God is flavor
- Thread starter wesmorris
- Start date
Re: Re: God is flavor
Don't remember ever making a choice.
\Regardless of your memory, you have free will and thusly choose your god.
Because mortals have the ability to choose.
\Yeah, but how is it that you think you can CHOOSE the "creator" or however your conception goes. Isn't it the "creator" just IS? Like for instance a rock. You don't CHOOSE the rock, the rock is. How can you "choose god"? When IF "god" exists, "god" then simply IS and is not what you "choose".
As far as i know, all religions have bearing on what God is.
\See above. How can a human conception have any bearing on something which is generally by definition so far greater than the human himself? Are you saying that the thought of god itself is the reality? I would say that it IS reality, but a reality that only exists inside the abstract world of beholder.
It would depend on the state of mind.
\That is sheer egocentrism. I don't know how you could claim to be so reverent towards the exhaulted one and maintain such irreverence simultaneously. I personally would think that IF there were some sort of "god" it would literally be beyond my comprehension because I'm merely a simple human. I am not omnipresent and could thusly not even concieve of what that state could be like.
No.
\Respect.
No.
\Just a wild theory I have really anyway. Just pushing buttons to see what happens. Uh, I would contend though that if jesus existed he would be incarcerated due to mental illness by today's standards.
How do you know it is false?
\It's just my most reasonable guess. While you seem like a reasonable human for the most part, your beliefs are not... I'm pretty sure my lack of beliefs regarding the issue is perfectly reasonable.
How your your opinion, wach-u-talkenboutboy?
\You couldn't figure out the typo? My bad. "how DOES your opinion... ". Understand the question now?
Why don't you learn to ask proper questions?
\That's childish. I'm that way sometimes so I really can't say much except to label it as is appropriate.
Expert at what?
\Expert at discerning the nature of the universe, which is what you'd have to be to claim intimate knowledge of "god" right? Oh, or a lemming or mentally ill or something. Welcome to the age of reason.
Ask yourself, your family, your friends and neighbours, then make your own mind up.
\Done. It's because your definition of "god" or choice thereof is as random as my choice of underwear on a daily basis. You've picked some random bullshit theory that seems plausible because you are a lemming or you were brainwashed into it as a child and you love the people who taught you so it must be right and you'll continue to make it right because to realize it's stupid would be to dishonor the memory of the lessons you learned from ones you love. I can forgive it, but that doesn't mean that you aren't responsible for your ignorance and further, the ignorance you spread.
I don't know, what do you think?
\Definately. Some moreso, some less.
Yes.
\Then why do you claim it to be true?
No.
\I disagree, you now filter all other potential truths through this assumption, which is a majorly limiting factor. You've chosen a subset of possible solutions to a ethical/philosophical problem by choosing your "god". By choosing "god" in your conception, you rule out all other possibilities thusly limiting your quest for truth to a subset based on sheer conjecture resulting from emotional reactions on your part.
Refuse to what? Give up the quest for truth?
\Yes.
What selfish and lazy assumptions are those?
\The ones where you assume through your intimate knowledge of whatever, that you have some kind of clue as to nature of "god" or the creation of the universe.
Don't remember ever making a choice.
\Regardless of your memory, you have free will and thusly choose your god.
Because mortals have the ability to choose.
\Yeah, but how is it that you think you can CHOOSE the "creator" or however your conception goes. Isn't it the "creator" just IS? Like for instance a rock. You don't CHOOSE the rock, the rock is. How can you "choose god"? When IF "god" exists, "god" then simply IS and is not what you "choose".
As far as i know, all religions have bearing on what God is.
\See above. How can a human conception have any bearing on something which is generally by definition so far greater than the human himself? Are you saying that the thought of god itself is the reality? I would say that it IS reality, but a reality that only exists inside the abstract world of beholder.
It would depend on the state of mind.
\That is sheer egocentrism. I don't know how you could claim to be so reverent towards the exhaulted one and maintain such irreverence simultaneously. I personally would think that IF there were some sort of "god" it would literally be beyond my comprehension because I'm merely a simple human. I am not omnipresent and could thusly not even concieve of what that state could be like.
