Philosophy Now Forum

I know God doesn't exist as experienced by reality which tells one that god is just another perverted idea by a screwed up species.

Dubious wrote:I know God doesn't exist as experienced by reality which tells one that god is just another perverted idea by a screwed up species.

Saying that 'God' doesn't exist is like saying your 'Mother' doesn't exist. These are just fiction labels, without which, there is no human story. Belief in fiction as being actual reality is the human error. But like every other robotic system, the human is what's it's been programmed to be, what you see is what you get like monkey see, monkey do. There's no way out of this jungle.

Dontaskme wrote:

Dubious wrote:I know God doesn't exist as experienced by reality which tells one that god is just another perverted idea by a screwed up species.

Saying that 'God' doesn't exist is like saying your 'Mother' doesn't exist.

I know my mother existed; as she was ergo I am...but I never met the other gentlemen you call god.

Belief in fiction as being actual reality is the human error.

I agree; god is a fiction and nowadays a worn out one. We now have other fictionalized super heroes who are out to save a universe they haven't created; likely to be the next big step in their godlike power of blowing bubble universes which, I believe, has already begun.

Dubious wrote:I know God doesn't exist as experienced by reality which tells one that god is just another perverted idea by a screwed up species.

But reality as experienced by Dubious is not the same reality as experienced by John, Plato, Bill, Socrates, and Georgie.

Dubious should become sceptical of her own rightness.

Dubious wrote:I know God doesn't exist as experienced by reality which tells one that god is just another perverted idea by a screwed up species.

IF there is a God one can know that God does exist, however, one cannot know that God does not exist.

attofishpi wrote:

Dubious wrote:I know God doesn't exist as experienced by reality which tells one that god is just another perverted idea by a screwed up species.

IF there is a God one can know that God does exist, however, one cannot know that God does not exist.

My underline.

But the sort of God that one might know of from empirical evidence is not the sort of God that philosophers usually discuss.

Dubious wrote:
I know my mother existed; as she was ergo I am...but I never met the other gentlemen you call god.

You know the label 'mother' but you don't know the I am phenomena that exists before/ behind the label. The pre-prior existing state of non-labeled I am-ness IS without doubt prior to any label or relationship. You've never met or seen your mother, god, or you, because there is no OTHER than you. And what you is, is prior to any label you choose to give you. The "I point of view" is an artificial add-on - a (virtual) overlaid on what already is void of any point of view/position/ or belief.

attofishpi wrote:
IF there is a God one can know that God does exist, however, one cannot know that God does not exist.

Only concepts are knowable. And since all known concepts are fictions, there is no chance of ever knowing anything conceptually created for real. The real can never be known by anything it knows...as it is already this unknown knowing of which nothing can be known about.

attofishpi wrote:

Dubious wrote:I know God doesn't exist as experienced by reality which tells one that god is just another perverted idea by a screwed up species.

IF there is a God one can know that God does exist, however, one cannot know that God does not exist.

I agree based solely on the formalities of logic.

One can know that God exists ONLY if it's predisposed to manifest itself as a Being we presume to be God of which there hasn't been an iota. The data simply doesn't exist. In that sense it completely combines with the idea "one cannot know that God does not exist" since logically not having revealed itself doesn't mean it isn't there.

But the clause "one cannot know that God does not exist" can be taken on its own terms and is only valid because to know factually that God does not exist requires overt proof. This is the point where logic deflects off a paradox it cannot penetrate: how does one prove the non-existence of something that was never amenable to any proof or validation to begin with including even its often presumed necessity. In nature, "God" remains a void explaining nothing except human psychology.

By inference, if understood correctly, the statement "one cannot know that God does not exist" reduces the probability for its existence to virtually zero. The Planck scale probability which remains is due only to a formality of logic which asserts it's literally impossible to prove since there are no terms it can work with except the one finalized in God. The upshot is that God exists only in the miniscule probability left by logic as a remnant in not being able to proceed in closing the gap.

...sorry to have made the post so long!

attofishpi wrote: IF there is a God one can know that God does exist, however, one cannot know that God does not exist.

Who cares, either way?

Harbal wrote:

attofishpi wrote: IF there is a God one can know that God does exist, however, one cannot know that God does not exist.

Who cares, either way?

No reason to care. God is nothing more than an exercise in logic. The very idea is absurd but an absurdity many still cling to. The habits of history are not easy to erase.

Dubious wrote:
No reason to care. God is nothing more than an exercise in logic. The very idea is absurd but an absurdity many still cling to. The habits of history are not easy to erase.

Why can't people believe what they like about God and just leave everyone else to do the same? Why do they have to go on and on about it?

Harbal wrote:

Dubious wrote:
No reason to care. God is nothing more than an exercise in logic. The very idea is absurd but an absurdity many still cling to. The habits of history are not easy to erase.

Why can't people believe what they like about God and just leave everyone else to do the same? Why do they have to go on and on about it?

Good question but god and religion have always been major subjects in philosophy and especially so in philosophy forums with everyone being allowed to participate. People somehow think they're defined differently believing in god compared to those who don't and often only wish to ridicule the lack of what seems obvious to them. Presenting ludicrous reasons for god's existence invariably get challenged but there are more sophisticated ones which try the logic approach also doomed to fail since the flaws in attempting it are obvious. Nevertheless, God has been so fundamental to the human psyche and so potent in history that it's not something a mere one or two hundred years is going to erase or cause to be strictly private; it's a rooted entity which though stunted, still continues to grow a few branches fertilized by wishful thinking.

Personally, returning to the source, never to return again is infinitely more consoling then the excessively perverse idea of being judged forever by what was done or not, believed or not during the span of a human life. If there is any proof for the non-existence of god, it's the gods WE ourselves have created.

...sorry, made this too long again!

Dubious wrote:

Harbal wrote: Who cares, either way?

No reason to care. God is nothing more than an exercise in logic. The very idea is absurd but an absurdity many still cling to. The habits of history are not easy to erase.

Care to partake in this exercise of logic?

God is more absurd than most could fathom, the depths within which it persists, exists, go far beyond what most people are willing to attempt to comprehend. It is entwined with our very consciousness, knowing every thought even preceding to know that thought as it surmounts to comprehension. God IS the base from which our binary universe is fed.

It only took me 19yrs of direct interaction with this entity to KNOW this.

attofishpi wrote:

Dubious wrote:

Harbal wrote: Who cares, either way?

No reason to care. God is nothing more than an exercise in logic. The very idea is absurd but an absurdity many still cling to. The habits of history are not easy to erase.

Care to partake in this exercise of logic?

God is more absurd than most could fathom, the depths within which it persists, exists, go far beyond what most people are willing to attempt to comprehend. It is entwined with our very consciousness, knowing every thought even preceding to know that thought as it surmounts to comprehension. God IS the base from which our binary universe is fed.

It only took me 19yrs of direct interaction with this entity to KNOW this.

attofishpi...We all have a God of our own understanding. And just because one persons definition of God differs to your definition of God does not make that God unworthy of consideration.

Some will deny God, but like I said earlier, to deny God is to deny your Mother. Your Mother may have given you life, but only life can give birth to life. My God is life.



This is Albert Einstein's God. . . “That which is impenetrable to us really exists. Behind the secrets of nature remains something subtle, intangible, and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion.”