Do theists not comprehend the concept of disbelief in God? (reincarnation, Lord)
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.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,920,960 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
The ability to demonstrate things objectively in science is a consequence of the mathematical laws of physics. Therefore it is impossible to do this with things which are not part of this system of mathematical laws. For me that is kind of the whole point. I believe in a spiritual aspect to reality because I do not believe our existence can be reduced to that which can be measured, demonstrated and consequentially manipulated and controlled.
You may BELIEVE that, but it does not carry any further than that. Any more than a believe that there is a golden teapot between earth and Mars.
You may BELIEVE that, but it does not carry any further than that. Any more than a believe that there is a golden teapot between earth and Mars.
Incorrect. The difference is how you live your life. If you really have this belief in such a golden teapot then may spend some time looking for it. If you really believe in a spiritual aspect to existence then you live your life according to that belief also.
What it does not do is give you exploit in life. If all you want is something you use to get what you want then I can well understand why this would be of no interest to you whatsoever.
The ability to demonstrate things objectively in science is a consequence of the mathematical laws of physics. Therefore it is impossible to do this with things which are not part of this system of mathematical laws. For me that is kind of the whole point. I believe in a spiritual aspect to reality because I do not believe our existence can be reduced to that which can be measured, demonstrated and consequentially manipulated and controlled.
My take on that would be the materialist one, I'm afraid, inasmuch as the spiritual' stuff (in the sense you are using it, or so it looks to me) is about human conventions, such as art, poetry, ethics, music, social relationships and the like. You can probably see how this stuff drifts from the practical to the consensus -agreed abstract and indeed how much of it is based on what we call 'instinct'. And instinct is, I believe, an evolved factor of the human bean that is there to assist survival. Game and indeed battle -winning confidence is one of those and confidence that God is on your side is one of the best. Promise of never dying is even better.
So, unless one is postulating an invisible physicality (so to speak) like the Soul, we are just talking about the way we think?
The bouncers tell me that Mystic Phd is outside trying to burst in with an Important Message, so I'll see you later.
My take on that would be the materialist one, I'm afraid, inasmuch as the spiritual' stuff (in the sense you are using it, or so it looks to me) is about human conventions, such as art, poetry, ethics, music, social relationships and the like. You can probably see how this stuff drifts from the practical to the consensus -agreed abstract and indeed how much of it is based on what we call 'instinct'. And instinct is, I believe, an evolved factor of the human bean that is there to assist survival.
There is a lot packed into this comment which makes it difficult to parse. The essence of human convention are arbitrary decisions made because it is more important in such cases that a decision is made than what those decisions are. I can certainly see elements of convention in art, poetry, ethics, music, social relationships (most clearly seen in the variation we see from one culture to another), but I certainly wouldn't reduce them to that. There are also elements of individual creativity in art, poetry, and music, and absolute elements in in ethics and social relationships -- i.e issues for which you give sound reasons why some alternatives are definitely better than others.
Other elements of your response suggest I make the following clarification of my position. Although I am a physicalist with regards to the mind-body problem, I believe there is an effective dualism that inspires the common idea of a dualistic relationship between the two. I see in the mind and body two distinct living systems at work. This is easy to see in the fact that there are two separate sets of needs and desires (which are often in competition with each other) and especially in the fact there are two completely different means of passing an inheritance to the next generation. I would also point out that this has even inspired Dawkins to coin the term "meme" for the mental parallel of "gene."
Thus I would say that the elements of human civilization you mention (art, poetry, ethics, music, social relationships and the like) are more a product of memetic evolution rather than biological evolution. ... and thus I would not see "instinct" (which I associate with biology) playing much of a role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Game and indeed battle -winning confidence is one of those and confidence that God is on your side is one of the best. Promise of never dying is even better.
The kind of use you are finding in religion represents the worst of it - those who twist religion into a tool of power. It is my thesis that anything which makes religion useful in such a way is basically just a con and has nothing whatsoever to do with authentic spirituality (as I have described it). Thus I only believe in a Christianity sanitized of such elements.
But while for you I am basically saying the only good religion is a useless religion, to the theistic minded I am saying that God cannot logically be used and if you are somehow making God into something used then you have replaced God with a lie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
So, unless one is postulating an invisible physicality (so to speak) like the Soul, we are just talking about the way we think?