No.
\Respect.
No.
\Just a wild theory I have really anyway. Just pushing buttons to see what happens. Uh, I would contend though that if jesus existed he would be incarcerated due to mental illness by today's standards.
How do you know it is false?
\It's just my most reasonable guess. While you seem like a reasonable human for the most part, your beliefs are not... I'm pretty sure my lack of beliefs regarding the issue is perfectly reasonable.
How your your opinion, wach-u-talkenboutboy?
\You couldn't figure out the typo? My bad. "how DOES your opinion... ". Understand the question now?
Why don't you learn to ask proper questions?
\That's childish. I'm that way sometimes so I really can't say much except to label it as is appropriate.
Expert at what?
\Expert at discerning the nature of the universe, which is what you'd have to be to claim intimate knowledge of "god" right? Oh, or a lemming or mentally ill or something. Welcome to the age of reason.
Ask yourself, your family, your friends and neighbours, then make your own mind up.
\Done. It's because your definition of "god" or choice thereof is as random as my choice of underwear on a daily basis. You've picked some random bullshit theory that seems plausible because you are a lemming or you were brainwashed into it as a child and you love the people who taught you so it must be right and you'll continue to make it right because to realize it's stupid would be to dishonor the memory of the lessons you learned from ones you love. I can forgive it, but that doesn't mean that you aren't responsible for your ignorance and further, the ignorance you spread.
I don't know, what do you think?
\Definately. Some moreso, some less.
Yes.
\Then why do you claim it to be true?
No.
\I disagree, you now filter all other potential truths through this assumption, which is a majorly limiting factor. You've chosen a subset of possible solutions to a ethical/philosophical problem by choosing your "god". By choosing "god" in your conception, you rule out all other possibilities thusly limiting your quest for truth to a subset based on sheer conjecture resulting from emotional reactions on your part.
Refuse to what? Give up the quest for truth?
\Yes.
What selfish and lazy assumptions are those?
\The ones where you assume through your intimate knowledge of whatever, that you have some kind of clue as to nature of "god" or the creation of the universe.
Finally replied
before i jump into the questions, you made a lot of assumptions about theists. not all theists are western protestants. in fact, most people in the world are not.
I know. I'm really only using generalizations, which is kind of lame I guess, but it's the easiest way to get the ball rollling... then each case can be evaluated individually.
Why do you choose your god?
//my concept of god (or godness as i like to call it) makes the most sense to me. "godness" is non-randomness. i believe the universe operates with purpose.
Hmm... see to me, you're kind of mincing words. To me, given the general conception of god that I seem faced with, for instance the typical christian variety, I don't like the word "god" at all. Mostly because you have to come up with "your own conception" and blah blah. I don't like words that describe "the creator" or "the supreme being" or "the life-force" in terms so vague as that really you're expected to come up with your own definition. Why is it a word if you have to define it every time you use it. Just fucking use the explanation of the definition. Topics like "hey, how does the universe work?" IMO deserve significantly more reverence and awe that "uh.... god?". If you're going to bother to have a conversation referring to your conception of "god" you might as well just spell out the conception and forget about the whole "god" thing. *shrug* Maybe I'm just a prick.
Why do you think it possible for a mortal to choose a god?
//mortals need something tangible to focus their thoughts on. in meditation you might hold a physical object from nature. in churches, it helps to have an idea though it may not be physical.
That doesn't really make sense to me. Maybe you just didn't explain what you mean in a way that I can understand. For instance I don't think "an idea" is tangible.
If there is a god, why do you think YOUR religious concept has any bearing on what that god is?
//i don't, i only know what works for me
so you think "yeah, I know some stuff about the ultimate power" or however you concieve it... which means that you realy expect that if you were suddenly to be faced with "god" it would be pretty much what you thought? I mean it's nice that you're secure and all, but isn't that just... uh... kind of presumptuous to say the least? I mean, I'd contend that remotest hint that your "conception of god" has anything more to do with the ACTUAL god, IF it exists, is pretty much the stupidest thing going. It's absolutely retarded, presumptuous, arrogant and uhm... well.. just dumb.
