Is God an Alternative Fact?

[Kemosloby]

Good luck with that.

Thank you.

 

[Cephus]

If God exists, then God can be found. You make assumptions that God is a belief or that God can not be found. If my thinking was like yours, then My conclusion would be that you do not exist. I only believe you are here. You are a delusion. Since, I choose reality. I have evidence that you do exist. Now, if I did not really want you to exist, I could choose to tell myself you don't then ignore everything concerning you. On the other hand, since I choose reality, I must be open to all truth not just that which I want to be true.

Your thought experiment seems to be no more than a box which you have placed limits on so you can get specific results which you do.

I have an open mind. Perhaps, I have not understood your thought experiment. Give me specific steps and I will conduct one. I will not limit my view as I believe you have.

There is a difference between can be found and has been found. I agree that if God exists, then God can be found, and in fact, needs to be objectively found before rational people believe in him. The fact that he hasn't been objectively found requires anyone with half a brain to reject said belief, at least provisionally, until better evidence is presented. I don't care if God exists one way or the other, I care about reality and God has not been demonstrated to exist in reality.

 

[Bird123]

Your logic is based on the existence of 'if" when your existence is based on "how" it came to exist as can be verified via the thought experiment in "real" life. The reality of our existence does not allow "if" prior to "how". That is why not a single human being can continue its existence without the ability to select or have someone else indirectly select for them in order to continue their existence.

You claim to have an "open mind" yet you have a closed mind when it comes to the Nature of our reality. You refuse to comprehend that you are prohibited to have a choice about the mechanics of "how" you are able to choose in the first place. This is not a "box". This is the Nature of our reality in which we are not entitled to have an opinion on the matter.

"Give me specific steps and I will conduct one." - The steps you are requesting happen each time a person becomes a quadriplegic or slips into a comma. Do you really want to go there in order to prove you have an "open mind"?

 

[Bird123]

Your logic is based on the existence of 'if" when your existence is based on "how" it came to exist as can be verified via the thought experiment in "real" life. The reality of our existence does not allow "if" prior to "how". That is why not a single human being can continue its existence without the ability to select or have someone else indirectly select for them in order to continue their existence.

You claim to have an "open mind" yet you have a closed mind when it comes to the Nature of our reality. You refuse to comprehend that you are prohibited to have a choice about the mechanics of "how" you are able to choose in the first place. This is not a "box". This is the Nature of our reality in which we are not entitled to have an opinion on the matter.

"Give me specific steps and I will conduct one." - The steps you are requesting happen each time a person becomes a quadriplegic or slips into a comma. Do you really want to go there in order to prove you have an "open mind"?

Your quote;The steps you are requesting happen each time a person becomes a quadriplegic or slips into a comma.

This tells me you merely speculate on all this.

You are living in a box and to a certain extent we all are. You see the causal nature of this universe and think that is all there is.

How did you acquire the ability to choose? Perhaps, it was not necessary for existence but it is necessary for the learning process thus you are placed here.. Creation of a universe for now is beyond me. On the other hand, I will discover it in time.

You just must explore beyond the surface for answers. Quantum physics might be a good path for you to explore. It will at least get you a direction out of your box view.

Consider a dimension without time. Quantum physics is pointing to the possibility of many dimensions. A dimension without time just is.

Clearly, you will not attempt to discover God. As I see it, this will make your attempt to discover the real truth a much longer one. Still, choosing is an important factor for us all. We are all meant to make choices.

 

[Bird123]

There is a difference between can be found and has been found. I agree that if God exists, then God can be found, and in fact, needs to be objectively found before rational people believe in him. The fact that he hasn't been objectively found requires anyone with half a brain to reject said belief, at least provisionally, until better evidence is presented. I don't care if God exists one way or the other, I care about reality and God has not been demonstrated to exist in reality.

Assumptions Assumptions Assumptions. Will they lead one to inactivity??

As I see it just about everything that dictates this world is an action of God. Let's explore that. In this universe, knowledge is not given. It must be Discovered. When it is discovered, we are rewarded by it such as creating an easier life for ourselves. This supplies the desire to discover more.

It's about Discovery not Beliefs. Beliefs are a patch that covers the missing pieces when the facts are not known. Without beliefs, we would lock up just like my old computer when the facts were not known. So, isn't it really all about Discovery rather than Beliefs?

If it's all about Discovery, why would people think God is about Beliefs or wants us to Believe? Isn't religion the only ones who must have Beliefs?

