Philosophy Now Forum

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pm

philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:38 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:11 pm
God’s plan(s) cannot be understood by humans. This explains the premise of the question.

Your comment is void of any arguments. Religious people always says that, it's a (too) convenient way of dismissing any criticism of the belief in God.

If God does not exist, there can be no plan of God’s.
If there can be no plan of God’s, there can be no understandable plan of God’s.
If there can be no understandable plan of God’s, there is no understandable plan of God’s that a human can understand.
If there is no God, there can be no plan of God’s that a human can understand.
If God exists, God could have a plan. (a priori)
If God has a plan, it could not be understood by a human. (a priori)
If God exists or not, there can be no plan that a human could understand.
God’s plan cannot be understood by humans.

I did not mean to imply that God exists. That can only be blindly believed, and not rationally proved.

Apparentally I am more atheist than agnostic. To wit: I cannot make a valid argument of the form, if God exists his plan cannot be understood by humans. Of course, I've said as much ("...can only be blindly believed, and not rationally proved") and Philosopher has exposed this as well.

commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:39 pm Apparentally I am more atheist than agnostic. To wit: I cannot make a valid argument of the form, if God exists his plan cannot be understood by humans. Of course, I've said as much ("...can only be blindly believed, and not rationally proved") and Philosopher has exposed this as well.

Neither am I going to make a formal, structured argument that is acceptable to you, for your convenience. However, here’s more than enough material for you to do that yourself in an objective way, if that’s possible with the burden of an atheism bias.

Each statement is stand alone and feeds the next statement, so the forum custom of isolating one statement out of context of the whole is ‘specially irrational in this situation of informal, empirical observations in list form.

The question is, will atheistic responses contain more than no?
If so, it could be an historical first, but that would have to be fact-checked.

Shelfish God? Wait, I read that wrong.

*

- Conditions determine manifestation of a perceptible.

- Assembling specific elements produces a repeatable, predictable effect such as a perception.

- In daily life, a human cannot know all elements that comprise a condition because a human cannot perceive all types of energy that are present.

- An element of a condition is any portion of a condition. For instance, in the condition of this written communication many elements have been assembled. You are one of those elements and like conditions themselves, elements are aspects of a compounded, ordered assembly.

- When something is invisible to a human, then human blindness is one of the elements causing the condition of invisibility.

- For instance, in darkness when the honey badger smells the mouse so acutely it can catch the mouse, or when the snake senses the mouse with its forked tongue so acutely it can catch the mouse, then the condition of invisibility does not exist even though the mouse is cloaked by darkness, because the elements of invisibility have not been assembled to cause that condition.

- When a human comes along, then invisibility is caused, by the human element.

- However turn on the lights and voilà, there is the mouse.

- The light does not make the mouse visible, for the mouse is already visible to those entities with the capacity to perceive the mouse.



- God is already visible to all, when filters of understanding are gone from emptiness.

- For example, you look at the world with your unfiltered eyes and what you perceive is God.

- Then you pick up your piece of red rock candy* and hold it to your eye, and all you perceive through that filter of perception, is red.

* Your understanding.

commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:27 pm

philosopher wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 9:37 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 10:35 pm

A priori is a claim that has been accepted by previous consensus. I have often heard in the common vernacular that God’s plan cannot be understood by mortal man. This lead me to believe that the claim that humans cannot understand God’s plan has been widely regarded as a given. I didn’t think I would have to explain or deduce an a priori assumption.

This is what we describe as Argumentum ad Populum - argument from consensus/popularity.
Or Argumentum ad Antiquitatem - appeal to tradition.

It is a fallacy.

Just because there is a consensus doesn't mean that it is right. You have to investigate the reasoning BEHIND the consensus.
You have provided none of that.

If it isn't right, nothing that follows can be false, no?

If it isn't right nothing that follows can be true. At least, if it is true (whatever follows) it is for other reasons entirely.

Say for example you deduct that because you see a comet and one of your loved ones die. Well, both happened, and both are true (the comet really was there indeed, and your loved one died, indeed), but the connection between them is false logic.

I sorry about sayeing fellows in pos above. If a premise (such as, "My seeing a comet is connected with the death of a loved one") is false, then any statement that follows (i.e. follows, as in: arrives or appears later or after) (not as in: appears next as a consequence) (not as in: follows logically) can be false or it can be true. Definitely seemed fallacious to me when I penned the humorous statement above (qv laughing icon at end of joke).

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Mar 07, 2019 8:33 am Shelfish God? Wait, I read that wrong.

Or a crabby god manipulates human prawns. Hee-hee

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pm

philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:38 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:11 pm
God’s plan(s) cannot be understood by humans. This explains the premise of the question.

Your comment is void of any arguments. Religious people always says that, it's a (too) convenient way of dismissing any criticism of the belief in God.

If God does not exist, there can be no plan of God’s.
If there can be no plan of God’s, there can be no understandable plan of God’s.
If there can be no understandable plan of God’s, there is no understandable plan of God’s that a human can understand.
If there is no God, there can be no plan of God’s that a human can understand.n
If God exists, God could have a plan. (a priori)
If God has a plan, it could not be understood by a human. (a priori)
If God exists or not, there can be no plan that a human could understand.
God’s plan cannot be understood by humans.

The foregoing explains why a question of the type, how can a God who is something wish something, might be asked: it is because the asker doesn’t know the answer, which, in turn, cannot be known as it cannot be understood.

I did not mean to imply that God exists. That can only be blindly believed, and not rationally proved.

your posits are nonesence, as if the existance of God or not matters per the limited nature of man.

God may exist - I affrim empircism myself, so do not see Him - as to the existing God, to claim He is Good and We can understand Him is the infinate height of Pride/Folly.

maybe God/s is/are not "good", or equally likely man is unable by his nature to understand God/s - so the same thing in a way (or not).

either way, there is no mandate that man can ever know God/s - nor that the God/s are good.

your posit is folly in that assumes too much (i.e. to assume anything WRT to God/s is folly - assuming you are a man as i am).

but maybe you are more than a man and so know the mind of God/s,

in which case your post is not folly, you just have a higher nature than me- either i'm less than a man or you are higher then a man.

in which case carry on with your posits.

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pm
If God exists or not, there can be no plan that a human could understand.
God’s plan cannot be understood by humans.

exactly! i did not read this part of your post prior.

my apologies.

philosopher wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:53 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pm If God exists, God could have a plan. (a priori)
If God has a plan, it could not be understood by a human. (a priori)

If God exists or not, there can be no plan that a human could understand.
God’s plan cannot be understood by humans.

Why? Why can't God's plan not be understood by humans?

I would assume using logic (a human ability - infinately lesser than any Godlike thought - but all we as human's have), that unless you are a God (unlike me - i''m just a man), it is impossible to know the mind of/the God/s

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:17 am

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:29 am How a God who is Love, fully self giving, could wish that everybody should Love him more than the amount you love others?

FUCK IT - I know (of) this entity...and I'll say it:-

'GOD' suffered CHAOS. CHRIST'S physical pain was a blip in the ocean in comparison, IT just wanted us to comprehend suffering and to respect IT.

LOVE ? for what it suffered to form us and our reality, yes you should.

as you should know by now I'm an Athiest nor anti-religion.

from your earlier posts i know you are a Christian, and would welcome your views (for my personal wisdom - not into slamming anyone's Faith - of any religion).

I know of several faiths from reading the texts and so not an ignoramous.

this forum is here - ideally for disscussion rather than invective, and so would like to understand your version of your faith.

gaffo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 4:08 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:17 am

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:29 am How a God who is Love, fully self giving, could wish that everybody should Love him more than the amount you love others?

FUCK IT - I know (of) this entity...and I'll say it:-

'GOD' suffered CHAOS. CHRIST'S physical pain was a blip in the ocean in comparison, IT just wanted us to comprehend suffering and to respect IT.

LOVE ? for what it suffered to form us and our reality, yes you should.

as you should know by now I'm an Athiest nor anti-religion.

from your earlier posts i know you are a Christian, and would welcome your views (for my personal wisdom - not into slamming anyone's Faith - of any religion).

I know of several faiths from reading the texts and so not an ignoramous.

this forum is here - ideally for disscussion rather than invective, and so would like to understand your version of your faith.

Mr gaffo - I have pointed you to threads where I have been discussing this, last time you asked exactly the same thing, but you never responded. You are asking again!

So ask me a direct question regarding what I might know regarding this 'God' entity and my 'faith' with regards to this 'Christ' entity.

Gaffo

I hope you know by now that you and I are of similar minds and in agreement on most, if not all, matters.

gaffo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:55 am

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pm If God exists, God could have a plan. (a priori)
If God has a plan, it could not be understood by a human. (a priori)

If God exists or not, there can be no plan that a human could understand.
God’s plan cannot be understood by humans.

exactly! i did not read this part of your post prior.

my apologies.

I would assume using logic (a human ability - infinately lesser than any Godlike thought - but all we as human's have), that unless you are a God (unlike me - i''m just a man), it is impossible to know the mind of/the God/s

Strange gaffo, that was pretty much the only point made by commonsense that I had issue with.

Do you both think that God - if it existed, would not be intelligent enough to explain a simple plan to a wo/man?

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pmThe foregoing explains why a question of the type, how can a God who is something wish something, might be asked: it is because the asker doesn’t know the answer, which, in turn, cannot be known as it cannot be understood.
I did not mean to imply that God exists. That can only be blindly believed, and not rationally proved.

Actually, this is not the case, it can be empirically proven to an individual, if the 'God' entity wishes to permit it. This is the case with myself, the fact that I cannot prove it exists to others, does not mean I received no empirically verifiable evidence for myself. (by verified, I mean, when there was doubt - for example - that this entity was aware of ALL my thoughts, I tested it again and tested it again, and confirmed it to be so - also in the process another confirmation that I had already learned, that it is has the ability to alter reality, it is has multi-dimensional control.)

attofishpi wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 11:47 pm

gaffo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:55 am

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pm If God exists, God could have a plan. (a priori)
If God has a plan, it could not be understood by a human. (a priori)

If God exists or not, there can be no plan that a human could understand.
God’s plan cannot be understood by humans.

exactly! i did not read this part of your post prior.

my apologies.

I would assume using logic (a human ability - infinately lesser than any Godlike thought - but all we as human's have), that unless you are a God (unlike me - i''m just a man), it is impossible to know the mind of/the God/s

Strange gaffo, that was pretty much the only point made by commonsense that I had issue with.

Do you both think that God - if it existed, would not be intelligent enough to explain a simple plan to a wo/man?

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pmThe foregoing explains why a question of the type, how can a God who is something wish something, might be asked: it is because the asker doesn’t know the answer, which, in turn, cannot be known as it cannot be understood.
I did not mean to imply that God exists. That can only be blindly believed, and not rationally proved.

Actually, this is not the case, it can be empirically proven to an individual, if the 'God' entity wishes to permit it. This is the case with myself, the fact that I cannot prove it exists to others, does not mean I received no empirically verifiable evidence for myself. (by verified, I mean, when there was doubt - for example - that this entity was aware of ALL my thoughts, I tested it again and tested it again, and confirmed it to be so - also in the process another confirmation that I had already learned, that it is has the ability to alter reality, it is has multi-dimensional control.)

My eyes are starting to glaze over. Are you saying that if God exists, God's plan could be understood by humans if God wanted it to be?

Perhaps God, if extant, could have a simple plan that humans could understand. I don't think so, because if the plan were that simple, then humans would understand it, unless it was simple enough for God to explain but God chooses not to explain.

Either the plan is not simple enough for humans to understand and consequently it cannot be understood by humans, or God is intelligent enough to explain the plan but does not explain it and consequently God's plan cannot be understood by humans.

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 11:56 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 11:47 pm

gaffo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:55 am
exactly! i did not read this part of your post prior.

my apologies.

I would assume using logic (a human ability - infinately lesser than any Godlike thought - but all we as human's have), that unless you are a God (unlike me - i''m just a man), it is impossible to know the mind of/the God/s

Strange gaffo, that was pretty much the only point made by commonsense that I had issue with.

Do you both think that God - if it existed, would not be intelligent enough to explain a simple plan to a wo/man?

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:55 pmThe foregoing explains why a question of the type, how can a God who is something wish something, might be asked: it is because the asker doesn’t know the answer, which, in turn, cannot be known as it cannot be understood.
I did not mean to imply that God exists. That can only be blindly believed, and not rationally proved.

Actually, this is not the case, it can be empirically proven to an individual, if the 'God' entity wishes to permit it. This is the case with myself, the fact that I cannot prove it exists to others, does not mean I received no empirically verifiable evidence for myself. (by verified, I mean, when there was doubt - for example - that this entity was aware of ALL my thoughts, I tested it again and tested it again, and confirmed it to be so - also in the process another confirmation that I had already learned, that it is has the ability to alter reality, it is has multi-dimensional control.)

My eyes are starting to glaze over. Are you saying that if God exists, God's plan could be understood by humans if God wanted it to be?

Perhaps God, if extant, could have a simple plan that humans could understand. I don't think so, because if the plan were that simple, then humans would understand it, unless it was simple enough for God to explain but God chooses not to explain.

Either the plan is not simple enough for humans to understand and consequently it cannot be understood by humans, or God is intelligent enough to explain the plan but does not explain it and consequently God's plan cannot be understood by humans.

Oh! So if God exists it would only have ONE plan - the MASTER PLAN!! It wouldn't just want to communicate to someone that bothered to believe, a small plan in relation to that individual.
Personally, even though I know it exists - I don't believe it has a grand master plan - it pretty much lets things role..because, if it wanted to - we'd all have utopia right now, but shit ain't like that.

Maybe there could be 2 plans. Maybe 3. Maybe...

Just substitute “plans” for “plan” above.