I suppose I'm just saying that my epistomological perspective is that all knowledge is tentative and any assertion regarding "god" is also as such.... so when you say "yeah this is right for me" you're saying, "my knowledge isn't tentative" and that is distubing to me because it makes you dangerous. Someone to whom knowledge is tentative is much more likely to have a realistic perspective on knowledge itself.
Okay I'm full of shit. I thought I had a point, pardon.
Wouldn't you think that god would be more than the human mind can really comprehend?
//i'll say! i can hardly wrap my mind around what i said above. i take inspiration from ideas formed by others to help me, mostly physics scholars and even a little bit george lucas
that is more respect than I see most people show. booya kasha. Respect.
You really believe that your holy text is more important than the other holy texts?
//nope. as i was raised catholic my holy text might be the bible. it is important in that it has inspired some amazing literature/theater/film.
And a lot of other junk too. I give the people involved the credit, but yeah... the bible can be a tool for art and inspiration for great deeds... as can any inspiring item.
Was jesus the original socialist (for the christians, pardon)?
//while encouraging his followers to reject the laws of the ruling class, he maintained submission under god. so, no.
You're saying he was a rebel? Maybe so, but I his message was pretty much that of socialism in my opinion.
Why do you need this kind of false reassurance so badly?
//nobody's reassured me of anything. more often than not, people would fight me unarmed for their "faith"
It does seem as such... sadly. Bunch of dummies.
How your your opinion have any bearing on objective physical reality?
//it would be really friggin cool if scientists could find the energy force or essense of godness
yeah, it could happen, hard to say when really the fundamental structure of the universe is likely not even concieved of as yet. Interesting times ahead though man, all bets are off. It's really almost impossible to even remotely predict was is and isn't possible.
Why is your opinion more valid than the person of the other religion who is as religious as you but not of your religion?
//well if they're as religious as me, neither of us would be fighting. depending on the religion, theirs would be less valid if it's based on blind faith.
It does seem that there's a lot of that blind faith thing going around.
What makes YOU the expert?
//no one else could be the expert on what i believe. that's just silly.
I'd assume you'd know that's not point. You are answering the wrong question. What makes you the expert on what god is? How is it that you think the odds of "your conception" of "the creator" or however you personally redefine god, has any bearing on reality whatsoever? YOu'd have to consider yourself pretty damned gifted, IMO to have singlehandedly resolved the exact flavor of the hypnotic ice-cream cone that humanity has been slurping on throughout its initial attainment of consciousness. That's pretty damned impressive to me. You MUST be an expert... right? Maybe you're just egotistical? Eh, I am too, but still.. hehe, you must be pretty badass, solving all of mankinds wonders and all like that. *high five* You go man, you go!
It seems like a lot of people disagree with your choice of god, why do you think that is?
//cause they were raised to worship a human-like diety with no proof whatsoever, making them ever more likely to cling to it and violently defend it.
Hmm.. regardless of your conception, people are going to disagree because everyone thinks they have figured out and for some reason that I have a hard time fathoming sometimes, most people simply cannot accept "there is no answer right now.. sorry" as an answer. I completely understand it yet I'm completely baffled by it at the same time. It's very very simple.. nobody knows.. next question. DAMNIT people, get it together. I guess you can't. Argh. Glad some other people are reasonable too. Argh.
JUST FOR THE RECORD: IMO, you are not necessarily unreasonable in a manner that matters to me if you are a theist. It only matters to me when you start trying to justify your ridiculous assumptions to other people that I feel obligated to attack you, such that you might hear the truth and snap out of your theological haze. Why? Because I love people and I love brains and cannot stand to seem them corrupted in such a offensive manner. Dogma is my enemy, circular reasoning brings me right down man.. I gotsta represent for the west side G!!! RESPECT!! Booya Kasha.
Do you think they are as serious about their religion as you are about yours?
//if they disagree with me, they are more serious. if they couldn't care less, probably about the same.