Is your assumption that God has not been found by anyone true? Does the finding of God require the converting or preaching to others if God isn't about Believing?

I think it's easier to live and accept Beliefs. Ask scientists, it takes much effort to actually Discover that which exists beyond mere beliefs.

As I see it, the best way to understand anyone is to study and understand their actions. Just as you said. One must be open objectively for the truth even truth they might not agree with.

Scientists have been studying the actions of everything. That is why I think science will Discover God long before any religion ever will.

 

[Cephus]

Assumptions Assumptions Assumptions. Will they lead one to inactivity??

As I see it just about everything that dictates this world is an action of God.

Where did you get that crazy idea? How did you objectively validate it? All you're doing is asserting an empty claim because it makes you feel good. Do try again.

 

[Bird123]

Where did you get that crazy idea? How did you objectively validate it? All you're doing is asserting an empty claim because it makes you feel good. Do try again.

There was a small town who had a new person move into their community. Since the man came from outside their community, he seemed strange to them. Everybody in town called the man crazy. A group of locals were sitting around watching the man one day when one of the men realized that there was Method to the stranger's madness.

Perhaps something besides madness was placed at your door. How long did mankind watch birds fly before they figured out how? Some might not ever be aware of a door even if it is right in front of them.

As I see it, all the secrets of the universe stare us in the face. Who can Discover? Perhaps it's all a test of Intelligence.

 

[TDselector]

Your quote;The steps you are requesting happen each time a person becomes a quadriplegic or slips into a comma.

This tells me you merely speculate on all this.

Ok, if being in a comma or being a quadriplegic you can continue your existence without a direct or indirect selection being made then you will have empirical evidence that your existence is not governed by the two acts of selection but by your "open mind". So when will you confirm in real life that the reality we all share is a speculation as you claim?

 

[Cephus]

There was a small town who had a new person move into their community. Since the man came from outside their community, he seemed strange to them. Everybody in town called the man crazy. A group of locals were sitting around watching the man one day when one of the men realized that there was Method to the stranger's madness.

Perhaps something besides madness was placed at your door. How long did mankind watch birds fly before they figured out how? Some might not ever be aware of a door even if it is right in front of them.

As I see it, all the secrets of the universe stare us in the face. Who can Discover? Perhaps it's all a test of Intelligence.

So the answer is, you've got nothing. You adopted a belief because it felt good, you never tried to verify it because you didn't care, you only wanted it to feel good. And now you're trying to tell other people that your belief is true, not because you have any rational reason to think that it is, but because it feels good.

Gotcha.

 

[TDselector]

So the answer is, you've got nothing. You adopted a belief because it felt good, you never tried to verify it because you didn't care, you only wanted it to feel good. And now you're trying to tell other people that your belief is true, not because you have any rational reason to think that it is, but because it feels good.

Gotcha.

Reality is not a belief and that is why you refuse to put your money (life) where your mouth is (God believer) by not conducting the thought experiment in real life. You insists on using the acts of selection to create your examples without acknowledging that you cannot even create a single example without first making a selection. Cart before the horse.

In order to believe, it is necessary to be ignorant of knowledge. Obtain knowledge and you no longer need to believe. GOTCHA!

 

[Nakosis]

Ok, if being in a comma or being a quadriplegic you can continue your existence without a direct or indirect selection being made then you will have empirical evidence that your existence is not governed by the two acts of selection but by your "open mind". So when will you confirm in real life that the reality we all share is a speculation as you claim?

If I were to perform this thought experiment, then the result could be whatever I thought it should be. At times when I meditate I exist where neither direct nor indirect selection is being made. It's not very hard for me to imagine existence without either. Can this state exist when my physical body no longer functions? I don't know. If it did, I don't see how my knowledge would do you any good.

All that being said, I have "memories" of living other lives. Are they real or some alternative fact created by my mind? I don't know. If I do somehow continue some existence after death and have some vague recollection of this life will I be any better off than I am now, more knowledgeable, more sure of those memories? Probably not.

It seems to me you're assuming the result of your thought experiment based on a lack of knowledge, experience and basing some idea of truth on that.

It's a thought experiment. Everyone can individually assume the results of that experiment based on whatever they believe will happen. I'm not sure how that proves anything.

 

[Bird123]

Ok, if being in a comma or being a quadriplegic you can continue your existence without a direct or indirect selection being made then you will have empirical evidence that your existence is not governed by the two acts of selection but by your "open mind". So when will you confirm in real life that the reality we all share is a speculation as you claim?

