This is for AThousandYoung:
Sorry, I have not mastered the editing feature here:
You wrote: Not really. Why should it be?
My response: Well maybe toss to the waistside was a bit strong to do but in the final conclusion the very idea of existence to me is such a marvelous thing to me that I sometimes cannot help but hold my head in wonder as to why I am able to function the way I can. Why all of mankind can function? I wonder does the lion in Africa have any type of thoughts of consciousness and wonderment of the very idea it "exists"? I often believe that's why organized religion was created: For control and to cure this type of insanity.
You wrote: Which means what exactly?
My response: Which means to me what is your personal definition as to why you exist? Not the scientific or conventional religious belief so much. That's why I wrote what I did in my opening statement.
You wrote: I think that's likely, but I am not sure. I don't really have much information to work with in order to make a conclusion regarding that topic. Please realize that I consider whatever happened at the Big Bang, if this event did take place, as still being a result of the physical laws of the universe.
My response: Sure but I guess that keeps bringing back to the same perhaps moot point. Even if you had more conclusive evidence the entire point I think I am getting at is "why" we exist? My premise as to "how" was inaccurate.
You wrote: I would say yes, but there's been a lot of debate lately about what the word 'atheist' "really" means, so I don't want you to jump to conclusions about me based on that word.
My response: No I don't believe I have. I wasn't attempting to anyway.
You wrote: Sure, once in a while.
My response: I guess this is the emphasis of this thread then. Trying to understand the wonderment, if it is indeed "wonderful". It's dangerous to stay in this place for too long though because it can hinder you. But sometimes it just blows my mind that I am conversing with people all over the world via this machine in front of me and all of what I am (what all of us are) is just taken for granted.
Originally posted by telerionGood point and I guess that is the inevitable conclusion of this thread but I am hoping to avoid that if possible. I guess those of us who are willing to go down this "weird" road do so at the sake of throwing away much of what we believe to real or logical. At the sake of offending anyone (and this is in no way my intention) but doesn't this reduce many of our beliefs, our natural laws, etc to jibberish?
Originally posted by Joe Fist
[b]I understand what you are saying and it comes from a place of logic but, at some point, don't you think logic (laws, etc) has to get thrown to the waistside?
I had thoughts like this for a while, and I do still wonder if since humans are a subset of all of the universe (materialistic thinking here), they cann ...[text shortened]... m there. Once we abandon reason, what can we say? Every statement crumbles into nonsense.
[/b]
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIt's not clear how the laws of physics guarantee consciousness. Human beings are conscious. Hence, humanity is not obviously a natural result of physical laws.
Humanity is a natural result of the laws of physics at work in the universe.
I am not saying that it doesn't, just that it is isn't obvious why.
Originally posted by Joe FistYeah, once we abandon reason, we abandon language. Once we lose language, we lose the ability to reflect because reflection is grounded in language.
Good point and I guess that is the inevitable conclusion of this thread but I am hoping to avoid that if possible. I guess those of us who are willing to go down this "weird" road do so at the sake of throwing away much of what we believe to real or logical. At the sake of offending anyone (and this is in no way my intention) but doesn't this reduce many of our beliefs, our natural laws, etc to jibberish?
Now that doesn't mean that we can't have reasoned discussions of these topics. Man, in his natural state, is a rational creature. Perhaps any attempt to divorce ourselves from rationality leads us farther away from what it is to be human, like trying to see a lights show with our eyes closed.
Originally posted by Joe FistHey Joe,
Please understand that there is no intended sarcasm by this question but it seems to me many of the debates here are centered around religious beliefs. Whether one is an atheist, christian, buddhist, whatever. So, with the utmost respect ...[text shortened]... anyone knows the wiser please let me know and thanks in advance 🙂
Richard Feinman worked a long time on 'breaking a wave". I think he was onto something, though I will never know for certain because I lack mathability.
One thing we have noticed in quantum physics is that until a 'reality' or 'photon' or 'information packet' is observed, it has a dual nature. It carries an "uncertainty" that allows it free passage through time/space. No apparent limits by time/space.
But... Once it is "observed" or "measured" it breaks. Hence... the term "breaking the wave".
I wonder if the answer is still to be discovered as to what "mind" is. If it turns out to be integrated into a portion of our universe that we have yet to discover or explore, then we might have all sorts of goodies waiting for us in both time and space.
But as of now, "who are we" must remain in the realm of the known. We can trace our evolution from the split from plant life with certainty using our DNA and the DNA of a fern plant.
We are more developed than a fern, but less developed than God?
That is my best guess as of today.
Mike
<edit> Please note that I am an ateist. But not dogmatic on that subject. I just accept my limits and proclaim what is obvious to me. I will adapt to change.
