@.@ (noncognitivtheists) does god exist?

[crossfire]

(noncognitivtheism) is term I just coined (because noncognitivtheists prolly have difficulty coining a term to suit them..)
Started this thread specifically for @Niatero

 

[Niatero]

I was thinking of calling it "apatheism." I don't know, and I don't care. "God exists" and "God does not exist" are just meaningless strings of words to me. They look like they're saying something but they aren't.

That only applies to "God" in the Abrahamic scriptures. I don't have any opinions or non-opinions about any other gods.

 

[crossfire]

I was thinking of calling it "apatheism." I don't know, and I don't care. "God exists" and "God does not exist" are just meaningless strings of words to me. They look like they're saying something but they aren't.

You are putting a lot of thought into it though, instead of being apathetic.

 

[Niatero]

Are you talking about the Trinity discussions?

Oh. My posts in the "Does God exist" threads.

 

[Niatero]

(noncognitivtheism) is term I just coined (because noncognitivtheists prolly have difficulty coining a term to suit them..)
Started this thread specifically for @Niatero

So, are you inviting me to repeat what I said in the other thread?

 

[crossfire]

Non-cognitivism in regards to theism. (I had to coin the phrase for those who might get stuck in the formless realms to have some nama-rupa to grab on to in order to not get stuck there where they can't learn the dhamma.)

 

[crossfire]

So, are you inviting me to repeat what I said in the other thread?

Well, you said you didn't fit in in the transtheism thread, so I made this one just for you.

 

[Niatero]

Maybe we could use it to talk about a-women's issues.

 

[crossfire]

Flashing in and out of existence: Chochma

https://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380785/jewish/Chochma.htm

 

[crossfire]

I was thinking of calling it "apatheism." I don't know, and I don't care. "God exists" and "God does not exist" are just meaningless strings of words to me. They look like they're saying something but they aren't.

That only applies to "God" in the Abrahamic scriptures. I don't have any opinions or non-opinions about any other gods.

The torch of chaos and doubt - this is what the sage steers by.11 So he does not use things but relegates all to the constant. This is what it means to use clarity.​

​

Now I am going to make a statement here. I don't know whether it fits into the category of other people's statements or not. But whether it fits into their category or whether it doesn't, it obviously fits into some category. So in that respect it is no different from their statements. However, let me try making my statement.​

​

There is a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. Suddenly there is nonbeing. But I do not know, when it comes to nonbeing, which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something. But I don't know whether what I have said has really said something or whether it hasn't said something.​

​

--Chuangtzu,On Making All Things Equal​

 

[Niatero]

The torch of chaos and doubt - this is what the sage steers by.11 So he does not use things but relegates all to the constant. This is what it means to use clarity.​

​

Now I am going to make a statement here. I don't know whether it fits into the category of other people's statements or not. But whether it fits into their category or whether it doesn't, it obviously fits into some category. So in that respect it is no different from their statements. However, let me try making my statement.​

​

There is a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. Suddenly there is nonbeing. But I do not know, when it comes to nonbeing, which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something. But I don't know whether what I have said has really said something or whether it hasn't said something.​

​

--Chuangtzu,On Making All Things Equal​

Does that say something to you? Can you think of any different way of saying it?

Or is it like "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" when used properly?

Oh! I know! Me! Me!

(stands up straight and tall) For every "is" there is a "not yet beginning to be." ... So from what I just said, there is a not yet beginning to ... Let's see .. wait a minute ... (mumbles to self) There is a "not yet beginning to be" for every "is," so ... so ... There is a not yet

 

[crossfire]

Does that say something to you? Can you think of any different way of saying it?

Or is it like "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" when used properly?

Oh! I know! Me! Me!

(stands up straight and tall) For every "is" there is a "not yet beginning to be." ... So from what I just said, there is a not yet beginning to ... Let's see .. wait a minute ... (mumbles to self) There is a "not yet beginning to be" for every "is," so ... so ... There is a not yet

Let me add my commentary:

The torch of chaos and doubt - this is what the sage steers by.11 So he does not use things but relegates all to the constant. This is what it means to use clarity.​

The constant referred to is Change (the Tao.) Chuangtzi is focusing on describing the process of change instead of making it into a "thing."