OK. Since you say God does not exist. Let's assume for a minute God does not exist. There was no selection or indirect selection made when the elements came together to cause existence followed by evolution. There is more to existence than the causal nature of the universe. On the other hand, if God exists then I guess God made the selection.

Let's look at another. When one dreams in sleep. one exists but are they really making selections or are there indirect selections going on? I think not. It just happens.

There are factors you are not aware of because all you see is the causality of this universe and have stopped looking after that.

 

[Bird123]

So the answer is, you've got nothing. You adopted a belief because it felt good, you never tried to verify it because you didn't care, you only wanted it to feel good. And now you're trying to tell other people that your belief is true, not because you have any rational reason to think that it is, but because it feels good.

Gotcha.

Feeling has nothing to do with it. How can what I have been saying feel good??

Religion and beliefs such as yours counts on feeling. I'm not talking about feeling. I'm talking about Discovery. One who searches for the real truth can not care about feelings. One must be open to Discover that which one does not readily agree with. Can one agree with everything they Discover? If yes, then you are saying no one is ever surprised at what they Discover and we both know that is not true.

It would be easier for you to label it all as feeling. It would make it easier for you to dismiss it. Yes, a lot less work to do nothing but live in your beliefs.

If you look closely, the Method is there. Each must choose for themselves what they want to Discover in life.

 

[TDselector]

If I were to perform this thought experiment, then the result could be whatever I thought it should be. At times when I meditate I exist where neither direct nor indirect selection is being made. It's not very hard for me to imagine existence without either. Can this state exist when my physical body no longer functions? I don't know. If it did, I don't see how my knowledge would do you any good.

All that being said, I have "memories" of living other lives. Are they real or some alternative fact created by my mind? I don't know. If I do somehow continue some existence after death and have some vague recollection of this life will I be any better off than I am now, more knowledgeable, more sure of those memories? Probably not.

It seems to me you're assuming the result of your thought experiment based on a lack of knowledge, experience and basing some idea of truth on that.

It's a thought experiment. Everyone can individually assume the results of that experiment based on whatever they believe will happen. I'm not sure how that proves anything.

The hypothesis is simple. If the two acts of selection are effects of our physical existence, i.e., thought, then anyone can safely conduct the thought experiment in real life and continue to live. If the two acts of selection are the cause of our physical existence then no one can conduct the thought experiment in real life and continue to live. (see pages 88-89 of "Who Is Telling The Truth, Nature Or Man?" article)

"lack of knowledge" - There is not a single human being that can continue their existence without food or water, the Nature of our reality prohibits this. Furthermore, even if you have food or water right next to your mouth, without the ability to select food or water you die. Even a child knows this. So if you believe that your existence is God given, yet the Nature of your reality tells you that the two acts of selection governs your existence, then you must lie to yourself in order to believe in God, plain and simple.

 

[Nakosis]

The hypothesis is simple. If the two acts of selection are effects of our physical existence, i.e., thought, then anyone can safely conduct the thought experiment in real life and continue to live. If the two acts of selection are the cause of our physical existence then no one can conduct the thought experiment in real life and continue to live. (see pages 88-89 of "Who Is Telling The Truth, Nature Or Man?" article)

Sorry, I just get a blank page when I try that link. Maybe I'm blocked for some reason. However none can conduct that experiment in real life and expect their body to physically survive. The question remains does some type of existence continue after your current body physically dies? I think most religious folks assume continuation in some kind of spiritual form. Whereas I don't claim one way or another, I don't see where your experiment rules this out.

"lack of knowledge" - There is not a single human being that can continue their existence without food or water, the Nature of our reality prohibits this. Furthermore, even if you have food or water right next to your mouth, without the ability to select food or water you die. Even a child knows this. So if you believe that your existence is God given, yet the Nature of your reality tells you that the two acts of selection governs your existence, then you must lie to yourself in order to believe in God, plain and simple.

Folks lie to themselves all the time. Kind of need to, to survive. You have to believe your going to survive the next day, to the next year, your football team is going to win knowing you have no idea if this is true or not. Otherwise what motivates someone to try to continue forth through life? Lying to yourself is part of being human. I assume most of life is illusion anyway so lying I see as part of existence. Point being lying to yourself, no big deal. I simply see some as more aware of this than others.