Mayharm -
Vanity as in the motivation to "look good" and be appreciated/desired for looking good.
Is that not equivalent to what you have just described?
Nope. "Prettyness" is a human judgement or experience - or that of some other being capable of experiencing it. We find roses pretty due to their color, their symmetry, or whatever.
These things came about through genetic alterations to the plant (random and later human modified as well) which were then naturally selected for because bees and birds and things could find them more easily, eat their necter, and in the process carry off their pollen, allowing the plant to spread it's reproductive cells farther and mixing the gene pool of that species up more effectively. Such plants would succeed more than plants with less noticeable reproductive organs. Later, humans artificially selected plants based on humans' sense of beauty.
Pretty flowers did not come about because of any motivation or desire of the plant, as far as I can tell. I think plants are probably unconcious and unaware, and not capable of vanity.
Similarly, there are plants that smell like rotting meat, because that attracts flies. We don't find this smell attractive, but it does the job it's supposed to do. It attracts mobile organisms that will spread it's pollen.
dj2becker -
My worldview vs the Biblical worldview - why mine makes more sense:
1. What is reality?
My worldview (ATY)-'Reality' is a word. Define it however you want. This question makes little sense. What do exist with certainty are me and my perceptions. I can intepret these however I want, but nothing else is certain.
Biblical Worldview and my interpretation of them (BIB) - This worldview assumes things for no good reason - things like the existence of God (whatever that is), 'absolute morality' (again, whatever that is), the infallibility of the Bible, etc.
2. What is our basis of knowledge?
ATY - Again, 'knowledge' is a word, and you can define it how you want. I've already described the two things that form the basis for all else - my existence, and the existence of my perceptions.
BIB - I have no idea what BIB has to say about this.
3. How can we know what is right or wrong?
ATY - 'Right' and 'wrong' are determined by human feelings of rightness and wrongness. An individual examines his own feelings, works through logic, etc, to determine what is right or wrong for that person. This sense of right and wrong can be changed by debate, experience, or training/brainwashing. Generally there is a tendency to feel that happiness and the elimination of suffering (especially when done for others) is good, or right, and the opposite is evil, or wrong.
BIB - Right and wrong are 'absolutes' based on the will of God as the Bible explains (very unclearly, I will add), yet also dependent or reflected by conscience. Somehow these two things are perfectly in sync. Despite the widespread existence of suffering, pain, or whatever one feels is evil and wrong, not all of which have much to do with human choice - and especially not the choice of the one who suffers - and despite God's supposed omnipotence, somehow everything makes sense. But it doesn't. If you feel this way, it's just your ignorance, or lack of ability to understand God. This is a bizaare worldview and hard to swallow. It's explained easily by ATY by the explanation that people are trained to feel this way when young, and there is a tremendous amound of societal reinforcement for it. In addition there's a natural desire in humans to feel profound and important, to have something to strive for, and to have the answers to many things they don't have the answers to, and religion seems to offer these things. Sometimes people are unhappy and need to find something that lets them feel important and gives them some structure.
ATY is explained by BIB as a 'choice' of mine to deliberately challenge and ignore God, despite my supposed limited capability for understanding (and if I did understand, I would be insane, because I'd be giving up Heaven and sending myself to eternal torment, which no sane person would do if they really understood it), despite my natural, supposedly God given, tendency to think for myself, and the huge amount of ignorance of 'God's word' and the validity of God's word that clearly exists in the world. How can we choose when we have no reason to believe the truth?
4. What is man?
ATY -Again, it's a word, define it how you want. Generally it's defined as those perceptions that seem to represent a body and mind similar to oneself.
BIB -Same thing, as far as I can tell...though BIB claims certain qualities like man is a special creation of God, has an immortal 'soul', etc. There's no evidence for the existence of these qualities.
5. What happens to a person after death?
ATY - I don't know. The evidence suggests that the person ceases to exist.
BIB - The person's 'soul', which is different from his mind (I think?) goes to various places, like Heaven, or Hell, or Purgatory, or whatever, depending on how God judges that person's morality (that is, obedience), there to experience various extreme consequences, either good or bad, for eternity. There is no evidence for the existence of these places. This concept is easily explained by ATY as a combination of wish fulfillment and a method of control (not necessarily a bad thing - controlling people so they don't kill each other can be good).
6. What is the meaning of history?
ATY - Again, it's a word, pick a definition. The common definition is that the perception of memory and perceptions of documents suggests that in the past people lived and did certain things, which they often recorded and can be read about.
BIB - I don't know what BIB says about history.
7. Why is there suffering and evil?
ATY - Probably because organisms that can suffer tend to avoid things that keep them from reproducing and spreading their genes.
