Philosophy Now Forum

Reflex wrote:

sthitapragya wrote: But then why call it God? Existence is a perfectly good name for the phenomenon. And why give it spiritual and mystical overtones? Existence is. Dealt and done with. We can try and understand what it is. But why all the woooooooooo about it?
I am honestly puzzled at the need to call something God.
Wait. Maybe you consider existence to be self aware. If that is the case, then we come back to the same problem. Do you think existence is self aware? Or conscious?

It was enough to get you to admit God exists. I'll let you work out the details for yourself.

Now that is just childish and reductionist. I do not attribute any consciousness or awareness to existence because only that would make it God. Consciousness and awareness seem to have arisen with life and there is no reason to believe they existed in this universe before that. Existence dose not seem to have willed itself. That doesn't sound like God to me.

sthitapragya wrote: But then why call it God? Existence is a perfectly good name for the phenomenon. And why give it spiritual and mystical overtones? Existence is.

What else you going to call ''nothing''?

Think of mystical overtones as a kind of fancy exotic dressing, like you pour over a bland salad to give it some zing. I mean what can you do with nothing except dress it up?

sthitapragya wrote:I am honestly puzzled at the need to call something God.

I am honestly puzzled at the need to call something sthitapragya.

Terrapin Station wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:I define information in the context of knowledge known.

Humans can only know what they know via the information they hold which is knowledge. Knowledge comes from a human perception, and is therefore illusory since a perception is never how reality actually is, a perception is an interpretation of how reality appears to be . . .

That's a lot of stuff (continuing with the stuff I didn't quote) to, um, disagree with. Trying to bring the focus back a bit, it seems like maybe you're using "information" and (at least potential) "knowledge" interchangeably, then, and that you're using it to refer to what I'd call facts--that is, all states of affairs in the world are "information" in your view and at least potential knowledge.

If so, that's where the confusion is coming in re our discussion.

I use "knowledge" in the standard analytic philosophical sense (a la propositional knowledge) to refer to "justified true belief."

One thing to notice with that definition is that knowledge is a type of belief. So knowledge doesn't occur where beliefs do not occur. And beliefs are a type of mental phenomenon.

That's why I started the thread called....'' Beliefs we are absolutely sure about''

Knowledge is the story -without our story there is no you, no me and nothing here. We are not the story, but believe we are... what we really are is that in which the story arises....which is this never ending blank paged book....the moment a page is written by a ghost writer it's already history...and on and on it goes never reaching the end ....

Dontaskme wrote:

You really are tenacious, I will give you that. I really honestly seriously don't read anything you write. At all.Ever. Seriously. Just thought I would let you know so that you won't have to tire the words that come out on their own on the screen. So there is really no point in posting replies to my posts. I keep getting notifications from you so I know that you quoted me. But that is all. I put your blank quote just so you would get a notification and read this.

You can carry on posting replies to my posts though. That is your prerogative.

sthitapragya wrote: I do not attribute any consciousness or awareness to existence because only that would make it God.

Do you not know what simply logic is? .... the concept apple will always be an apple, an apple can not be an orange. Concepts never change they are fixed. You are mixing apples with oranges.

sthitapragya wrote:Consciousness and awareness seem to have arisen with life and there is no reason to believe they existed in this universe before that.

Consciousness and awareness have never existed except as concept. There is no before or after except as concept.

Consciousness exists only because you exist....and who the heck are you? ...define you? ..is there a before and an after of you?


Were you there before you? ...were you there after you? ..... have you ever seen this you?

Another notification. Well, okay then. Carry on posting.

sthitapragya wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:

You really are tenacious, I will give you that. I really honestly seriously don't read anything you write. At all.Ever. Seriously. Just thought I would let you know so that you won't have to tire the words that come out on their own on the screen. So there is really no point in posting replies to my posts. I keep getting notifications from you so I know that you quoted me. But that is all. I put your blank quote just so you would get a notification and read this.

You can carry on posting replies to my posts though. That is your prerogative.

Aww, you put a blank quote in my name....aww, I'm so devastated and heartbroken, I think I'm going to cry my little eyes out now, how mean of you ...

Yeah I know you don't read my posts....you have told me about a thousand times already. How many more times are you going to tell me you don't read my posts? ...now who's the tenacious one ?

