- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
26 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by PenguinTrue.
Googlefudge, being the one not making the extra-ordinary claim, does not need to have anything really.
--- Penguin
However as it happens I have available the summed knowledge and wisdom
gained through science, reason, whit and imagination that makes up our
societies immense extelligence.
We have at our finger tips immense and ever growing stores of knowledge.
More than anything this is our unique and defining characteristic as a species.
One I embrace, and Grampy does not.
I don't need to have anything to reject an unsubstantiated extraordinary claim...
That doesn't mean I don't have anything.
26 Jun 13
"an ancient dilemma..."
Let's say there's an ancient dilemma facing us all in present time. If there is an alive and powerful, eternal entity who/which has offered each of us the unearned and undeserved gift of permanent relationship which we individually reject [and repeatedly reject], isn't it reasonable to expect eternal separation as the only viable alternative? Your comments. (op)
26 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyNo, the possibilities here are clearly:
[b]"an ancient dilemma..."
Let's say there's an ancient dilemma facing us all in present time. If there is an alive and powerful, eternal entity who/which has offered each of us the unearned and undeserved gift of permanent relationship which we individually reject [and repeatedly reject], isn't it reasonable to expect eternal separation as the only viable alternative? Your comments. (op)[/b]
1. A permanent relationship
2. A temporary relationship
3. Multiple temporary relationships
4. A permanent separation
Options 3 or 4 would be most appealing to me, assuming option 4 consists of a simple lack of existence (as all evidence suggests is the reality). As has been pointed out, option 1 is highly likely to be a form of purgatory.
The simple existence of such an ultimatum as you describe (I.e. only options 1 and 4) would indicate to me that the being proposing it is needlessly restrictive.
And we have no evidence that such a proposal or being does in fact exist.
--- Penguin.
26 Jun 13
Originally posted by Penguin... your source or authority?
No, the possibilities here are clearly:
1. A permanent relationship
2. A temporary relationship
3. Multiple temporary relationships
4. A permanent separation
Options 3 or 4 would be most appealing to me, assuming option 4 consists of a simple lack of existence (as all evidence suggests is the reality). As has been pointed out, option 1 is highly lik ...[text shortened]... ve.
And we have no evidence that such a proposal or being does in fact exist.
--- Penguin.
26 Jun 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyThere are so many "gods" with eternal gifts. How do you decide which is the right god to worship? If this Judeo/Christian god actually existed as described in the Bible, it is so egotistical, that I cannot beleive It would not be reappearing to modern man, full blown. This god is portrayed as demanding not just being a good person and following Its laws, but that the human must worship It too. This just strikes me as aburd and full of human egotism that has been foisted on "god".
[b]"an ancient dilemma..."
Let's say there's an ancient dilemma facing us all in present time. If there is an alive and powerful, eternal entity who/which has offered each of us the unearned and undeserved gift of permanent relationship which we individually reject [and repeatedly reject], isn't it reasonable to expect eternal separation as the only viable alternative? Your comments. (gb)[/b]
26 Jun 13
Originally posted by Phranny"There are so many "gods" with eternal gifts. How do you decide which is the right god to worship?" (Phranny)
There are so many "gods" with eternal gifts. How do you decide which is the right god to worship? If this Judeo/Christian god actually existed as described in the Bible, it is so egotistical, that I cannot beleive It would not be reappearing to modern man, full blown. This god is portrayed as demanding not just being a good person and following Its laws, ...[text shortened]... oo. This just strikes me as aburd and full of human egotism that has been foisted on "god".
... and which do you worship? (gb)
26 Jun 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyOk, I will rephrase it to emphasize the important point in my post:
... your source or authority?
---------------------------------------------------
No, the possibilities here are clearly:
1. A permanent relationship
2. A temporary relationship
3. Multiple temporary relationships
4. A permanent separation
Options 3 or 4 would be most appealing to me, assuming option 4 consists of a simple lack of existence (as all evidence i have seen suggests to me is the reality).
---------------------------------------------------
Do you disagree that there must in fact be those 4 possibilities?
--- Penguin.
Originally posted by PenguinPlease flesh out the hypotheticals, specifically to clarifying how and where
Ok, I will rephrase it to emphasize the important point in my post:
---------------------------------------------------
No, the possibilities here are clearly:
[b]1. A permanent relationship
2. A temporary relationship
3. Multiple temporary relationships
4. A permanent separation
Options 3 or 4 would be most appealing to me, assuming option 4 ...[text shortened]... -----------
Do you disagree that there must in fact be those 4 possibilities?
--- Penguin.[/b]
"worship' of some person, place, thing or nothing fits in. Thanks. -Bob
Postscript: René worshipped himself.
27 Jun 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbySorry, the only hypothetical we are discussing is your O.P. proposing that the gift of an eternal relationship has been offered and asserting that the only logical alternative is eternal separation.
Please flesh out the hypotheticals, specifically to clarifying how and where
"worship' of some person, place, thing or nothing fits in. Thanks. -Bob
Postscript: René worshipped himself.
I am simply pointing out that logically there are two other possible alternatives: a single temporary relationship and multiple temporary relationships. I want to know why you think those are not logical possibilities.