But we certainly ARE postulating an un-measurable indemonstrable aspect to reality like the eternal soul, BUT for the "materialist" (or naturalist would be the modern update), the only impact on what they are willing to acknowledge as real is the impact on human thought.
Last edited by mitchellmckain; 06-30-2016 at 09:09 AM..
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,920,960 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
You may BELIEVE that, but it does not carry any further than that. Any more than a believe that there is a golden teapot between earth and Mars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
Incorrect. The difference is how you live your life. If you really have this belief in such a golden teapot then may spend some time looking for it. If you really believe in a spiritual aspect to existence then you live your life according to that belief also.
What it does not do is give you exploit in life. If all you want is something you use to get what you want then I can well understand why this would be of no interest to you whatsoever.
One may partially live their life according to their religious belief, but that is exactly what gets us Muslim, Jewish, Christian and even some Buddhist terrorists. All because they fervently belief that their special imaginary spirit are the right ones.
How much better to take a humanist approach, treat others like you would want to be, recognize this earth and our time on it is all there is, revere our planet rather than destroy it because one think an apocalypse is just around the corner, and start actually carrying about this one life we have before we turn into wormfood.
Clearly, the lifelong conditioning to life in a physical body is determinate. Far too many seem completely unable to divorce their existence from a physical body despite the utter absurdity that a spiritual body would actually BE a physical body. 1 Cor 15:35-58 should utterly disabuse anyone of the silly idea that anything spiritual has anything to do with the physical. I despair of the impossible task of deconditioning anyone from their classical and operant conditioning to a physical body.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
I am not entirely sure what you are trying to say. My best guess is that you are attempting to explain why so many Christians support a physical resurrection when this is directly contradicted by Paul. If that is the case then I would say it has more to do with ambiguities in the meaning of the word "physical" and the fact that Jesus was something new and never seen before. One meaning of the word "physical" is in fact "bodily" but another meaning has do with with the laws of physics. I have had the same difficulty with various people when talking about the human mind -- how can it be physical when physical means "bodily?" It seems like a contradiction in terms.
From your response, i would think we are in basic agreement and I misunderstood your use of "bodily" resurrection.
Quote:
And then there is the conflict with the words of Jesus in the doubting Thomas story, particularly the wording in Luke 24.
Now I can argue with them that while Paul is directly addressing the theological question, in Luke 24:36-42, Jesus has a completely different agenda which was to deal with the fears of his apostles and to get them to believe. And I explain that Jesus was nothing like the dead spirits we call ghosts, but a living spirit is more like God, who is clearly more real and substantial than we are. But they still remain resistant to what I am saying.
Again we seem to be in agreement. The deeply conditioned terror of Spirits was a major obstacle to Christ's teaching about rebirth/resurrection. The "bodily" appearance despite walls and closed doors is the hidden clue for future, less frightened, generations to see. The purpose of the entire episode was to ally their fears of Spirits despite telling them that a birth of Flesh is Flesh and a birth of Spirit is Spirit.
Quote:
The real point is that the resurrected body of Jesus is totally different. I don't like their terminology which seems to imply it was a magicalized physical body which sounds like pure nonsense to a physicist like me, and they don't like my terminology which sounds like I am implying Jesus was a bodiless ghost. I try to focus on the facts that whatever you call it, this body is not subject to the laws of nature, but that doesn't seem to mean as much to them as it does to me. It is usually when I remind them of the ambiguity in the word "physical" that I can usually get through to them at this point.
I am a physicalist with respect to the mind-body problem so I think memes are 100% physical and the mind dies right along with the body. But once you separate mind and spirit then there is a parallel philosophical problem regarding the relationship between physical and spiritual and my position on that one is mostly that of an epiphenomenalist. That is, the vast majority of the interaction is one way from the physical to the spiritual. The laws of physics are not causally closed, but the window for interaction coming from outside the laws of physics is a very narrow one. Neither this nor the objective evidence can support a puppet master like relationship between the spirit and our physical existence.
So this interesting mitchell....and btw thanks for your thoughtful posts.
What is your take on the influence of the physical to the spiritual then? As in....how do you see the effect of a paraplegic, brain damaged, or even down's syndrome person's condition affecting their spirit?