​

Now I am going to make a statement here. I don't know whether it fits into the category of other people's statements or not. But whether it fits into their category or whether it doesn't, it obviously fits into some category. So in that respect it is no different from their statements. However, let me try making my statement.​

This part reminded me of when you wrote you didn't fit into the transtheist thread. Since you obviously have some category, I coined one for you with this thread.

​

There is a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. Suddenly there is nonbeing. But I do not know, when it comes to nonbeing, which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something. But I don't know whether what I have said has really said something or whether it hasn't said something.​

​

--Chuangtzu,On Making All Things Equal​

What Chaungtzi is describing here reminds me a lot of Chochma linked in post #9 above. The kabbalahsists give it a name, making it "thing," whereas Chuangtzi refrains from naming it, and is even skeptical about it when it is inactive (the yin aspect of the Tao is the resting state, whereas the the active state is the yang aspect.) Since the Tao is inherently yin, Chuangtzi did actually say something about non-being. But since you really can't observe the nonbeing aspect, he has reason to doubt.

 

[Niatero]

Let me add my commentary:

The constant referred to is Change (the Tao.) Chuangtzi is focusing on describing the process of change instead of making it into a "thing."

This part reminded me of when you wrote you didn't fit into the transtheist thread. Since you obviously have some category, I coined one for you with this thread.

What Chaungtzi is describing here reminds me a lot of Chochma linked in post #9 above. The kabbalahsists give it a name, making it "thing," whereas Chuangtzi refrains from naming it, and is even skeptical about it when it is inactive (the yin aspect of the Tao is the resting state, whereas the the active state is the yang aspect.) Since the Tao is inherently yin, Chuangtzi did actually say something about non-being. But since you really can't observe the nonbeing aspect, he has reason to doubt.

That fits very well with another commentary that I read about it. He is mocking the language of some other teachers, but as he often does, he mocks himself at the same time, intentionally.

The Humor of Zhuangzi; the Self-Seriousness of Laozi

 

[crossfire]

That fits very well with another commentary that I read about it. He is mocking the language of some other teachers, but as he often does, he mocks himself at the same time, intentionally.

The Humor of Zhuangzi; the Self-Seriousness of Laozi

Well, the discourse is titled "On Making All Things Equal," so mocking himself while he mocks others makes sense.

 

[Niatero]

Well, the discourse is titled "On Making All Things Equal," so mocking himself while he mocks others makes sense.

Can I tell you what I think about gender issues, in an interview thread? I'm thinking that maybe you could help me improve my ways of thinking about the issues.

(later) There might be some disagreements between us and I might get heated up sometimes.

 

[crossfire]

Can I tell you what I think about gender issues, in an interview thread? I'm thinking that maybe you could help me improve my ways of thinking about the issues.

(later) There might be some disagreements between us and I might get heated up sometimes.

There are other people here who are more qualified than me to discuss it. However, if you are using it to attack anti-discrimination declarations, then watch out!

 

[Niatero]

There are other people here who are more qualified than me to discuss it. However, if you are using it to attack anti-discrimination declarations, then watch out!

What I would say would be about gender-affirming vs person-affirming and self-perception affirming.

(later) I was hoping to fight about it discuss it with someone who is promoting gender-affirming practices.

 

[crossfire]

What I would say would be about gender-affirming vs person-affirming and self-perception affirming.

(later) I was hoping to fight about it discuss it with someone who is promoting gender-affirming practices.

You can put an announcement out in the one-on-one debate section requesting such a debate. While I do enjoy heated debate, promoting gender-affirming practices is not something I can get too heated over. It's between the person and their health care professional.

 

[Niatero]

You can put an announcement out in the one-on-one debate section requesting such a debate. While I do enjoy heated debate, promoting gender-affirming practices is not something I can get too heated over. It's between the person and their health care professional.

I'm not only talking about medical work. I'm talking about all the ways that gender identity is being promoted as a way of sorting people for legal, policy, and other purposes.

 

[crossfire]

I'm not only talking about medical work. I'm talking about all the ways that gender identity is being promoted as a way of sorting people for legal, policy, and other purposes.

It shouldn't. As far as the law and the issues mentioned in the anti-discrimination declarations are concerned, at least. That would be discrimination.