Your next point I assume is if I believe life is in some part illusion then why not try the experiment. Because I don't think it would prove anything. Certainly not to you and for reasons I expressed previously, it's questionable that it'd prove anything to me.

For your experiment, your trusting in your experience. You've seen someone else die. They cease for you to physically exist. Your own experience is the limits of your knowledge. My experience is the limits of my knowledge. There are things beyond either of our experiences that maybe true and we can only speculate on until we personally experience them.

We both trust what we have experienced for ourselves. Where I think you might be lying to yourself is trusting your experience to predict something that lies beyond your experience. I do as well. What else can you do but rely on your past experience in order to predict what happens next. However I realize that doing so is still a gamble. I'm lying to myself that my limited knowledge based on on my past experience is sufficient to predict what happens next. I know it's a lie but a person has to have some kind of faith in that to go forth and act with any purpose.

I don't know what happens to conscious existence when the body physically dies. Making a prediction either way I think is lying to myself. I can speculate on it but I'm really working with limited knowledge.

From my perspective, relying on your past experience to make future predictions, even though we all do it, is risky at best.

 

[Nakosis]

You claim to have an "open mind" yet you have a closed mind when it comes to the Nature of our reality. You refuse to comprehend that you are prohibited to have a choice about the mechanics of "how" you are able to choose in the first place. This is not a "box". This is the Nature of our reality in which we are not entitled to have an opinion on the matter.

But as I see it, here you are with an opinion on the matter. You just think that opinion can't be questioned. Me, I'm not ready to stop questioning the truth of anything. I will continue to question the truth of everything until the day I cease to exist. When you accept the truth of something without question, that's when you are lying to yourself.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

If the two acts of selection are effects of our physical existence

You STILL have not shown that any "acts of selection" are anything relevant to our existence, in anything except theory--and what little theory you present is incoherent. You have not clearly established what these "acts of selection" really are and why they are relevant, nor why there should be two choices, rather than one or three, or four or more.

You keep repeating the same quotes out of your own supposedly (but not really) peer-reviewed paper and website, and it's still garbage. It sounds like you're saying something relevant, but you have not demonstrated it.

 

[TDselector]

However none can conduct that experiment in real life and expect their body to physically surviv.

But as I see it, here you are with an opinion on the matter. You just think that opinion can't be questioned. Me, I'm not ready to stop questioning the truth of anything. I will continue to question the truth of everything until the day I cease to exist. When you accept the truth of something without question, that's when you are lying to yourself.

Which came first, your thoughts or the brain that generated your thoughts? Take away the acts of selection and your brain dies along with its thoughts. If you understood this, then you would also understand that the Nature of your reality prohibits you from questioning what you are not entitled to question. You simply do not have a choice in the matter of how you came to exist or can continue to exist.

 

[TDselector]

You STILL have not shown that any "acts of selection" are anything relevant to our existence, in anything except theory--and what little theory you present is incoherent. You have not clearly established what these "acts of selection" really are and why they are relevant, nor why there should be two choices, rather than one or three, or four or more.

You keep repeating the same quotes out of your own supposedly (but not really) peer-reviewed paper and website, and it's still garbage. It sounds like you're saying something relevant, but you have not demonstrated it.

If your existence is not governed by the acts of selection then why not conduct the thought experiment in real life to confirm your opinions to the contrary of the laws that govern your existence? If indeed you are correct and the findings are a "theory", then what do you have to lose? Please feel free to show us all the error of our existence.

 

[Nakosis]

Which came first, your thoughts or the brain that generated your thoughts? Take a way the acts of selection and your brain dies along with its thoughts. If you understood this, then you would also understand that the Nature of your reality prohibits you from questioning what you are not entitled to question. You simply do not have a choice in the matter of how you came to exist or can continue to exist.

Why assume one came before the other? One's thoughts are constantly changing as well as the physiology on the brain. They affect each other. They create each other. Is a single cell a brain? The brain I had tomorrow will be created by my thoughts today. If I have some kind of brain injury today it will effect my thought tomorrow. You're assuming the answer to a question I don't think you have a right to assume.

However nothing prevents me from questioning anything and I certainly wouldn't agree that I'm not entitled to question something.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. What is an example of an act of selection. A computer for example can make an act of selection. To do so you need both the hardware and the software. They can exist separately from each other. Neither can do anything by itself. When they come together they make their act of selection. One doesn't have a need to exist before the other. The software could of resided on numerous types of media before the computer existed and the computer could have existed long before the software. Not knowing that answer you could assume either came first.