that while experience and credentials can help us separate experts from laymen in the end they do not make you right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
It obviously emphasizes exactly how meaningless we are (in contrast).
Well stated and a point I am trying to get across to another interlocutor in another thread.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Yes "I" am a logical necessity for me not however for you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
I am the universe.
If this is not just another way of saying I think therefore I am would you care to elaborate?
Created: