Philosophy Now Forum

C'mon, I want the blokes you regurgitate from - ya Nietzsche, Kant, Hume (and forget Spinoza)

What can you or any atheist provide that will contradict my comprehension of God and Christ?

WHAT YA GOT ATHEISTS?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 4:44 pm C'mon, I want the blokes you regurgitate from - ya Nietzsche, Kant, Hume (and forget Spinoza)

What can you or any atheist provide that will contradict my comprehension of God and Christ?

WHAT YA GOT ATHEISTS?

What's your comprehension of gods and why would anyone bother to contradict it?

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:11 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 4:44 pm C'mon, I want the blokes you regurgitate from - ya Nietzsche, Kant, Hume (and forget Spinoza)

What can you or any atheist provide that will contradict my comprehension of God and Christ?

WHAT YA GOT ATHEISTS?

What's your comprehension of gods and why would anyone bother to contradict it?

I'd be extremely surprised if there was more than one. Promethean once said he basically had some sort of realisation bordering epiphany that there is no God, hence, am interested in whatever it was that he read that convinced him.

What is the RED direction stating in your avatar?

we don't believe u. that's the bitch about revelatory knowledge of god. far too many sketchy blokes throughout history have claimed to have experienced the presence of god. so god's PR is all fucked up becuz of em.

the second kind of knowledge of god is rational knowledge. this kind does not involve experience of god, but would propose the truth that god exists through induction and inference. problem with this method is, not one of these arguments contain any verifiable empirical propositions or objects. not one, from Plotinus to Hartshorne and everyone in between. the whole gamut has been one long drawn-out sophisticated language game.

the only n*gga to ever make any sense when muttering the word 'god' was spinoza.

so you're kinda fucked, mate. i don't care if god came down and sat on your face. unless he sits on ours, we won't believe u. moreover, whatever sat on your face may have not been god even tho u believed it was. so even that experience/proof is dubious.

and you'll certainly not be able to prove god exists through rational argument. not the god u claim exists, anyway.

this may be the third or fourth time I've explained this here. am I becoming that guy who repeats himself over and over again at a philosophy forum becuz he believes anybody actually reads his shit? my god. it's happening to me. I'm becoming that guy.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:20 pm

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:11 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 4:44 pm C'mon, I want the blokes you regurgitate from - ya Nietzsche, Kant, Hume (and forget Spinoza)

What can you or any atheist provide that will contradict my comprehension of God and Christ?

WHAT YA GOT ATHEISTS?

What's your comprehension of gods and why would anyone bother to contradict it?

I'd be extremely surprised if there was more than one. Promethean once said he basically had some sort of realisation bordering epiphany that there is no God, hence, am interested in whatever it was that he read that convinced him.

What is the RED direction stating in your avatar?

I believe there's a bit more than 2000 at last count.

"It Depends", is the Red direction, ie the most accurate of the three.

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:30 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:20 pm

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:11 pm

What's your comprehension of gods and why would anyone bother to contradict it?

I'd be extremely surprised if there was more than one. Promethean once said he basically had some sort of realisation bordering epiphany that there is no God, hence, am interested in whatever it was that he read that convinced him.

What is the RED direction stating in your avatar?

I believe there's a bit more than 2000 at last count.

You appear to be making a common mistake in assuming that since man has contrived of > 2000 Gods, therefore belief in A or any God is somehow defunct.

LuckyR" wrote:It Depends", is the Red direction, ie the most accurate of the three.

I like it.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 7:58 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:30 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:20 pm

I'd be extremely surprised if there was more than one. Promethean once said he basically had some sort of realisation bordering epiphany that there is no God, hence, am interested in whatever it was that he read that convinced him.

What is the RED direction stating in your avatar?

I believe there's a bit more than 2000 at last count.

You appear to be making a common mistake in assuming that since man has contrived of > 2000 Gods, therefore belief in A or any God is somehow defunct.

Defunct? Far from it. The vast majority of the planet's human inhabitants claim to believe in (at least one of the) gods.

Personally I have no major objection to such belief systems, since they have documented benefits for their believers in certain circumstances. These benefits can (again in certain circumstances) outweigh the known negatives of the practice.

Between Dawkins & God
John Holroyd negotiates a middle way between these two much-lauded figures.

I want to press this point about empirical evidence, since Dawkins is insistent in his commitment to evidence and reason in contrast to faith.

Me too. And I focus in particular on empirical evidence that can be accumulated in regard to these four factors:

1] demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that, historically, culturally and in terms of uniquely personal experiences, dasein and plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy, "acts of God", and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path

Any Christians here care to go there?

What would Dawkins think of a medic who wrote an article designed to be read as widely as possible which suggested that a virus was spreading through a hospital or town, when there was no medical consensus about this at all? Would Dawkins regard that as responsible medical journalism? I do not think so. To liken a religion to a virus is similarly irresponsible. It similarly helps to foster suspicion and fear.

More to the point here [mine] how would the Christians explain the very existence of such deadly viruses as AIDS and Covid? Were they not created by God Himself? Indeed, there are those Christian communities among us that refuse to go to doctors when afflicted with illnesses. Why? Because they put their faith in the Christian God. He created the viruses, the viruses afflicted members of the congregation. Now, Thy will be done all the way to the grave if necessary. Then other Christians insisting that is not God's will at all. Yet with all that is at stake, the Christians themselves can't even pin down God's will?

So, which is it?