Well, you seem pretty reasonable... I'm just kind of a prick, so pardon me if you don't mind. it's my pet character flaw.
Aren't you really just "choosing the explanation that works for you?" and giving up the quest for truth.. then getting pissed off if other people refuse to.. because it contradicts your selfish and lazy assumptions?
//yes no no no in that order
1) Would you agree then, that all knowledge is tentative?
2) okay
3) You don't seem like it, sweet
4) Come on, just a lil bit.. you do seem to have made some assumptions there.. while I'd agree they do seem more rational than a standard christian gig, they are still significant and somewhat unreasonable assumptions (I think you shouldn't commit for lack of evidence either way.. due to a lack of real methodology by which to discern a reasonable answer)
before i jump into the questions, you made a lot of assumptions about theists. not all theists are western protestants. in fact, most people in the world are not.
I know. I'm really only using generalizations, which is kind of lame I guess, but it's the easiest way to get the ball rollling... then each case can be evaluated individually.
Why do you choose your god?
//my concept of god (or godness as i like to call it) makes the most sense to me. "godness" is non-randomness. i believe the universe operates with purpose.
Hmm... see to me, you're kind of mincing words. To me, given the general conception of god that I seem faced with, for instance the typical christian variety, I don't like the word "god" at all. Mostly because you have to come up with "your own conception" and blah blah. I don't like words that describe "the creator" or "the supreme being" or "the life-force" in terms so vague as that really you're expected to come up with your own definition. Why is it a word if you have to define it every time you use it. Just fucking use the explanation of the definition. Topics like "hey, how does the universe work?" IMO deserve significantly more reverence and awe that "uh.... god?". If you're going to bother to have a conversation referring to your conception of "god" you might as well just spell out the conception and forget about the whole "god" thing. *shrug* Maybe I'm just a prick.
Why do you think it possible for a mortal to choose a god?
//mortals need something tangible to focus their thoughts on. in meditation you might hold a physical object from nature. in churches, it helps to have an idea though it may not be physical.
That doesn't really make sense to me. Maybe you just didn't explain what you mean in a way that I can understand. For instance I don't think "an idea" is tangible.
If there is a god, why do you think YOUR religious concept has any bearing on what that god is?
//i don't, i only know what works for me
so you think "yeah, I know some stuff about the ultimate power" or however you concieve it... which means that you realy expect that if you were suddenly to be faced with "god" it would be pretty much what you thought? I mean it's nice that you're secure and all, but isn't that just... uh... kind of presumptuous to say the least? I mean, I'd contend that remotest hint that your "conception of god" has anything more to do with the ACTUAL god, IF it exists, is pretty much the stupidest thing going. It's absolutely retarded, presumptuous, arrogant and uhm... well.. just dumb.
I suppose I'm just saying that my epistomological perspective is that all knowledge is tentative and any assertion regarding "god" is also as such.... so when you say "yeah this is right for me" you're saying, "my knowledge isn't tentative" and that is distubing to me because it makes you dangerous. Someone to whom knowledge is tentative is much more likely to have a realistic perspective on knowledge itself.
Okay I'm full of shit. I thought I had a point, pardon.
Wouldn't you think that god would be more than the human mind can really comprehend?
//i'll say! i can hardly wrap my mind around what i said above. i take inspiration from ideas formed by others to help me, mostly physics scholars and even a little bit george lucas
that is more respect than I see most people show. booya kasha. Respect.
You really believe that your holy text is more important than the other holy texts?
//nope. as i was raised catholic my holy text might be the bible. it is important in that it has inspired some amazing literature/theater/film.
And a lot of other junk too. I give the people involved the credit, but yeah... the bible can be a tool for art and inspiration for great deeds... as can any inspiring item.
Was jesus the original socialist (for the christians, pardon)?
//while encouraging his followers to reject the laws of the ruling class, he maintained submission under god. so, no.
You're saying he was a rebel? Maybe so, but I his message was pretty much that of socialism in my opinion.
Why do you need this kind of false reassurance so badly?
//nobody's reassured me of anything. more often than not, people would fight me unarmed for their "faith"
It does seem as such... sadly. Bunch of dummies.
