LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
I know God exists with absolute certainty.... but the atheist/agnostic who relies on science must say nothing more than, 'there is no evidence to support the existence of God.'
IF they don't rely on Science then I'd think they could say with certainty what they say but I'd like to know the basis of such a position. Maybe it is intuitive...
Am I? Or am I simply holding up a mirror to you and you are not liking what you see?
This is rather amusingly ironic.
You claimed that "everything [you] do is to confront the certainty of others." And I said you don't appear to do this yourself, and you now have become angry and offended at that comment.
But your response is evidence of exactly what I said: absolute certainty, like this:
So, you appear happy to challenge the certainty of others, but not to challenge your own -- and especially not, to have your certainty challenged by others.
A rather odd double standard, is it not?
I can see what you think exactly as much as you can see what others think. If it's invalid for me to "project" onto you, then why is it valid for you to project onto others?
Moving along, you say this ...
... followed immediately by this:
You cannot see how self-contradictory these statements are? That you would be offended at any suggestion that I know what you think, but you have no problem doing that very same thing to others -- which you do on a regular basis?
Have I? Not from where I sit.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,101
- 5,640
- 126
What is even more odd is people who insist that "god(s)" exist with such certainty.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Ah... well... such is life, I guess... I can't imagine knowing something and not being certain I know it.. I suppose it is possible but either I do or don't know something unlike Socrates... hehhehe
He who knows not and knows not he knows not: he is a fool-shun him.
He who knows not and knows he knows not: he is simple-teach him.
He who knows and knows not he knows: he is asleep-wake him.
He who knows and knows he knows: he is wise-follow him.
All aboard!!!!
Dr. Zaus
Lifer
- Oct 16, 2008
- 11,770
- 347
- 126
hubris is not wisdom, it is folly... as the who thinks he knows and knows he knows is bound to know not and not know that he doesn't know. It is only he who knows, and knows he knows, but also knows not and knows he knows not that is capable of full wisdom.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Science will one day exaplin what you think you know whether it's CGNP or soratoin uptake or something else from "believers" that causes them such surety so sure they are even willing to blow themselves up or get eaten by lions for their God it's chemicals not a man in the sky.
Thats my faith.
Last edited:
Unless he knows that he knows not of something due to it being presently unknowable; in which case he is the one who is wise.
Unless what he knows, and what he knows he knows, is actually self-delusion; in which case, he is the fool.
To be honest, there is always a little doubt, but that is only b/c my mind lives in the material world. However, a combination of reason and experience persuades me otherwise.
I am not sure it is possible to be 100% certain of anything due to the nature of our minds and the world around us. Life is fairly stable, but at the same time it is very fragile. In terms of the spiritual, it is hard to not be weak-minded as it is another realm, although intertwined. The invisible manifests itself but we forget too easily. Also, we are not always satisfied with how it manifests itself, especially in the first world as we have little need for the spiritual, being so saturated with wealth and distraction.
Yeah I pretty much agree. If they relied on more than just science to inform themselves about the nature of the universe they could more reasonably make a more definitive stand.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,101
- 5,640
- 126
All affluent societies have usually had a decline in Religion. Is it due to distraction or is it that they had less need for Hope? I'm gonna go with the latter.
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
- Jun 19, 2004
- 24,135
- 1,594
- 126
I think it's due to the more affluent a society is, the less connection/more insulation they have to the rest of the world.
M: Hehehe, You do realize, I hope that I know the kinds of things I think about and you have no idea, that having just told you that I consider something all the time you tell me you think I am lying? Do you not see you are not only insulting but insane?
CK: Am I? Or am I simply holding up a mirror to you and you are not liking what you see?
This is rather amusingly ironic.
You claimed that "everything [you] do is to confront the certainty of others." And I said you don't appear to do this yourself, and you now have become angry and offended at that comment.
M: Wonderfully amazing. I asked you:
"Do you really think I don't apply the same analysis to myself?"
And you responded:
"Honestly? Yeah, most of the time."
So let's cut the bull shit that I appear not to do this because if you had said that, as I already pointed out, there would be no problem. But you made no suggestion whatsoever that I appeared to do that, you said you honestly don't think I do most of the time. You honestly know that I never look at my motives most of the time and not that I don't appear to. I can understand why you would like to fudge this all you can.
Furthermore, your notion of certainty certainly seems different than mine. I am pretty certain I have five fingers on each of my hands that that something I call myself is typing, but I am not certain I know my unconscious motivations. So when I'm talking about uncertainty, I am talking about hidden morivations that make people do things they think they do for other reasons. I am also certain about what I think about, that I spend time trying to understand my motivations, and I am certain you have no idea if I do or not.
CK: But your response is evidence of exactly what I said: absolute certainty, like this:
"M" I know what I think about and I said so. You no nothing about it. Do you not see how pathetic and how sad that is? You went right out there in La La land.
CK: So, you appear happy to challenge the certainty of others, but not to challenge your own -- and especially not, to have your certainty challenged by others.