Then [for me] particularly surreal contexts like this...

"Pope Laments ‘Appalling’ Loss of Life in War in Gaza" headline in NYT

Again, all I can do here is to ponder how all of this will play out on Judgment Day.

Any speculations?

LuckyR wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 7:52 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 7:58 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2023 5:30 pm

I believe there's a bit more than 2000 at last count.

You appear to be making a common mistake in assuming that since man has contrived of > 2000 Gods, therefore belief in A or any God is somehow defunct.

Defunct? Far from it. The vast majority of the planet's human inhabitants claim to believe in (at least one of the) gods.

What humans believe and what is true can be extremely different thangs. For example, anyone that believes in 1 less God than I know exists, is wrong.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 8:56 pm

1] demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that, historically, culturally and in terms of uniquely personal experiences, dasein and plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy, "acts of God", and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path

Any Christians here care to go there?

How many times do you want me to answer that - and then be ignored (cockhead).

btw. The sages started the Covid at the Spring Equinox as per this thread I started in 2019. viewtopic.php?t=28051

In November 2019 I emailed the "Church" of Scientology to take down the crucifix symbol from their church otherwise they would be affected by "chaos" at the Spring Equinox (22/3/2020)

-

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2023 12:43 am

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 8:56 pm

1] demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that, historically, culturally and in terms of uniquely personal experiences, dasein and plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy, "acts of God", and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path

Any Christians here care to go there?

How many times do you want me to answer that - and then be ignored (cockhead).

btw. The sages started the Covid at the Spring Equinox as per this thread I started in 2019. viewtopic.php?t=28051

In November 2019 I emailed the "Church" of Scientology to take down the crucifix symbol from their church otherwise they would be affected by "chaos" at the Spring Equinox (22/3/2020)

-

Absolutely shameless!

Or, rather, I'm sure that it would be if I had actually read it.




Note to others:

Again, in regard to those here I suspect of having a "condition", I don't read their posts. On the other hand, if you do and ever come across something he or she posts you think might actually be of interest to me, by all means, link me to it.

Like for example, his/her "answer" to the four factors I noted above.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2023 1:01 am Or, rather, I'm sure that it would be if I had actually read it.
Note to others:

Pretty certain those "others" are as amazed as I am that someone with such a feeble mind as yours is capable of reading at all.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2023 12:43 am

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 8:56 pm

1] demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that, historically, culturally and in terms of uniquely personal experiences, dasein and plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy, "acts of God", and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path

Any Christians here care to go there?

How many times do you want me to answer that - and then be ignored (cockhead).

btw. The sages started the Covid at the Spring Equinox as per this thread I started in 2019. viewtopic.php?t=28051

In November 2019 I emailed the "Church" of Scientology to take down the crucifix symbol from their church otherwise they would be affected by "chaos" at the Spring Equinox (22/3/2020)

-

Point being.

Between Dawkins & God
John Holroyd negotiates a middle way between these two much-lauded figures.

John Cornwell picks up this point in the following way. Dawkins has given English a new word, ‘meme’. Memes are the erstwhile mental equivalents of genes: they’re ideas, habits, concepts, which compete like genes for survival, to be copied from mind to mind. Memes include everything from the corkscrew and the hydrogen bomb through to jokes, Strictly Come Dancing, and Occam’s razor. Like genes, the most useful memes in a culture survive, while others die out.

Of course, the genes we come into the world with are entirely beyond our control. Or, rather, they were until scientists of late figured out ways to "play God" and "recombine" biological components of the human genome into, well, who actually knows how far they can or will go?

Don't think you're a man? Then get an operation and become a woman.

Memes on the other hand are considerably more problematic. They evolve and change -- sometimes dramatically -- over time historically and culturally. And certainly in regard to our own uniquely personal experiences. In fact, these changes perturb some more than others. Memes are simply dismissed as "social constructs" that have little or no capacity to change what we are "naturally".

Not sure what you are "naturally"? Let these folks -- https://knowthyself.forumotion.net/f6-agora -- tell you.

Dawkins might consider where his own meme, the idea that religion is a virus, might lead.

More to the point [mine] to what extent are his conclusions not themselves rooted existentially in dasein? In other words, where it leads him may or may not be where it leads you. Then the part where the "serious philosophers" among us attempt to pin down where it ought to lead those who wish to be thought of as rational men and women. Religion might be deemed a virus because [in a free will world] it can "infect" some to the point where they become religious fanatics. Think Hamas and the Israeli Zionists.

Same in regard to moral nihilists. Where did the genes stop and the memes begin when I thought myself into believing that I am fractured and fragmented?

Dawkins seems to me clearly to be a humane man who dislikes prejudice against individuals or groups. However, the character of his book, and those of other meme-buddies such as Christopher Hitchens, plus the bile of Martin Amis against Islam, for example, are a potent brew.

Or impotent if your own collection of genes and memes take you in an entirely conflicting direction. Again, however, the point is this: philosophically, what direction ought one to go in?

One of these...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... philosophy

...perhaps?

In combination with some less than reputable aspects of our media, I believe these writings have caused social harm and indirectly put at risk significant numbers of people within Islamic communities in the U.K. and elsewhere.

Unless, of course, they are "terrorists" and get what they deserve.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2STiabRV8TE

listening to a serious scholar on Christianity is so refreshing. OMG, some of my fellow humans have descended a long way on the evangelical road to insanity.