Theory on God and existence

  • Thread starter ChongFire
  • Start date
  • #26
4,465
72
Now, let's see what my two cent ramble would get me to pertaining the tension between science and religion.

Perhaps that the billions year evolution gradually increased the focus / instinct of all species on survival, both the species and the individual specimens. When the ability to think logical evolved, it appears that this instinct governed thinking.

The urge to survive, requires security and resents surprises. Therefore it's paramount to understand the nature of things, in order to know what is best to secure the future for us as individual and as a species and forfill the primary requirement for our instincts to survival.

But nature surprises us with a deluge of complicated phenomenons which made it apparent to early humans that there must be some higher order of something undefinable that makes the rules. And with an abundance of fallacies, like the post hoc - propter hoc (after this...hence because of this...) religions emerged with a complicated set of rules and rituals fighting the evil witches, devils and dragons and please the deities in an attempt to secure survival and prosperity. It's all a lot more complicated but if it makes you happy, why not?

Why not? Because rationality tends to prevail -one wants to understand- and even Plato already understood that religion is in fact fallacious. So, objective science slowly emerged, repelling any irrational religion-logic. But it has the same objective as religion, to secure survival and stimulate prosperity. Thus, both are competing each other obviously, which explains the policy of the management of this place.

Interestingly enough, the most important feature of religion, - blind fate - is the biggest taboo in science.

As long as science has no answers to the essential questions of the universe and life, it is each individuals choice where to put it's *fate*.
 
Last edited:
  • #27
114
0
Evo said:
No, god is not the absolute when there can be a pantheon of gods. Which god are you discussing?
The Absolute (only) one.

Also, the gods in most mythologies had weaknesses which caused their demise. So, your statement that "god is the absolute" is false.
Those gods are false.

How often do you talk to the trout?
On the rare occasion I feel like having one for dinner.
 
  • #28
114
0
Andre said:
Interestingly enough, the most important feature of religion, - blind fate - is the biggest taboo in science.
This can be thought of differently. The biggest tool in science is blind fate. Every attempt to redifine or refine science, is based on not knowing if the answer will come.

As long as science has no answers to the essential questions of the universe and life, it is each individuals choice where to put it's *fate*.
Yes, science seems to give itself credit, where credit is not yet due.
 
  • #29
23
0
Eric England said:
Those gods are false.
how do you know which gods are false?


anyway back to the "aquarium", this is nothing like the universe, for these fish to move you have to make them move so there is no free will involved. do you think you have free will?

and how can you be sure that it is you creating the fish and not them creating you from their own imaginations? after all if you were imaginary you would not know unless the fish imagined you to know. :biggrin:
 
  • #30
114
0
rkkane said:
how do you know which gods are false?
If they have an outside they're false.
 
  • #31
Evo
Mentor
23,139
2,679
Eric England said:
If they have an outside they're false.
That's nonsense.
 
  • #32
114
0
Define sense in all its "senses", then we can talk about the "non" version of sense.
 
  • #33
Evo
Mentor
23,139
2,679
Eric England said:
Define sense in all its "senses", then we can talk about the "non" version of sense.
No, you explain how you can make a statement like

Eric England said:
rkkane said:
how do you know which gods are false?
If they have an outside they're false.
and expect anyone to take you seriously.
 
  • #34
23
0
Eric England said:
If they have an outside they're false.

Define sense in all its "senses", then we can talk about the "non" version of sense.
this sounds like what a wacky fortune teller would say.

you don't actually know anything about any god you can only make assumptions, but if your going to assume don't say it like its a hard fact.
 
  • #35
loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,749
5
Eric is echoing a sentiment that runs all the way back to Xenophanes:

1. God is one, supreme among gods and men, and not like mortals in body or in mind. [Zeller, Vorsokrastische Philosophie, p. 530, n. 3.]

2. The whole [of god] sees, the whole perceives, the whole hears. [Zeller, 526, n. 1. No author is given in the context; Karsten follows Fabricius in accrediting it to Xenophanes.]

3. But without effort he sets in motion all things by mind and thought.

4. It [i.e. being] always abides in the same place, not moved at all, nor is it fitting that it should move from one place to another.

5. But mortals suppose that the gods are born (as they themselves are), and that they wear man's clothing and have human voice and body. [Zeller, 524, n. 2. Cf Arist. Rhet. ii. 23; 1399 b 6.]

6. But if cattle or lions had hands, so as to paint with their hands and produce works of art as men do, they would paint their gods and give them bodies in form like their own-horses like horses, cattle like cattle. [Zeller, 525, n. 2. Diog Laer. iii. 16; Cic. de nat. Deor. i. 27.]
link

Unfortunately, as far ahead of his time as Xenophanes was (he was certainly a rebel and arguably the first monotheist in western civilization), his thinking does amount to "this makes sense, therefore it must be true" and even he puts up more of an argument than we are seeing here. Bald assertions about absolute nature that are not substantiated, but simply claimed with increasing conviction, are not appropriate for this forum, regardless of whether or not they are correct.

That and the fact that this thread has strayed beyond its intended purpose and is devolving into a fight results in closure.
 

Related Threads on Theory on God and existence

Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Last Post
5
Replies
100
Views
10K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • Last Post
8
Replies
186
Views
16K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • Last Post
9
Replies
200
Views
11K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
3K
Top