How your your opinion have any bearing on objective physical reality?
//it would be really friggin cool if scientists could find the energy force or essense of godness
yeah, it could happen, hard to say when really the fundamental structure of the universe is likely not even concieved of as yet. Interesting times ahead though man, all bets are off. It's really almost impossible to even remotely predict was is and isn't possible.
Why is your opinion more valid than the person of the other religion who is as religious as you but not of your religion?
//well if they're as religious as me, neither of us would be fighting. depending on the religion, theirs would be less valid if it's based on blind faith.
It does seem that there's a lot of that blind faith thing going around.
What makes YOU the expert?
//no one else could be the expert on what i believe. that's just silly.
I'd assume you'd know that's not point. You are answering the wrong question. What makes you the expert on what god is? How is it that you think the odds of "your conception" of "the creator" or however you personally redefine god, has any bearing on reality whatsoever? YOu'd have to consider yourself pretty damned gifted, IMO to have singlehandedly resolved the exact flavor of the hypnotic ice-cream cone that humanity has been slurping on throughout its initial attainment of consciousness. That's pretty damned impressive to me. You MUST be an expert... right? Maybe you're just egotistical? Eh, I am too, but still.. hehe, you must be pretty badass, solving all of mankinds wonders and all like that. *high five* You go man, you go!
It seems like a lot of people disagree with your choice of god, why do you think that is?
//cause they were raised to worship a human-like diety with no proof whatsoever, making them ever more likely to cling to it and violently defend it.
Hmm.. regardless of your conception, people are going to disagree because everyone thinks they have figured out and for some reason that I have a hard time fathoming sometimes, most people simply cannot accept "there is no answer right now.. sorry" as an answer. I completely understand it yet I'm completely baffled by it at the same time. It's very very simple.. nobody knows.. next question. DAMNIT people, get it together. I guess you can't. Argh. Glad some other people are reasonable too. Argh.
JUST FOR THE RECORD: IMO, you are not necessarily unreasonable in a manner that matters to me if you are a theist. It only matters to me when you start trying to justify your ridiculous assumptions to other people that I feel obligated to attack you, such that you might hear the truth and snap out of your theological haze. Why? Because I love people and I love brains and cannot stand to seem them corrupted in such a offensive manner. Dogma is my enemy, circular reasoning brings me right down man.. I gotsta represent for the west side G!!! RESPECT!! Booya Kasha.
Do you think they are as serious about their religion as you are about yours?
//if they disagree with me, they are more serious. if they couldn't care less, probably about the same.
Well, you seem pretty reasonable... I'm just kind of a prick, so pardon me if you don't mind. it's my pet character flaw.
Aren't you really just "choosing the explanation that works for you?" and giving up the quest for truth.. then getting pissed off if other people refuse to.. because it contradicts your selfish and lazy assumptions?
//yes no no no in that order
1) Would you agree then, that all knowledge is tentative?
2) okay
3) You don't seem like it, sweet
4) Come on, just a lil bit.. you do seem to have made some assumptions there.. while I'd agree they do seem more rational than a standard christian gig, they are still significant and somewhat unreasonable assumptions (I think you shouldn't commit for lack of evidence either way.. due to a lack of real methodology by which to discern a reasonable answer)
Last edited:
Wes
Just as people have faith in natural selection. So-called lots of evidence, but no one has the proof for it either! In a court of law it would be called circumstantial evidence. Figure that one out!
So, I guess people who believe in God, are hypocrites just like those that believe in natural selection. It's not a one way street! Your old enough-you should have figured that out a long time ago!
Just as people have faith in natural selection. So-called lots of evidence, but no one has the proof for it either! In a court of law it would be called circumstantial evidence. Figure that one out!
So, I guess people who believe in God, are hypocrites just like those that believe in natural selection. It's not a one way street! Your old enough-you should have figured that out a long time ago!
Re: Wes
Thanks?
Okay: DONE... I've got it here for you: Um.. Natural Selection is a theory. God is not a theory, it's a basis for a religion. Natural Selection is tentative. "Holy Scripture" is NOT tentative. Can you see the difference?
