A failure of understanding

V

Vkothii

Banned
Banned
A conversation:

Do you believe in God?

-I believe in myself, yes, of course.
So, you mean you think you're God?

-That isn't what I said. I don't have to think I'm anything, to be something, do I?
But you believe you are?

-Belief is that which comes from seeing, or hearing, you know, being with, if you will.
With what?

-With myself, of course, with me. It's like communing with something that you learn to see is not something other than you. Of course it isn't, how could you be with yourself if you didn't exist?
Commune, what does that mean though, doesn't that mean to go and meet with?

-Yes, but that's a conceptual problem with language, the word has a religious meaning too. You don't need to go anywhere or make a call to someone and talk to them on the spirit phone or anything. You can believe, if that's what you think you need to, that God is outside you and you need to go and talk to him. I don't need to go anywhere, or say anything to anyone.
 
In what way are the answers hugely evasive? What do the answers evade?
BTW it isn't meant to make sense - note the title.
 
This is the age old problem with language, it's clumsy. The word God is an extreme example of this. You may attach a completely different meaning to that word than I do, which leads to misunderstanding. Before we could start using the word god in a conversation we'd have to have a whole seperate conversation about how we define god for ourselves. That conversation might spawn another clarification, of words like belief or spirit.

Language is really inefficient when it comes to sharing complex ideas, and there are clear points where language simply fails altogether. Ask someone who's taken LSD or mushrooms to describe the experience to you, if you've never had a similar experience it's impossible. The other person will come across as an overly metaphysical idiot because there simply aren't words to describe these things, and if there are they have completely different meanings for different people.
 
Vkothii said:
What do you mean by "an answer"? You mean a "here's the answer" kind of answer?
Click to expand...

It seems a simple enough question. A simply yes or no will suffice.
After that you may explain how exactly you view your God (in light of your religion or self-defined).
 
Enmos said:
A simply yes or no will suffice.
Click to expand...
What's the question though? Do I "believe in" God? That kind of isn't a question. It's like being asked: "do you believe in the fact you're breathing"?

Don't you think the question should be: "do you believe in the existence of the same God that I 'believe in' - the one you have to go to a Church to commune with and talk to the representatives of? You know - men of God, priests and so on?"

A "simple" answer to a "simple" question, huh?
 
Last edited:
there is still "stigma" to say - No,

can provoke hatred within the masses and as a consequence>> affect business

see what they do- just open your mouth and they will ban your sousages from their shops :mad:
 
Last edited:
Vkothii said:
What's the question though? Do I "believe in" God? That kind of isn't a question. It's like being asked: "do you believe in the fact you're breathing"?

Don't you think the question should be: "do you believe in the existence of the same God that I 'believe in' - the one you have to go to a Church to commune with and talk to the representatives of? You know - men of God, priests and so on?"

A "simple" answer to a "simple" question, huh?
Click to expand...

God as a metaphor for life the universe and everything is a God that even atheists can believe in. It makes the word almost meaningless.
 
spidergoat said:
It makes the word almost meaningless.
Click to expand...
It's an unfortunate word, in many ways. Two people having a discussion about God, can convince themselves they're talking about the same subject, but they aren't.
 
Vkothii said:
What's the question though? Do I "believe in" God? That kind of isn't a question. It's like being asked: "do you believe in the fact you're breathing"?

Don't you think the question should be: "do you believe in the existence of the same God that I 'believe in' - the one you have to go to a Church to commune with and talk to the representatives of? You know - men of God, priests and so on?"

A "simple" answer to a "simple" question, huh?
Click to expand...

The question in itself is simple.
For instance, you would answer 'yes [+explanation]' while I would answer 'no'.
 
Enmos said:
The question in itself is simple.
Click to expand...
Well, of course, you can make an assumption, if you want to.
I don't bother with explaining my belief using any language that's loaded with preconceptions.

My experience is that there is no explanation that actually explains or answers what people are asking. It's almost like they want an answer that I can't give them, or they're expecting something, or they "already know the answer", or think they do.
They may also think the subject is "simple", and they don't have the problem explaining it that I do.
But in reality, they are just as lost for words when it comes to the actual explaining.
 
Vkothii said:
Well, of course, you can make an assumption, if you want to.
I don't bother with explaining my belief using any language that's loaded with preconceptions.

My experience is that there is no explanation that actually explains or answers what people are asking. It's almost like they want an answer that I can't give them, or they're expecting something, or they "already know the answer", or think they do.
They may also think the subject is "simple", and they don't have the problem explaining it that I do.
But in reality, they are just as lost for words when it comes to the actual explaining.
Click to expand...

But when someone asks you whether or not you believe in God they want to hear a yes or no, plus maybe an explanation of what exactly it is you believe in.
What would your answer be when someone asked you that question ?
Would you start explaining something they most likely don't get and aren't interested in anyway, or would you just say yes (which is an truthful answer, however, not very detailed) ?
 
Enmos said:
But when someone asks you whether or not you believe in God they want to hear a yes or no, plus maybe an explanation of what exactly it is you believe in.
What would your answer be when someone asked you that question ?
Would you start explaining something they most likely don't get and aren't interested in anyway, or would you just say yes (which is an truthful answer, however, not very detailed) ?
Click to expand...
The context of the discussion seems important to me. It seems like you are imagining a conversation with an acquaintance out in the world. But here in a portion of the philosophy forums a simple yes or no could be quite misleading and raising the complexity of the issue fits.
 
Enmos said:
But when someone asks you whether or not you believe in God they want to hear a yes or no, plus maybe an explanation of what exactly it is you believe in.
Click to expand...

If they want to hear "yes", or "no", then, as far as I'm concerned, they've already answered their own question.
My response to whether or not I believe in God is usually along the lines I've outlined already.
Or I might turn it back on them and ask them the same question, or: "what do you mean by 'God'? What's that?"
 
Last edited:
If they want to hear "yes", or "no", then, as far as I'm concerned, they've already answered their own question.
My response to whether or not I believe in God is usually along the lines I've outlined already.
Or I might turn it back on them and ask them the same question, or: "what so you mean by 'God'? What's that?"
Click to expand...

So you never really answer the question.
 
A question is not: being asked to say "yes", or to say "no". What if I said: "Nyoes".

What was the question again?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top