Blackstone
Registered Member
I personally believe that its the second, a tool to control the masses...
What a stunning argument!Originally posted by Blackstone
There is no need to prove that it was man who created his own high entity thoughout history..each culture had its idea of a god(s) , creators ..each one different from the other.
Actually, just a little - I'm of the much maligned 'commond thread' school. I'm just apalled by the number of assumptions underlying this overly-broad statement. Like the proverbial blind men touching an elephant in different locations and declaring 'this is what an elephant looks like', we argue back and forth about the existance or non-existance of God without experiencing enough about the underlying nature. We are only left with either a)rationalisms that cannot make a valid statement one way or the other, or b) metaphors and allegories which, while self-limiting, allow some comparative understanding. All the evidence is indirect and subjective. and the 'logical thinking mind' - the ego, can't stand that.Originally posted by Tyler
Turduckin; No arguement is necessary. Unless you are about to take up the position that every god ever believed in by any human being is real. Somethin' tells me you ain't about to do that, though.
Common usage has turned it into a proverb. I never read the poem, but am familiar with the image.Originally posted by Tyler
"Like the proverbial blind men touching an elephant..."
This is just my little thing but.....that's not proverbial. I believe the elephant thing comes from a poem. Not a proverb.
That is the reason I chose it. It was the point I was trying to make. There is an underlying whole that using just rational argument will never reveal.
Comparing it to the elephant poem is not a wise link. The elephant poem sets out to show that perhaps all religions/spiritualities and the such are understanding only part of the whole and declaring it the whole.
I agree - if I were to limit myself only to logic, then there is no logical formulation for belief in God. But does it neccessarily follow that there is no logical reason to limit the argument to logic. Talk about God REQUIRES that a style of thinking other than logic. That was the point of the rant that you don't seem to be able to entertain, whether its correct or incorrect, which is why you said:
This has nothing to do with the existence of non-existance of god. There is no logical reason to believe in god. If you want to compare religion and atheism to the elephant poem, you'd have to take out the elephant (not because I assert that god definetly does not exist - but because there is no logical reason to...).
Thank you for using the term 'seemingly'. That was polite. And I admitted up front that it was a rant. Please accept that as an apology.
The next two paragraphs you wrote are totally off-topic and seemingly just rantings.
I'm visiting to see how far modern thought has evolved. From where I sit, it hasn't made it to far past "Cogito, Ergo Sum"
"If you believe that God did not create the universe, then why do you waste your time arguing about it?"
If someone came on a debate forum and said they had physical proof the world was flat would you debate them to prove them wrong? Why bother, you already know the world isn't flat?
Nice editing job. You left out the IF..."you truly didn't care, why would you post inane questions like this one?"
1) How dare you assert I don't care. Try not to make so many gross assumptions in one post when you argue that I (or, Redoubtable) have done the same.
Of course it concerns the nature of man. But I'm saying that you don't understand the nature of man. If you did, you would not have dismissed that whole middle part as an irrelevent rant.2) This question concerns the nature of man. Some people are intersted in the nature of man.
Don't worry, that's just your logical mind trying to save it's own skin.
And I don't really know what you're saying is of any relevance after that.
Or show something more than speculation, otherwise you can't claim you know anything for sure, especially as your mind is equally infinitesimal.So the infinitesimal mind has the arrogance to say - "prove it in my terms or it must be fantasy, and you must be wrong",
Perhaps some don't want to know and are happy with their position. But there are many who genuinely search for truth and look for the best methods that have been proven reliable.when in fact, It doesn't want to know the answer.
You mean they won't do what you consider needs to be done. What gives you the authority to say what is the correct method?It will never do what needs to be done to find the answer.
Correction, alleged evidence. If it were acceptable evidence then there wouldn't be a debate. But indirect and subjective? How about vague, imprecise, imaginative, speculative, etc.Again, all the evidence is indirect and subjective.
You start with a closed minded presumption that an alleged god already exists. You really mean the 'idea of a god' must be tracked, right?So God has to be tracked.
It is not possible to track a fantasy. There has to be something more substantial before tracking can begin.But tracking implies that you want to find the thing you are tracking.
Perhaps that is because you may not be able to understand a different attitude than your won. But it isn't religion that is the fantasy, unfortunately religion is very real and for many of us it represents a real danger to humanity and to the progress of humanity. It is the object of religion that many of us see as fantasy, i.e. the unsupported speculation of a supernatural realm.So it constantly amazes me how many people who claim that religion is a fantasy have so much to say about it.
Your statement shows your difficulty understanding a different perspective. The issue of a god fantasy is largely irrelevant; it is the irrational people who try to impose their religious ideas and lifestyles on others that many of us find so repugnant.If you believe that God did not create the universe, then why do you waste your time arguing about it?
It is impossible to find something that doesn't exist. Why look for a fantasy?You will never find God because you aren't looking for him
Perhaps because some of us are more than atheists, perhaps some of us want a society free of the imposition that religions place on human progress. Perhaps it is a quest to understand the mind of the theist and religionist so that we can more effectively oppose what they support.If you are an athiest, why are you asking about religion or God?
I don't see that exercising the discipline of critical thought is giving in to fear. It takes effort to think and reason for oneself and significant courage to face the expectation of death without anything on the other side no matter how attractive religions appear.What frustrates me is that true intellectual and spiritual growth is sacrificed at the alter of fear. The fear of being wrong.
I agree. Man must move to a new level beyond his current significant limitations. Many groups are now forming throughout the world with the specific hope and intention of seeing posthumanism become a reality.In that regard, as much as I believe in evolution, I believe that rational man is an evolutionary dead-end.
It is our logic that specifically frees us from making the tragic errors that have permeated religious thinking throughout the ages. It is our rationality that allows us to see and detect truth with clarity that religions can never achieve. Logic is the most disciplined form of thought currently devised by man. It may not always be perfect but anything less will always be prone to significant error. It is the ability of critical thought that will free us from the bondage and repression of religion, and eventually condemn religion to the trashcan where it belongs.Our logic prevents us from seeing the ultimate consequences of the way we think and behave, and therefore it will eventually destroy us.
Originally posted by Blackstone
I personally believe that its the second, a tool to control the masses...
Others might say that, in the case of theists, the illusion of true intellectual and spiritual growth is fabricated at the alter of ignorance. I suspect that this is an over-generalization. But I also know that it is preposterous to presume that intellectial and spiritual growth must be predicated upon the belief in God(s).Originally posted by Turduckin
What frustrates me is that true intellectual and spiritual growth is sacrificed at the alter of fear.
I suspect that the poll options say more about your baggage than about myth creation. Too bad, it could have been an interesting discussion.Originally posted by Blackstone
I personally believe that its the second, a tool to control the masses...
Well the idea exists and has been voiced by humans so presumably it was their idea, especially since no other intelligent species is apparent, and chimps, apes and dolphins just don't appear to be sufficiently vocal.Where is the evidence that man created God?