Is god a number?

[Tesla]

...I still do not think it a scoffing matter, just more of an ignorance issue.

That's probably because you are a nicer person than me. I did say: "I don't think it is appropriate to scoff at people who are sincerely trying to come to terms with reality, but I do believe that anyone who claims to know the answers deserves to be laughed at."
It's not an attitude I am proud of, but for the sake of argument, I will defend it. It's the Emperor's new clothes syndrome; I don't like pomposity and I really don't like exploitative money grubbing opportunism. To that end I think there are legitimate targets for ridicule; perhaps something that looks like scientology, but obviously not scientology itself, because that is a proper religion, the leaders of which believe in alien intervention and that naval uniforms look good on dry land.

ok. lets review the child that grows up in a small religious community ignorant of any other form of life or ideology in which the teachers and administrators of the religion--and the community--honestly believe the doctrine taught from youth. the older that child becomes, the more ingrained the societal endorsed view of life and God has become.

Ridicule is a tool of society to mold and maintain societal norms. you ridicule them, they ridicule you. stalemate.

So their societies children are given options for alternative beliefs--due to internet exposures and debate--and those not so ingrained, or not so convinced, or otherwise not so blindly ignorant: can come to terms with the truth, but potentially lose connection with their society.

(not all societies have access to the internet)

How would you approach the problem? why is it a problem?

For this reason, I feel ridicule is inadequate. but the reasons lie in answering the last two questions.

Other issues:
God: many possibilities.
Truth of 'purpose': many possibilities.
'Good': Relative to what? Good for the whole, good for the individual, good for a specific society? etc.

[uwot]

Still not hearing this 'God's' number?

Wakey, wakey Arising: G=7, O=15, D=4. 7+15+4= 26, or 2 and 6...HALF A CROWN!!!

[bobevenson]

So whats 'God's' number then?

In English gematria simplex, Holy Spirit adds up to 151, Jesus Christ adds up to 151 and Ouzo Cross adds up to 151. If Satan takes the place of the Ouzo Cross, the total adds up to "the seven horsemen of the Apocalypse."

Still not hearing this 'God's' number?

If it looks like a moron, acts like a moron and talks like a moron, it must be a moron. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to insult a member of the British Empire!

[Arising_uk]

If it looks like a moron, acts like a moron and talks like a moron, it must be a moron. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to insult a member of the British Empire!

And 'God's' number is?

[tillingborn]

"I don't think it is appropriate to scoff at people who are sincerely trying to come to terms with reality, but I do believe that anyone who claims to know the answers deserves to be laughed at."

ok. lets review the child that grows up in a small religious community ignorant of any other form of life or ideology in which the teachers and administrators of the religion--and the community--honestly believe the doctrine taught from youth. the older that child becomes, the more ingrained the societal endorsed view of life and God has become.

And tragically the harder it is for them to turn into responsible adults, able to engage with people who hold different opinions without sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting. I don't think it is ever appropriate to ridicule a child, much of the rest of such a community I would include amongst those who are ‘are sincerely trying to come to terms with reality’ and I wouldn’t ridicule them.

Ridicule is a tool of society to mold and maintain societal norms. you ridicule them, they ridicule you. stalemate.

I'm sure it has been used as a tool of society, but societies tend to be more blunt and go for the propaganda option. Depending on the country, satirists who ridicule society may be ridiculed back, they may on the other hand be thrown in jail, tortured or murdered; all of which has happened to people during my lifetime in places only a couple of hours flight away. Ridicule, satire, lampooning have always had a role in society and it is a fairly good rule of thumb to gauge a society’s maturity by it’s ability to laugh at itself, same goes for individuals.

So their societies children are given options for alternative beliefs--due to internet exposures and debate--and those not so ingrained, or not so convinced, or otherwise not so blindly ignorant: can come to terms with the truth, but potentially lose connection with their society.

(not all societies have access to the internet)

There's that word 'truth' again. I don't know the truth is and I'm quite certain no one else does, but their are plenty of people who are very jealous of their 'truth' and a fully prepared to make dissenters uncomfortable.

How would you approach the problem? why is it a problem?