M: Yes I am a real monster that way. I challenge the assumptions that people make that are impossible to have rationally, like there is a God because the Bible says so. But I would never question the reading material of somebody who said he reads the Bible. I can have no idea if he does or not. I question the absurdity of words like the implied certainty of the expression, "I'm happy to do this" but I pass on making it an issue because it's of little importance but the notion that I don't want mine challenged is all your own. You challenged my certainty that I know what I think about, not anything with hidden motivation. I know what the fuck I think about. You didn't challenge any unconscious assumptions I make, you challenged something I certainly know.
CK: A rather odd double standard, is it not?
M: The only double standard appears to me to be a product of desperate and illogical thinking and a kind of pettiness. Pretty sad is what it seems.
============
M: Had you been a truly rational person you could have challenged what you see as results or stated you see none forthcoming, but you have no idea if I perform such self questioning or not because you can't see what people think. But you can project on them what you do.
CK: I can see what you think exactly as much as you can see what others think. If it's invalid for me to "project" onto you, then why is it valid for you to project onto others?
M: I can't see what others think unless they tell me. If somebody says he self-reflects I don't tell him he lying. I comment on real thoughts that others express. You didn't question the motivation of something I said, you denied that I do what I said, not that I don't do it well, not that I don't see some ulterior motive for what I do, but that I don't to it at all. I know that you are wrong and I am completely certain of it just like what I had for breakfast.
==========
CK: Moving along, you say this ...
"M" Be so kind, if you answer any of this to include how it is that you and not me gets to know what I think, not whether it's right or wrong, but subject matter wise.
CK: ... followed immediately by this:
"M" People lie to themselves all the time. They lie about things when they think. They lie about their feelings, but if a bridge engineer says he thinks about bridges a lot, what kind of person would come along and say, you don't think about bridges.
CK: You cannot see how self-contradictory these statements are? That you would be offended at any suggestion that I know what you think, but you have no problem doing that very same thing to others -- which you do on a regular basis?
M: Ah shit. You didn't tell me you know what I think. You told me you know I don't think what I said I do which is patently absurd. I don't tell people they don't think what they say they think but that what they say they think has unconscious bias. These are totally different things and you seem to be too obsessed with defending your illogic to see it.
==========
M: It looks to me like you just took any pretense you had to reasonableness and threw it down the toilet.
CK: Have I? Not from where I sit.
M: Too bad. There were so many issues I brought up I thought more important than being dragged through this crap, the notion that self knowledge requires self confrontation, the matter of unconscious assumptions, the beauty of faith that leads to God as a manifestation of love, the notion of religions as bridges, the motivations of folk who argue for and against belief, etc. But everything that leads to the truth of motivation gets deflected. But the problem with self hate is that the one thing it will never allow is self confrontation. It is that simple truth, I think, that makes you sure that what you say to me makes me angry. It would make you angry. Do you notice at all that you are extremely defensive? If so can you say why?
CK: Am I? Or am I simply holding up a mirror to you and you are not liking what you see?
This is rather amusingly ironic.
You claimed that "everything [you] do is to confront the certainty of others." And I said you don't appear to do this yourself, and you now have become angry and offended at that comment.
M: Wonderfully amazing. I asked you:
"Do you really think I don't apply the same analysis to myself?"
And you responded:
"Honestly? Yeah, most of the time."
So let's cut the bull shit that I appear not to do this because if you had said that, as I already pointed out, there would be no problem. But you made no suggestion whatsoever that I appeared to do that, you said you honestly don't think I do most of the time. You honestly know that I never look at my motives most of the time and not that I don't appear to. I can understand why you would like to fudge this all you can.
Furthermore, your notion of certainty certainly seems different than mine. I am pretty certain I have five fingers on each of my hands that that something I call myself is typing, but I am not certain I know my unconscious motivations. So when I'm talking about uncertainty, I am talking about hidden morivations that make people do things they think they do for other reasons. I am also certain about what I think about, that I spend time trying to understand my motivations, and I am certain you have no idea if I do or not.
CK: But your response is evidence of exactly what I said: absolute certainty, like this:
"M" I know what I think about and I said so. You no nothing about it. Do you not see how pathetic and how sad that is? You went right out there in La La land.
CK: So, you appear happy to challenge the certainty of others, but not to challenge your own -- and especially not, to have your certainty challenged by others.
M: Yes I am a real monster that way. I challenge the assumptions that people make that are impossible to have rationally, like there is a God because the Bible says so. But I would never question the reading material of somebody who said he reads the Bible. I can have no idea if he does or not. I question the absurdity of words like the implied certainty of the expression, "I'm happy to do this" but I pass on making it an issue because it's of little importance but the notion that I don't want mine challenged is all your own. You challenged my certainty that I know what I think about, not anything with hidden motivation. I know what the fuck I think about. You didn't challenge any unconscious assumptions I make, you challenged something I certainly know.
CK: A rather odd double standard, is it not?
M: The only double standard appears to me to be a product of desperate and illogical thinking and a kind of pettiness. Pretty sad is what it seems.
============
M: Had you been a truly rational person you could have challenged what you see as results or stated you see none forthcoming, but you have no idea if I perform such self questioning or not because you can't see what people think. But you can project on them what you do.
