Let's Present Some Evidence ...

[PureX]

Right, but the physical structures themselves will still exist. Love, beauty, and justice do not exist as anything other than experiences/concepts. You're comparing apples and the taste of oranges.



Why would it? They have an objective existence apart from conscious perception. Love, beauty, and justice do not.

This becomes the old : "if a tree falls in the forest...?" thing. And the answer is that it's a pointless point.

"God" doesn't have a physical body. So what's your point?

Love doesn't have a physical structure. So what's your point?

Beauty can't be defined, and lives in the eye of the beholder. So what's your point?

Justice is can't be weighed or measured, only meted out. So what's your point?

There are aspects of existence that are defined by the results of relational phenomena, rather than being defined by their physical structure. So what? Functionally, they certainly aren't any less real. And apart from us ... well ... who cares?

 

[Commoner]

This becomes the old : "if a tree falls in the forest...?" thing. And the answer is that it's a pointless point.

"God" doesn't have a physical body. So what's your point?

Love doesn't have a physical structure. So what's your point?

Beauty can't be defined, and lives in the eye of the beholder. So what's your point?

Justice is can't be weighed or measured, only meted out. So what's your point?

There are aspects of existence that are defined by the results of relational phenomena, rather than being defined by their physical structure. So what? Functionally, they certainly aren't any less real. And apart from us ... well ... who cares?

So, what?

Well, we usually don't say that "tall" created the universe. If it's a concept, it should stay a concept.

 

[Copernicus]

The concept of a "mountain", or a "valley", or a "river" will also cease to exist when the conscious entities capable of perceiving and experiencing them cease to exist. But that doesn't make mountains or valleys or rivers any less real. Ultimately all there is, is energy expressing itself, and we experiencing and conceptualizing and labeling it.

But we know that we interpret our experiences incorrectly. For example, a magician who appears to pull a coin out of a boy's ear might succeed in convincing the boy that that is what he really did. Long after the boy and the magician have ceased to exist, it will still be true that the coin was never actually pulled out of the boy's ear, even if the boy went on to believe that experience for the rest of his life.

 

[themadhair]

This is an interesting turn of events. A concept has become too vague to be anything other than a concept. I've never seen this happen before.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

"God" doesn't have a physical body. So what's your point?

Love doesn't have a physical structure. So what's your point?

Beauty can't be defined, and lives in the eye of the beholder. So what's your point?

Justice is can't be weighed or measured, only meted out. So what's your point?

The point is that analogizing that god is "real," the way that love, beauty, and justice are "real," is only evidence of god being a "real", subjective concept, not something "real" in that it objectively exists outside of consciousness.

I agree that god is "real" as a subjective concept, just like love, beauty, and justice. If one posits that god is "real" as an objective entity, then some type of empirical evidence is necessary to support this statement.

 

[PureX]

The point is that analogizing that god is "real," the way that love, beauty, and justice are "real," is only evidence of god being a "real", subjective concept, not something "real" in that it objectively exists outside of consciousness.

How does this matter. NOTHING exists outside of consciousness, for US. We ARE our consciousness. WE don't even exist outside of our own consciousness. "God" is as real as we are.

 

[PureX]

If one posits that god is "real" as an objective entity, then some type of empirical evidence is necessary to support this statement.

I have never posited that God is an objective entity. I don't even think most religions posit that. Perhaps when the Christians called Jesus "God", they were giving God an objective status. But I disagree with them on this, anyway, and Jesus said he was not God. So I think there is some misunderstanding going on in that instance.

 

[PureX]

This is an interesting turn of events. A concept has become too vague to be anything other than a concept. I've never seen this happen before.

If you think concepts aren't very clear and very real, you've never had a broken heart.

And keep in mind that YOU ARE A CONCEPT.

 

[Commoner]

How does this matter. NOTHING exists outside of consciousness, for US. We ARE our consciousness. WE don't even exist outside of our own consciousness. "God" is as real as we are.