It's a problem because some people who don't get their way resort to violence. Since Aristophanes in ancient Greece, ridicule has been used against people bloated with self-importance. It sometimes works, but on the occasions that people can't take a joke, prepare for battle.

For this reason, I feel ridicule is inadequate. but the reasons lie in answering the last two questions.

Indeed. Tragically, sometimes people have had to fight.

[Tesla]

Ridicule is a tool of society to mold and maintain societal norms. you ridicule them, they ridicule you. stalemate.

I'm sure it has been used as a tool of society, but societies tend to be more blunt and go for the propaganda option. Depending on the country, satirists who ridicule society may be ridiculed back, they may on the other hand be thrown in jail, tortured or murdered; all of which has happened to people during my lifetime in places only a couple of hours flight away. Ridicule, satire, lampooning have always had a role in society and it is a fairly good rule of thumb to gauge a society’s maturity by it’s ability to laugh at itself, same goes for individuals.

If ridicule inflames anger, and is a path to violence, it should then be used cautiously.

There's that word 'truth' again. I don't know the truth is and I'm quite certain no one else does, but their are plenty of people who are very jealous of their 'truth' and a fully prepared to make dissenters uncomfortable.

And I believe that is the truth: No one knows, so accept your belief but recognize why you choose it in light of the truth: no one knows.
The truth 'no one knows' is strongly evidenced.

How would you approach the problem? why is it a problem?

It's a problem because some people who don't get their way resort to violence. Since Aristophanes in ancient Greece, ridicule has been used against people bloated with self-importance. It sometimes works, but on the occasions that people can't take a joke, prepare for battle.

The path of the species is decided by it's words and actions, cooperation's, or lack of cooperation's. If we want a world of peace and 'Good' we need to have agreements on what is good, and what is the path o attain it. we need agreement. and the reason why diverse religions are a problem is because they are built to divide. the strong will win of the divided, which may or may not be 'good'. I would say it is the greatest evil.

Since ultimately we pretty much have the same agreement of logic of a problem existing, the only thing left is to ascertain a solution, in which I have rejected ridicule.

Lets examine this as a proposal:

Apply the logic of the lazy and ignorant to the sacred texts: it is true no matter how fantastic, if an argument and agreement can be found. And let’s not forget, if God is the source you cannot check that.

Surely the past has its roots in ignorance: that we know more now than societies knew then. Perhaps it is time to write a new book to teach moral cooperation to find life as beautiful and fulfilling of an existence as possible, recognizing mystery, and perpetuating cooperation based on the strongest ‘truth’ and not the most enigmatic of ideas.

In short: I think that the old texts should be summarized to the basic morality they agree are good, and arguments for why, divorcing and completely rejecting the idea of divine sources, and with that insight write a ‘bible’ that will support the species direction that is ‘good’ with the arguments for why.

[bobevenson]

If it looks like a moron, acts like a moron and talks like a moron, it must be a moron. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to insult a member of the British Empire!

And 'God's' number is?

Ask the moron; in other words, look in the mirror and move your lips.

[Arising_uk]

Ask the moron; in other words, look in the mirror and move your lips.

Still not hearing 'God's' number?

[attofishpi]

Ask the moron; in other words, look in the mirror and move your lips.

Still not hearing 'God's' number?

All of them...

panentheism for the win.

[tillingborn]

If ridicule inflames anger, and is a path to violence, it should then be used cautiously.

I think you have to bear in mind that if you don't challenge someone who resorts to violence in response to ridicule, you are in danger of being held hostage to the whim of a petulant oaf or if they manage to manipulate enough people, particularly in the military, fascist nutters. One of the towering figures of the 20th century, to my mind was Mahatma Gandhi. In response to threats and harassment from the ruling British he advocated peaceful protest; hopelessly out gunned, he was smart enough to realise that far fewer of the people he represented would be hurt or killed than if he started a war. It is a lesson that has been swamped by the political ambition of the super-powers. He also understood the importance of ridicule, for example; when asked: "What do you think of western civilization?" He replied, "I think it would be a good idea."

And I believe that is the truth: No one knows,

Me too; that's why I said it.

so accept your belief but recognize why you choose it in light of the truth: no one knows.
The truth 'no one knows' is strongly evidenced.