These forum boards are not a primary school playground you know...it's like I know you are but what am I? ... ...geez man get a grip of yourself!

sthitapragya wrote:Another notification. Well, okay then. Carry on posting.

Don't worry I will.

You see, when you don't exist except as an imaginary idea, you can do what the fuck you like....like this....

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
We can only try, but posting here can be very disappointing.

Expectation can be very disappointing ...






.

Always expect the unexpected...


...like this....Always expect the unexpected because that will lead you to reality.

As it is and not how you want it to be...and you know you always hate it when you don't get what you want

Reflex wrote:
I don't disagree with you, Dam, but we've got to deal honestly with our situation without resorting to escapism, without pretending that "There is no one to whom life is happening."

No one is pretending that there is no one to whom life is happening ...no one is pretending that there is some one to whom life is happening.


Knowing you can't escape your imagined life is far better than not knowing you can.



.

Dontaskme wrote:That's why I started the thread called....'' Beliefs we are absolutely sure about''

Okay, I'll look for that thread in a minute.

Knowledge is the story

I wouldn't say that. Knowledge is a set of beliefs that are justified and true. Fictions, for example, which are stories, are not justified true beliefs. You can have justified true beliefs about fictions. but the fiction itself isn't a justified true belief. In other words, you can have a justified true belief that "In A. Conan Doyle's The Hound of the Baskervilles, Sherlock Holmes' address was 221B Baker Street," but "Sherlock Holmes' address was 221B Baker Street" is not a justified true belief (outside of a context where it's taken to imply a sentence like the former).

-without our story there is no you, no me and nothing here.

I don't agree with that in the slightest. I have no idea why you'd believe something like that. Creatures certainly exist that do not have any beliefs or any consciousness at all. Humans could have turned out that way, too. And the world would exist whether there were any living things or not.

sthitapragya wrote:

Reflex wrote:

sthitapragya wrote: But then why call it God? Existence is a perfectly good name for the phenomenon. And why give it spiritual and mystical overtones? Existence is. Dealt and done with. We can try and understand what it is. But why all the woooooooooo about it?
I am honestly puzzled at the need to call something God.
Wait. Maybe you consider existence to be self aware. If that is the case, then we come back to the same problem. Do you think existence is self aware? Or conscious?

It was enough to get you to admit God exists. I'll let you work out the details for yourself.

Now that is just childish and reductionist. I do not attribute any consciousness or awareness to existence because only that would make it God. Consciousness and awareness seem to have arisen with life and there is no reason to believe they existed in this universe before that. Existence dose not seem to have willed itself. That doesn't sound like God to me.

What is an effect entirely absent in it cause called? What are act and potency and where do they fit into the scheme of things?

Dontaskme wrote:

Reflex wrote:
I don't disagree with you, Dam, but we've got to deal honestly with our situation without resorting to escapism, without pretending that "There is no one to whom life is happening."

No one is pretending that there is no one to whom life is happening ...no one is pretending that there is some one to whom life is happening.

Yeah. I expected that kind of response. I used to think like that, too. Then I realized that, real or not, I still point to myself and say, "I am." Then I went on a journey to find out how and why.

Reflex wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:

Reflex wrote:
I don't disagree with you, Dam, but we've got to deal honestly with our situation without resorting to escapism, without pretending that "There is no one to whom life is happening."

No one is pretending that there is no one to whom life is happening ...no one is pretending that there is some one to whom life is happening.

Yeah. I expected that kind of response. I used to think like that, too. Then I realized that, real or not, I still point to myself and say, "I am." Then I went on a journey to find out how and why.

I'm glad someone understands Dontaskme. The more he writes the less I understand him so far. He seems to have views that are diametrically opposed to mine for the most part, though I can't always tell, because I'm often not sure just what he's saying. He kind of seems like someone who read Aleister Crowley's Book of Lies (or something written in a similar style) and said "That's it. I'm done. That's all I need to know about philosophy."

sthitapragya,

I know seeing your questions being answered by questions hurts your head because you're not used to thinking, but what better way is there to understand the answer than to understand the process? So, don't be afraid. Answer the questions and we'll move on from there.