See, I told you Santa was real. Now where are my presents?

 

[PureX]

But we know that we interpret our experiences incorrectly. For example, a magician who appears to pull a coin out of a boy's ear might succeed in convincing the boy that that is what he really did. Long after the boy and the magician have ceased to exist, it will still be true that the coin was never actually pulled out of the boy's ear, even if the boy went on to believe that experience for the rest of his life.

To whom does "truth" matter? Only us. When we're gone, there will be no truth. We humans live in a conceptual life in a conceptual landscape. We are our concepts of ourselves, even. It's all conceptual. And when our consciousness ends, none of this will matter.

God is as real as we are. If our consciousness continues after our bodies die somehow, then so will God and love and beauty and justice. But the "objective universe" will be gone from us. It will have been transcended. Left behind. So why should we hold onto it as though only it were truth? Why not embrace that which MAYBE can transcend death?

Just asking.

 

[themadhair]

And keep in mind that YOU ARE A CONCEPT.

It appears that I am rather physical actually.

This new line of approach from you is amusing I have to say. Since you have gotten us to admit god is a concept (which was self-evident but no matter), your approach to showing it exists is to argue everything is a concept. I could not have made this up. The tooth fairy is a concept too - therefore by your logic it is as real as you.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

How does this matter. NOTHING exists outside of consciousness, for US. We ARE our consciousness. WE don't even exist outside of our own consciousness. "God" is as real as we are.

The earth would still exist if all humans vanished off the face of it. Love, beauty, and justice would not (assuming there aren't other species on the planet capable of formulating these concepts).

I'm not a nihilist, so even though I know when I die, everything will stop existing for me, I also know that things will continue to exist without me.

 

[themadhair]

Why not embrace that which MAYBE can transcend death?

Because a lie, no matter how comforting, is still a lie and some of us value intellectual and self honesty?

 

[PureX]

So, what?

Well, we usually don't say that "tall" created the universe. If it's a concept, it should stay a concept.

But "God" is a special kind of concept, in that it's transcendent. Through it, we can transcend ourselves; recreate ourselves, become new people. This is why we attribute such creative powers to "God".

 

[PureX]

Because a lie, no matter how comforting, is still a lie and some of us value intellectual and self honesty?

But you don't know it's a lie. You have already admitted that. If you're being so honest, why are you being so stubbornly biased?

 

[themadhair]

But "God" is a special kind of concept, in that it's transcendent. Through it, we can transcend ourselves; recreate ourselves, become new people. This is why we attribute such creative powers to "God".

All together now....

[size=+3]textbook example of special pleading[/size]

 

[Commoner]

But "God" is a special kind of concept, in that it's transcendent. Through it, we can transcend ourselves; recreate ourselves, become new people. This is why we attribute such creative powers to "God".

I have no idea what you mean by that.

 

[themadhair]

But you don't know it's a lie.

Taking your god concept for the moment, if it is contradictory then it is false. It doesn't get any simpler than that, and these contradictions have already been pointed out to you (and you ignored them).

 

[PureX]

The earth would still exist if all humans vanished off the face of it. Love, beauty, and justice would not (assuming there aren't other species on the planet capable of formulating these concepts).

I'm not a nihilist, so even though I know when I die, everything will stop existing for me, I also know that things will continue to exist without me.

Again, I don't see how this is relevant. Of what significance is an existing Earth with no conscious humans to interpret or appreciate it? How would it matter that a dead (unconscious) universe goes on forever?

 

[Commoner]

God is as real as we are. If our consciousness continues after our bodies die somehow, then so will God and love and beauty and justice. But the "objective universe" will be gone from us. It will have been transcended. Left behind. So why should we hold onto it as though only it were truth? Why not embrace that which MAYBE can transcend death?

Just asking.

Should you not have just said that god is as real as Santa and ended this debate?