My take on that would be the materialist one, I'm afraid, inasmuch as the spiritual' stuff (in the sense you are using it, or so it looks to me) is about human conventions, such as art, poetry, ethics, music, social relationships and the like. You can probably see how this stuff drifts from the practical to the consensus -agreed abstract and indeed how much of it is based on what we call 'instinct'. And instinct is, I believe, an evolved factor of the human bean that is there to assist survival. Game and indeed battle -winning confidence is one of those and confidence that God is on your side is one of the best. Promise of never dying is even better.
So, unless one is postulating an invisible physicality (so to speak) like the Soul, we are just talking about the way we think?
The bouncers tell me that Mystic Phd is outside trying to burst in with an Important Message, so I'll see you later.
::Bursting in:: They way we think and what we think is as much a real part of our reality as anything you consider material, Arq!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
Other elements of your response suggest I make the following clarification of my position. Although I am a physicalist with regards to the mind-body problem, I believe there is an effective dualism that inspires the common idea of a dualistic relationship between the two. I see in the mind and body two distinct living systems at work. This is easy to see in the fact that there are two separate sets of needs and desires (which are often in competition with each other) and especially in the fact there are two completely different means of passing an inheritance to the next generation. I would also point out that this has even inspired Dawkins to coin the term "meme" for the mental parallel of "gene."
Thus I would say that the elements of human civilization you mention (art, poetry, ethics, music, social relationships and the like) are more a product of memetic evolution rather than biological evolution. ... and thus I would not see "instinct" (which I associate with biology) playing much of a role.
I agree there are two living systems, the physical body and our embryo Spirit, that are both subject to evolutionary and maturation processes. The spiritual evolution species-wide can be seen as memetic and the physical evolution is biological. The maturation process determines the degree of dominance each living system has. Initially at birth, the body has complete dominance and the Spirit is but a seed so concerns of survival and physical development dominate. As the Spirit matures it achieves more dominance (strongly affected by the memetic spiritual evolutionary stage of the species). This produces the conflicts you refer to. But unlike you, I see the conflicts as the process for gaining dominance. The more self-control our Spirits exert over the drives generated by biology, the stronger and more mature our Spirit becomes - vice versa.
Quote:
The kind of use you are finding in religion represents the worst of it - those who twist religion into a tool of power. It is my thesis that anything which makes religion useful in such a way is basically just a con and has nothing whatsoever to do with authentic spirituality (as I have described it). Thus I only believe in a Christianity sanitized of such elements.
But while for you I am basically saying the only good religion is a useless religion, to the theistic minded I am saying that God cannot logically be used and if you are somehow making God into something used then you have replaced God with a lie.
I tend to agree and consider such carnal and worldly aberrations as contra-spiritual.
Quote:
But we certainly ARE postulating an un-measurable indemonstrable aspect to reality like the eternal soul, BUT for the "materialist" (or naturalist would be the modern update), the only impact on what they are willing to acknowledge as real is the impact on human thought.
Agreed. The dearth of consideration given to thoughts and feelings AS real phenomena existing within reality and not "just fleeting thoughts and feelings" or whatever, is the primary reason they remain in the penumbra of deliberations on their cognitive products which comprise our very character and essence as Spirit beings.
So this interesting mitchell....and btw thanks for your thoughtful posts.
What is your take on the influence of the physical to the spiritual then? As in....how do you see the effect of a paraplegic, brain damaged, or even down's syndrome person's condition affecting their spirit?
I believe the link which makes the spirit grow from the physical as Paul describes it, are the choices which living things make. Indeed I think the spirit can be said to be the product of our choices. Thus things in this life which are not a product of our choices would have no direct impact on the spirit. It is only indirectly as the context in which our choices are made can they have an impact. You could say that have some role in our identity but they cannot confine the spirit the way choices can.
I believe the link which makes the spirit grow from the physical as Paul describes it, are the choices which living things make. Indeed I think the spirit can be said to be the product of our choices. Thus things in this life which are not a product of our choices would have no direct impact on the spirit. It is only indirectly as the context in which our choices are made can they have an impact. You could say that have some role in our identity but they cannot confine the spirit the way choices can.
Agree yet again!
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.