CK: I can see what you think exactly as much as you can see what others think. If it's invalid for me to "project" onto you, then why is it valid for you to project onto others?
M: I can't see what others think unless they tell me. If somebody says he self-reflects I don't tell him he lying. I comment on real thoughts that others express. You didn't question the motivation of something I said, you denied that I do what I said, not that I don't do it well, not that I don't see some ulterior motive for what I do, but that I don't to it at all. I know that you are wrong and I am completely certain of it just like what I had for breakfast.
==========
CK: Moving along, you say this ...
"M" Be so kind, if you answer any of this to include how it is that you and not me gets to know what I think, not whether it's right or wrong, but subject matter wise.
CK: ... followed immediately by this:
"M" People lie to themselves all the time. They lie about things when they think. They lie about their feelings, but if a bridge engineer says he thinks about bridges a lot, what kind of person would come along and say, you don't think about bridges.
CK: You cannot see how self-contradictory these statements are? That you would be offended at any suggestion that I know what you think, but you have no problem doing that very same thing to others -- which you do on a regular basis?
M: Ah shit. You didn't tell me you know what I think. You told me you know I don't think what I said I do which is patently absurd. I don't tell people they don't think what they say they think but that what they say they think has unconscious bias. These are totally different things and you seem to be too obsessed with defending your illogic to see it.
==========
M: It looks to me like you just took any pretense you had to reasonableness and threw it down the toilet.
CK: Have I? Not from where I sit.
M: Too bad. There were so many issues I brought up I thought more important than being dragged through this crap, the notion that self knowledge requires self confrontation, the matter of unconscious assumptions, the beauty of faith that leads to God as a manifestation of love, the notion of religions as bridges, the motivations of folk who argue for and against belief, etc. But everything that leads to the truth of motivation gets deflected. But the problem with self hate is that the one thing it will never allow is self confrontation. It is that simple truth, I think, that makes you sure that what you say to me makes me angry. It would make you angry. Do you notice at all that you are extremely defensive? If so can you say why?
Last edited:
Well, fortunately, in a room full of people, some who asleep and some who are awake, those who are awake recognize who is awake and who is asleep.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Hehehehe,
The 'what' he knows is not mentioned but, in the conditions you mentioned I suppose that could be the case.
I, however, do sense in this post something related to another... not mine, cuz I'm way dumb actually... And way easy ()
Unlike Moonbeam who'd debate a nail into a 2 X 4 armed with eons of studying this kind of stuff I confine my self to what I know best... Me!
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
lol you have never been to Saudi Arabia. Even taxis are Mercedes 350E's and wealth abounds...they have malls that make our best malls look like strip malls in a bad neighborhood... they are considered rather religious. As in most fundamentalist of all Muslims. Women can't drive. Can't even leave the house without a male chaperon. Calls to prayer that wake you at 5am everyday on loud speaker.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
I guess my faith is simple really...
Today I am certain that I'm sitting here typing.... Tomorrow I may not be and the next day I may look back on the last two days and wonder what I was thinking and why I changed... I doubt it though... I'll simply stand up and type and not wonder at all about why I sat to type once upon a time...
IOW, bring me science and my views will change to conform to science... What is is.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
It will happen. Today we know virtually nothing about the brain compared to the rest of the body. But one day they will discover what triggers the need for belief in some what chemicals are released to satisfy that belief - syntheses it and give you a pill. Until then preach on just dont tread on me.
Last edited:
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Kyle, my grandson who just began his Grad studies in Bio/Chem... I guess that is his undergrad... but anyhow he said the same thing to me earlier... about chemicals and belief.... he's studying chemistry to biology... what made that transition and he drives me nuts with this stuff... :hmm: His point is that the Chemistry makes me think... and what I think depends on Chemistry too... And.... emotion creates chemicals which then produce thought and fear probably creates God...
Crazy stuff... He sure loves it though... he's nutty btw..
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,391
- 31
- 91
LunarRay grew up poor and abused. He never had any Christmas and didn't know about Santa Clause. The only reason he survived was because of the love of his Grandma which came from her faith in God.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Same here? I suppose we all are in a way with our infallible beliefs. Atheist or not. BTW you can see those fear chemicals working as everyone gets religion quick on a battle field so I'll never say never either.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
I'm not so certain about Santa anymore... but I do have two fire places in my house and one in the back yard just in case... I didn't see Santa this Christmas though... but My wife does have a moon roof... and she brought stuff in.... how it got into her car I'm not sure but she said Santa came... Some young guy with long hair... probably a helper actually..
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
I had that in mind.... There are no atheists on the medivac... or in the foxhole... well... in a fire base under siege... not one... until later.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Nah... I was rich beyond measure.... Do you have any idea how many books lined the shelves of the bay street library... had to be a million in the science section alone.... And Santa brought Einstein and Durak, Kepler, Tesla and Planck not to mention Feynman, Fermi and the rest of them dear rain people to me... What could anyone want beyond that?
But my Nanna did have faith in God, but ya know... she never ever pushed that on me. Not ever to my memory. IF I ever asked her a question I'd get answered by... 'Jimmy, what do you feel... not think, but feel... about this or that...'
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter