Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are myriad reasons . . . but they probably all emanate from an inner sense that God DOES exist.
Many here report no such inner sense or the opposite inner sense.
My initial inner sense was that my parents and teachers believed in god so being as they were adults and I was five years old, I assumed they must know what the heck they were talking about. I followed instructions and listened to the stories and conformed to the expectations. After a few years, I would have said that I had an "inner sense" that god existed, simply because of the confirmation bias coming from social norms. Social norms work because they are social norms.
This illusion evaporated when my belief in god collapsed. It was not all that strong for me anyway, it was more of an unexamined assumption waiting to be examined for what it actually was rather than blindly accepted for what it was alleged to be.
Even the question of whether anyone has an "inner sense" or "inner witness" in the sense you mean it (the "still, small voice" of god) is an unexamined assumption. The true inner witness is the sum of one's knowledge that allows some people, some of the time, to rise above so-called "common sense" and see things as they are, even when most others do not.
IMO the "inner witness" is a relabeling of one's personal assessments and opinions and desires so that its adaptive and maladaptive aspects can be attributed, respectively, to god and satan.
There are myriad reasons . . . but they probably all emanate from an inner sense that God DOES exist.The mythological versions are the result of our ignorant savage ancestors trying to reconcile that inner knowing using their superstitions and fears. The more we learn about our reality . . . the less likely and more irrational the mythologies surrounding God seem. This is the problem of "a little knowledge is dangerous thing" because the deeper our understanding of reality becomes . . . the more likely God seems, IMO. Of course, it all boils down to preferences and opinions . . . no matter what.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Many here report no such inner sense or the opposite inner sense.
My initial inner sense was that my parents and teachers believed in god so being as they were adults and I was five years old, I assumed they must know what the heck they were talking about. I followed instructions and listened to the stories and conformed to the expectations. After a few years, I would have said that I had an "inner sense" that god existed, simply because of the confirmation bias coming from social norms. Social norms work because they are social norms.
This illusion evaporated when my belief in god collapsed. It was not all that strong for me anyway, it was more of an unexamined assumption waiting to be examined for what it actually was rather than blindly accepted for what it was alleged to be.
Even the question of whether anyone has an "inner sense" or "inner witness" in the sense you mean it (the "still, small voice" of god) is an unexamined assumption. The true inner witness is the sum of one's knowledge that allows some people, some of the time, to rise above so-called "common sense" and see things as they are, even when most others do not.
IMO the "inner witness" is a relabeling of one's personal assessments and opinions and desires so that its adaptive and maladaptive aspects can be attributed, respectively, to god and satan.
This is typical of left brain dominant thinking, mordant. Our society's focus on developing the left brain cognitive disciplines of language and mathematics has a tendency to squelch or devalue the right brain disciplines and subordinate intuitions to left brain cognition. That is why you assert that "The true inner witness is the sum of one's knowledge that allows some people, some of the time, to rise above so-called "common sense" and see things as they are, even when most others do not." That is a very left brain dominant assessment. I do not believe the right brain sensibilities are absent . . . just suppressed and dominated by the left. It is through the right brain sensitivities that the "inner voice of God" is experienced.
I do not believe the right brain sensibilities are absent . . . just suppressed and dominated by the left. It is through the right brain sensitivities that the "inner voice of God" is experienced.
I don't claim to be free of intuition, or averse to it. I have intuition and I use it, though probably not to the degree of a more right brain dominant (or right brain trained) individual. Certainly I can tell by the differences in what I pick up on or take literally vs what my wife picks up on or takes literally in the same situation (and she is left brain dominant herself, just less so than I) that my default is to look for literal equivalences. Having less experience on that right brain side, I also tend to trust it less.
I get all of that. But no matter how right brained I might be or become, no matter how compelling a right brained experience I might have in the form of a peak experience or altered state or moment of insight, how could I ever treat that as anything but what it is -- a personal subjective experience? How much validity can I assign it if no one else has a shared experience with me so that it is at least somewhat verifiable?
I guess as you say I could simply choose it because it is warm and fuzzy enough that I'd prefer it. But even you don't claim that your personal subjective experience can be useful to me or mine to you. So we are left with the same stalemate as we started out with: neither of us can demonstrate god for the other and neither of us has access to each other's subjective experiences.
One final thing. If god hides behind the nondualistic right brain configuration, why on earth would he do that, assuming he gives a fig about communicating with us? If he has to cut out some chunk of the population from experiencing him, why doesn't he cut out the smaller chunk, and go with the vast majority of people living in practical everyday reality and not grooving on their god spot after months of discipline and training?
If I were god, I would just knock all this off and reveal myself already.
I don't claim to be free of intuition, or averse to it. I have intuition and I use it, though probably not to the degree of a more right brain dominant (or right brain trained) individual. Certainly I can tell by the differences in what I pick up on or take literally vs what my wife picks up on or takes literally in the same situation (and she is left brain dominant herself, just less so than I) that my default is to look for literal equivalences. Having less experience on that right brain side, I also tend to trust it less.
I get all of that. But no matter how right brained I might be or become, no matter how compelling a right brained experience I might have in the form of a peak experience or altered state or moment of insight, how could I ever treat that as anything but what it is -- a personal subjective experience? How much validity can I assign it if no one else has a shared experience with me so that it is at least somewhat verifiable?
I guess as you say I could simply choose it because it is warm and fuzzy enough that I'd prefer it. But even you don't claim that your personal subjective experience can be useful to me or mine to you. So we are left with the same stalemate as we started out with: neither of us can demonstrate god for the other and neither of us has access to each other's subjective experiences.
One final thing. If god hides behind the nondualistic right brain configuration, why on earth would he do that, assuming he gives a fig about communicating with us? If he has to cut out some chunk of the population from experiencing him, why doesn't he cut out the smaller chunk, and go with the vast majority of people living in practical everyday reality and not grooving on their god spot after months of discipline and training?
If I were god, I would just knock all this off and reveal myself already.
Disclaimer: I am NOT proselytizing . . . just explaining my view.
Ironically, it has been our cognitive successes in developing our consciousness and dominating the planet that has probably created the problem. Our anciestors were far more right brain dominant . . . in fact according to Jaynes the two hemispheres were actually separate at one time. We all re-experience the evolution of consciousness that our species underwent. The first stage toward consciousness that a human infant must pass through is the development of the subject-object distinction -- the separation of the "out there" from the "in here," or the recognition that it is not the same as its external environment. This distinction separates us from many of the animal species (not all). Fred Wolf discussed this dawn of consciousness,
. . . Consciousness means self-awareness . . . and that first awareness had to be the concept of "I am." In sensing this "I," our first observer was learning that he was not his thumb or his foot. The "in here" experience was "I." The "out there" experience was "it."
Before the evolution of our current integrated left/right brain consciousness . . . we were simply clever, semi-aware animals, occasionally following the voices of “gods”(our left brain thoughts) in our heads. The two halves of our brains were functioning more or less separately. The conscious left brain wasn’t yet considered an integrated part of US . . . we had no sense of "I am" . . . hence the “gods” in our heads. The appropriate physical connections were not yet completed.
Julian Jaynes suggested that our species eventually suffered its first nervous breakdown when the physical connections between the hemispheres of our brain coalesced to enable left/right brain communication. We finally became aware of ourselves as "I" people. The improved consciousness that evolved from this “breakdown” mainly manifested itself in right brain dominant dreams and visions of “prophets” in forms suitable to the still meager intellectual left brain capabilities of the time. This would account for all the ancient "prophesies" and their decidedly non-left-brain character. It certainly makes more understandable the Hebrew word for the God that appeared to Moses, YahWeh, or "I Am."
Unfortunately, before Jesus Christ, despite our evolving sense of “I” and rudimentary reasoning abilities. . . humankind's infant consciousness . . . was incapable of permanently connecting to God's consciousness until a human (Jesus) did so and completed the "spiritual synaptic connections." Prior to Jesus the connections were sporadic and unpredictable . . . as "inspirations."
There is an analogue in the development of human physical capabilities that is similar to this basic problem facing humankind's infant consciousness. An infant does not have certain reflexes and cannot perform certain physical actions until the proper nerve connections have grown together sufficiently to enable synaptic firing. No amount of exercise or training can overcome these conditions until the infant's growth and development has progressed to the necessary stage.
A human mind from this physical plane of existence had to produce a consciousness linked in perfect resonance (Identical) with the consciousness of God. The resonant spiritual neuronal connections had to be created. The consciousness that was produced by the mind of Jesus became one (Resonant/Identical) with the consciousness of God . . . and simultaneously, remains part of the existing human collective consciousness affording us permanent access to it.
It is in this manner that Christ is the way to God. As Paul said in Ephesians 2:18 ". . . because through Him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father." The consciousness that each one of us produces and to which we ascribe our individual nature, character, and essence can also attain oneness with God through this "spiritual synapse" created by the human consciousness of Jesus Christ.
Disclaimer: I am NOT proselytizing . . . just explaining my view.
Maybe it's the lateness of the hour, but I see neither proselytization, nor explanation here.
I am generally familiar with Jayne's views. They are not proven fact but seem quite plausible and they would explain alot regarding the origin of myth and legend about the gods. I probably don't draw anything like the same conclusions from them as you do, however.
This is typical of left brain dominant thinking, mordant. Our society's focus on developing the left brain cognitive disciplines of language and mathematics has a tendency to squelch or devalue the right brain disciplines and subordinate intuitions to left brain cognition. That is why you assert that "The true inner witness is the sum of one's knowledge that allows some people, some of the time, to rise above so-called "common sense" and see things as they are, even when most others do not." That is a very left brain dominant assessment. I do not believe the right brain sensibilities are absent . . . just suppressed and dominated by the left. It is through the right brain sensitivities that the "inner voice of God" is experienced.
Well not exactly... neuroscience has debunked that popular myth which originated in the 60's.
And that 'inner voice' a person experiences - especially while meditating, is you. The sense of "unity" and "expansion" and "oneness with the universe" is explained here:
I was not referring to that myth, Jay. I know all about the integrated brain. I am describing the different modes of processing information that occur in the hemispheres.
Quote:
And that 'inner voice', a person experiences - especially while meditating, is you. The sense of "unity" and "expansion" and "oneness with the universe" is explained here: A Glimpse into the Meditating Brain
Since the brain responds to external field stimuli in the form of artificially produced EM fields and interprets them as a presence . . . the "it's all in your brain" nonsense is called into question. Since our reality is all manifestations of various field phenomena within the universal field . . . it is not unreasonable to conclude that this newly discovered sensing ability of the brain is at work during meditation. When a meditator attunes his brain to detect the universal field (God's consciousness field) he experiences the same presence WITHOUT the artificial EM fields present. This indicates to me the brain is sensing a real field presence.
Last edited by MysticPhD; 11-25-2013 at 12:29 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