I don't think you should just accept your beliefs, the moment you do, you become a conservative in that your beliefs are static. In order to maintain them, they have to be defended. The more vigorous the assault, the more determined the defence. Just look at how quickly threads on this forum degenerate, bear in mind that this is a place where people fancy themselves as 'philosophers'.

In short: I think that the old texts should be summarized to the basic morality they agree are good, and arguments for why, divorcing and completely rejecting the idea of divine sources, and with that insight write a ‘bible’ that will support the species direction that is ‘good’ with the arguments for why.

Well there's no harm trying, but you've got your work cut out persuading all 7 billion humans.

[Tesla]

In short: I think that the old texts should be summarized to the basic morality they agree are good, and arguments for why, divorcing and completely rejecting the idea of divine sources, and with that insight write a ‘bible’ that will support the species direction that is ‘good’ with the arguments for why.

Well there's no harm trying, but you've got your work cut out persuading all 7 billion humans.

Well Argued. I stated this as a proposal. It isn't anything one person can do. You are approaching the line where skepticism ends and cynicism begins. I agree with much of your assessments. However you are no better equipped to be an expert on solution or lack of solution than anyone else. The degeneration of a conversation can happen easily when one defends their argument without accepting the potential they too could be wrong. Gandhi's ridicule was in good taste. Others who adopt ridicule will not have his mind behind their ridicules and can easily be an ignorant and even stupid way to address this problem. Especially when it comes to the topic of God; in which there is no true answer known. If you have his flair, you would be one of very few, so I would caution endorsing or teaching others to try to do what few can.

With what the species is facing globally concerning global warning, population maxing the earth’s sustainability, and agricultural problems when we already farm 30% of the land: a solution will be endorsed either reactionary or proactively. What will decide that is if the people with enough intelligence and ethics can come together and help on a solution, or if they will not or cannot cooperate for a solution and allow the degeneration of the species and planet to be their meal as well.

What do you believe is going to happen? How valuable is it worth trying to help solve? What faith do you have that people making fun of others will have the wisdom to do it ethically and for the right reasons?
(although from our conversation I am pretty sure your method of ridicule would be well received but I have not had the pleasure to receive it)

[tillingborn]

I agree with much of your assessments. However you are no better equipped to be an expert on solution or lack of solution than anyone else.

Now that is the truth. I am not proposing any solutions and I wouldn't claim to have a 'method of ridicule'; it's just what people do. You have said:

I feel ridicule is inadequate.

And I have agreed. It is not a solution to anything, it is simply a tool, that is sometimes effective, but as you rightly point out, it needs to be used with tact. It seems obvious to me that every person on the planet is a unique bundle of hopes, desires, needs, ideas, strategies etc, etc. I think this diversity is a fantastic thing that enriches all our lives, but it is not without risks, some people simply cannot cope with others disagreeing with them, and they are frankly ridiculous.
You are right, the world faces serious challenges; you ask what I think will happen. I have no idea about specific details, but I am confident that people will continue to challenge authority and received wisdom and that some people will find others funny. Mistakes will be made and people will get hurt, but that won't stop it.

[Tesla]

I agree with much of your assessments. However you are no better equipped to be an expert on solution or lack of solution than anyone else.

Now that is the truth. I am not proposing any solutions and I wouldn't claim to have a 'method of ridicule'; it's just what people do. You have said:

I feel ridicule is inadequate.

And I have agreed. It is not a solution to anything, it is simply a tool, that is sometimes effective, but as you rightly point out, it needs to be used with tact. It seems obvious to me that every person on the planet is a unique bundle of hopes, desires, needs, ideas, strategies etc, etc. I think this diversity is a fantastic thing that enriches all our lives, but it is not without risks, some people simply cannot cope with others disagreeing with them, and they are frankly ridiculous.
You are right, the world faces serious challenges; you ask what I think will happen. I have no idea about specific details, but I am confident that people will continue to challenge authority and received wisdom and that some people will find others funny. Mistakes will be made and people will get hurt, but that won't stop it.

well stated and agreed. Education then is key. What now is left of our discussion?