'Worship' has nothing whatsoever to do with this. We are talking about maths and logic here. If you want the hypothetical fleshed out, you will have to do it since it is your hypothetical.
--- Penguin.
27 Jun 13
Originally posted by PenguinOne day [13.06.27-13.06.27+] there will be a cessation of your brain waves; that moment the physical death of your body will occur. Where will you [your unique/immaterial being; distinct personality; and vast storage of memories] go? --- Bob
Sorry, the only hypothetical we are discussing is your O.P. proposing that the gift of an eternal relationship has been offered and asserting that the only logical alternative is eternal separation.
I am simply pointing out that logically there are two other possible alternatives: a single temporary relationship and multiple temporary relationships. I wan ...[text shortened]... ypothetical fleshed out, you will have to do it since it is your hypothetical.
--- Penguin.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
27 Jun 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYou assume the existence of a "unique/immaterial being".
One day [13.06.27-13.06.27+] there will be a cessation of your brain waves; that moment the physical death of your body will occur. Where will you [your unique/immaterial being; distinct personality; and vast storage of memories] go? --- Bob
You are assuming dualism.
From the perspective of non-dualists (and science) no such "immaterial being" exists.
The non-dualist sees your mind, your thoughts and memories, as functions of your physical brain.
And so in the same way that when a computer hard-drive is physically destroyed, destroying the data contained on it... When you die, the structures of your brain break down, destroying the data (your memories and personality) they once held.
They do not "go" anywhere. They just cease to exist.
27 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudge"They do not "go" anywhere. They just cease to exist." (googlefudge )
You assume the existence of a "unique/immaterial being".
You are assuming dualism.
From the perspective of non-dualists (and science) no such "immaterial being" exists.
The non-dualist sees your mind, your thoughts and memories, as functions of your physical brain.
And so in the same way that when a computer hard-drive is physically destroyed ...[text shortened]... s and personality) they once held.
They do not "go" anywhere. They just cease to exist.
All of the 'evolutionary process' leads to a colossal waste of nothingness?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
27 Jun 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI don't understand the question.
[b]"They do not "go" anywhere. They just cease to exist." (googlefudge )
All of the 'evolutionary process' leads to a colossal waste of nothingness?[/b]
Evolution is a natural process by which living things change and adapt to their environment over successive generations due to changes in frequency of genes in a population due to natural selection.
It has no purpose, no direction, no goal.
In the same way that gravity leads to the formation of stars and star systems from clouds of gas simply by pulling on stuff with no purpose or intent.
Also, what is a waste? in what context?
Considering a persons life ending as a waste is a subjective human feeling.
And has nothing to do with the non-sentient and uncaring laws of physics that govern our universe.
27 Jun 13
Originally posted by googlefudge"Evolution is a natural process by which living things change and adapt to their environment over successive generations due to changes in frequency of genes in a population due to natural selection"
I don't understand the question.
Evolution is a natural process by which living things change and adapt to their environment over successive generations due to changes in frequency of genes in a population due to natural selection.
It has no purpose, no direction, no goal.
In the same way that gravity leads to the formation of stars and star sys ...[text shortened]... has nothing to do with the non-sentient and uncaring laws of physics that govern our universe.
.... toward what end, penultimate and/or ultimate purpose?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
27 Jun 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyDid you actually read my post? I mean at all??
"Evolution is a natural process by which living things change and adapt to their environment over successive generations due to changes in frequency of genes in a population due to natural selection"
.... toward what end, penultimate and/or ultimate purpose?
"Evolution is a natural process by which living things change and adapt to their environment over successive generations due to changes in frequency of genes in a population due to natural selection.
It has no purpose, no direction, no goal.
In the same way that gravity leads to the formation of stars and star systems from clouds of gas simply by pulling on stuff with no purpose or intent. "
I am not sure how I could be clearer than that... But here goes.
The laws of physics, evolution, the natural processes of the universe...
HAVE NO PURPOSE, GOAL, OR INTENTIONS... ultimate or otherwise.
Let me explain evolution to you as you evidently do not get it.
You have some population of living things. (all one species)
This population is made up of individuals with a range of characteristics determined by their genes.
Those that successfully reproduce pass on those genes to the next generation.
Those that fail to reproduce don't pass on their genes to the next generation.
Those individuals who's characteristics happen to be better (even very slightly) suited to the local environment (including dealing with other species) will have a higher chance of reproducing and passing on their genes to the next generation.
Over time (successive generations) this leads to a greater frequency in the population of genes that give beneficial characteristics. Thus more individuals in the population will have those characteristics that are better suited to the environment and few individuals with characteristics that are less suited to the environment.
Every so often mistakes are made when copying and passing on the genes.
This introduces new characteristics not previously present.
These characteristics will compete with the older ones and those that are more beneficial will become more common and those that are less successful will become less common (or die out).
This continues until such a time as there are no reproducing life forms.
As you can see there is no goal, or purpose, or planning, or intent, or direction.
Evolution is a non-sentient and uncaring process that occurs to any and all known life forms.