It's not a street.
Thanks?
Wes
I'm sorry if I offended you, but I think you see my point. I know that religion thinks that this is true, but it seems to me that scientists think natural selection is true as well. So, no hard feelings. Have a good one Wes. I like you, haven't debated with you, but I like you. You seem relatively level headed.
Regards,
norad
I'm sorry if I offended you, but I think you see my point. I know that religion thinks that this is true, but it seems to me that scientists think natural selection is true as well. So, no hard feelings. Have a good one Wes. I like you, haven't debated with you, but I like you. You seem relatively level headed.
Regards,
norad
Re: Wes
I'm sorry if I offended you.
\You didn't.. but my experience here and mood at the moment... well I've found myself somewhat terse. Sorry, I just have a tendency to be kind of a prick.
but I think you see my point.
\No offense I swear, but I only saw that your point was invalid. I've seen that one many times before and it's really just bullshit. It's a way of irrationally justifying one's assumptions such that one does not look stupid.
I know that religion thinks that this is true, but it seems to me that scientists think natural selection is true as well.
\In general I'm sure they do.. but come up with a more rational explanation and you'll be given a million dollars and a nobel prize. Come up with a new god? Uh.. well, there's only one right? How do you think you have any knowledge of that god? Blah blah, I've said enough. If you are still asking these kind of questions you did not understand my argument. Really, I'm becoming confident that my argument is not reasonably refutable.
So, no hard feelings. Have a good one Wes. I like you, haven't debated with you, but I like you. You seem relatively level headed.
\Thanks, I always can appreciate the kind words.... I haven't seen many of your posts but being civil even when I'm a prick certainly gains much respect. Booya Kasha. Keep it real... on the west side (of stains, because it's the best)! (Da Ali G dude's movie, if you're perplexed at my weird comments).
I don't know how level headed I am, but I do believe that I'm gifted in this arena of thought. Could be I'm just an egotistical prick. Hard to say when you're me.
(hehe, *wonders if there are people lined up to confirm that one for me*)
I'm sorry if I offended you.
\You didn't.. but my experience here and mood at the moment... well I've found myself somewhat terse. Sorry, I just have a tendency to be kind of a prick.
but I think you see my point.
\No offense I swear, but I only saw that your point was invalid. I've seen that one many times before and it's really just bullshit. It's a way of irrationally justifying one's assumptions such that one does not look stupid.
I know that religion thinks that this is true, but it seems to me that scientists think natural selection is true as well.
\In general I'm sure they do.. but come up with a more rational explanation and you'll be given a million dollars and a nobel prize. Come up with a new god? Uh.. well, there's only one right? How do you think you have any knowledge of that god? Blah blah, I've said enough. If you are still asking these kind of questions you did not understand my argument. Really, I'm becoming confident that my argument is not reasonably refutable.
So, no hard feelings. Have a good one Wes. I like you, haven't debated with you, but I like you. You seem relatively level headed.
\Thanks, I always can appreciate the kind words.... I haven't seen many of your posts but being civil even when I'm a prick certainly gains much respect. Booya Kasha. Keep it real... on the west side (of stains, because it's the best)! (Da Ali G dude's movie, if you're perplexed at my weird comments).
I don't know how level headed I am, but I do believe that I'm gifted in this arena of thought. Could be I'm just an egotistical prick. Hard to say when you're me.
(hehe, *wonders if there are people lined up to confirm that one for me*)
Re: Wes
*sigh*
but I did. I've been doing it through this whole thread and I did it in specific response to your statement. read it again please if you really want an explanation. think about it a little... if you still don't think it covers it, let me know.
right on. I think I'm gonna play some gta 3
to be fair, you prolly haven't read mine either eh?
*sigh*
but I did. I've been doing it through this whole thread and I did it in specific response to your statement. read it again please if you really want an explanation. think about it a little... if you still don't think it covers it, let me know.
Originally posted by norad
Have a good one, Wes, time for me to pound back the rest of my beer
right on. I think I'm gonna play some gta 3