BIB - I'm not sure...because God gave people free will, and free will sometimes results in suffering and evil? Yet somehow God is not responsible...
8. What is the purpose of our existence?
ATY - 'Purpose' is a word to be defined arbritrarily. According to common definitions of purpose, I feel we have no specific purpose for existing.
BIB - I don't know what BIB says about this. Is the purpose to do God's will and get closer to God? Why does this matter? I guess it must make us happy?
9. Why should we live?
ATY - Because life can be good, and we can be happy. If this doesn't seem likely, and suffering seems much more likely or is very intense, then maybe we shouldn't. Death isn't as awful as life can be, probably. Also, people who love us will be unhappy if we die.
BIB - Because God wants us to, and tells us it's bad to kill ourselves, and will punish us for doing so.
What about the future?
What about it? Nobody can answer that question from any perspective unless you're more specific.
Originally posted by TinorangatiratangaThat seems reasonable. Why don't we do that?
This is a big ask, but perhaps there needs to be a collective sharing by all cultures (starting with 'us' on this forum) to appreciate the magnitude of such a question.
All cultures have their origin mythologies, based on their respective ontology, and many seem to share common beliefs and happenings. If we all post human origin stories/beli ...[text shortened]... haps even a theory ( 🙂)
We could be guided by the maxim, 'Where theres smoke theres fire'.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWe shall.
That seems reasonable. Why don't we do that?
In the beginning was dark. There gathered all beings both bright and dark.
And we were afraid. We knew not whither we came. We knew that all who arrive depart without meaning.
So then came a great sorrow. "If we come into this village and die, and are so forgotten, then what meaning do we possess?"
And we grieved.
There was no answer.
So we grieve.
Until we become immortal. Or die forever. We choose. By action.
India for all. Or... Space.
To live. To grow. To become. To... Be. What we can dream.
Joe Fist -
the very idea of existence to me is such a marvelous thing to me that I sometimes cannot help but hold my head in wonder as to why I am able to function the way I can.
It's definitely marvelous. But what does "why" mean? Why suggests a motive or justification. Whose motive? Whose justification? Why do we need a motive or justification for existence?
I often believe that's why organized religion was created: For control and to cure this type of insanity.
That makes sense.
Trying to understand the wonderment, if it is indeed "wonderful".
Wonder is an experience or emotion, like any other. What is there to understand about it? Wonderfulness is a judgement or intepretation by a being capable of wonder. It's not an inherent quality of something.
doesn't this reduce many of our beliefs, our natural laws, etc to jibberish?
What are you referring to by this?
Pawnokeyhole
It's not clear how the laws of physics guarantee consciousness. Human beings are conscious. Hence, humanity is not obviously a natural result of physical laws.
I am not saying that it doesn't, just that it is isn't obvious why.
I'd replace 'why' with 'how'. Otherwise I agree.
Since the laws of physics do have very strong influence over conciousness however there is clearly a very close link. The hypothesis that the laws of physics are responsible for conciousness is also a simpler explanation than one that invokes something outside physics, which in the absence of any other evidence makes it the more useful explanation.
Originally posted by AThousandYounglol!
Mayharm -
[b]Vanity as in the motivation to "look good" and be appreciated/desired for looking good.
Is that not equivalent to what you have just described?
Nope. "Prettyness" is a human judgement or experien ...[text shortened]... o do. It attracts mobile organisms that will spread it's pollen.[/b]
I think you're making the mistake of putting "man" at the centre of everything, not I.
You previously said the rose is the way it is to be...mmm...shall we say, more attractive? ...to the bees. This is the vanity I was referring to, the desire to "look good" and be desired for it.
If you want to exchange a rotting-meat-smelling plant and flies in this analogy, feel free to do so. I prefer the rose (though it's makes no difference to a jovian of course).
You also say there is no motivation, I beg to differ. If it does not strive to "look pretty" another plant, such as the humble buttercup, will gain the attentions of the bees instead. If the rose does nothing it will die out.
Isn't that motivation? (which actually fits better than desire, thank you)
MÅ¥HÅRM
Originally posted by MayharmOk. I now take this as a personal challenge. I have been rejected six times.
lol!
I think you're making the mistake of putting "man" at the centre of everything, not I.
You previously said the rose is the way it is to be...mmm...shall we say, more attractive? ...to the bees. This is the vanity I was referring to, the desire to "look good" and be desired for it.
If you want to exchange a rotting-meat-smelling plant and f ...[text shortened]... e out.
Isn't that motivation? (which actually fits better than desire, thank you)
MÅ¥HÅRM
Let's try "I take our sexuality as a given of nature. We will do all we can to trump our enemies/competitors".
May the force be with me. <chuckle>
Ever loving the thought police.