Theists: What would a godless universe look like?

[Polymath257]

theists as a whole, do more good than any atheists possibly could

Only because there are more of them and because atheists keep silent about their charity.

 

[Polymath257]

Grace and Salvation through Jesus Christ!
...it's a shame that you don't recognize your own sins enough, in order to perceive God's mercy

I’m quite aware of the many mistakes I have made. But I don’t need an imaginary friend to forgive me.

 

[Polymath257]

You're preaching to the choir - what's your point?

The biblical God is an evil being. That is my conclusion from reading the Bible.

 

[Polymath257]

All men do not share the same abilities of perception and wisdom - how do you fare?

And not all those who claim to perceive actually do. Self delusion is a real thing. How do you avoid that?

Why are theists so inconsistent about details? If they actually perceive something, they should all agree, right?

 

[Polymath257]

since the majority of the earth's population has always been spiritual, how do you explain such an absurdity coming from stardust and protoplasm - what other creatures are so irrational?

We don’t know what irrationalities other animals have. But, again, we seem to be the ones capable of abstract thought. That has been a very useful survival skill. But it does lead to nonsense in many cases.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Demons exist - can you perceive that much?

No, I can't.Never met one. Nobody I know has ever met one. People's heads turn 360 in movies and your imagination -- not in real life.

 

[Little Dragon]

Demons exist - can you perceive that much?

Demonic people exist, I perceive that all the time, usually when talking to hate filled bigots.

 

[Brian2]

You know, I think everbody should actually read what that link says, so here it is:

Self-Configuring Self-Processing Language​

​

Self-Configuring Self-Processing Language or SCSPL is the meta-mathematical structure to which the universe is isomorphic. SCSPL is the language of the universe, a language so expressive that the universe creates itself and evolves through using it. The universe is in every way, everywhere, identical to SCSPL.​

​

Normally, languages are considered to be in the minds of people and they work on the basis of moving symbols around mentally, where said symbols represent things in the "outside world". By attempting to represent things in the "outside world" with language, one gets closer and closer in accuracy of description to the things one attempts to describe the more expressive/powerful the language is. What would happen if a language was so expressive that it contained every piece of information on the thing it wishes to describe, to the highest resolution possible? You would have the SCSPL "coding" of that object in the universe, which is identical to the object itself. Thought about in another way, if one asks themselves "what does the SCSPL coding of a tennis ball look like?"; the answer is the tennis ball itself! One can say that Mind=Reality=Language since mind and reality intersect at the SCSPL language, as the content of both. It is through language that the source (mind) maps to the target (reality).​

​

Other languages that SCSPL provides a syntactic covering for (see description of syntactic covering and Human Cognitive Syntax) include; the laws of physics, the laws of mathematics, the expressions of the human mind or HCS.​

Definition​

According to the Reality Principle, the universe is self contained, and according to infocognitive monism, it regresses to a realm of nil constraint (unbound telesis or UBT) from which it must refine itself. According to the Telic Principle, which states that the universe must provide itself with the means to do this, it must make and realize its own "choice to exist"; by reason of its absolute priority, this act of choice is identical to that which is chosen, i.e. the universe itself, and thus reflexive. I.e., "existence is everywhere the choice to exist." Accordingly, the universe must adopt a reflexive form in which it can "select itself" for self-defined existence, with the selection function identical to that which is selected. This means that it must take a certain general or "initial" form, the MU form, which contains all of the requisites for generating the contents of reality. Due to hology, whereby the self-contained universe has nothing but itself of which to consist, this form is self-distributed.​

​

By the Principle of Linguistic Reducibility, reality is a language. Because it is self-contained with respect to processing as well as configuration, it is a Self-Configuring Self-Processing Language or SCSPL whose general spatiotemporal structure is hologically replicated everywhere within it as self-transductive syntax. This reduces the generative phase of reality, including physical cosmogony, to the generative grammar of SCSPL. [1]​

Notes​

1. Jump up↑ http://www.teleologic.org/

Anyone on this forum with the ability to read will recognize fairly quickly that it purports to say a great deal, while in fact saying practically nothing at all.. One can't help but notice, for instance, that there is only one note -- one "citation," and that is simply a pointer to where you can sign up for more of this nonsense.

The attempt to describe a language which is (must be) both it's own source and object, both the language and the speaker of it, along with the source of all of its own ideas and raw materials -- while not even pretending to show a single part of that language, parts of speech, syntax, nothing -- makes abundantly clear that it is merely a flight of fancy based on a highly imaginative, perhaps intelligent in an idiot-savant sort of way, but not particularly sensible person.

The bit I marked in red is a very text-book example of a deepity.

Look at the phrase, in the above text, "and according to infocognitive monism." This construct, referred to as if it were from some other source, exists only within this "CTMU Wiki" site, demonstrates the inevitably circular reasoning employed to try and look like real science -- which it most emphatically is not.

There are things which demonstrate to me that an intelligence is behind the design of this universe and the things in it. For example.

And interestingly the deeper we go into things the more this design should become apparent imo.

 

[Little Dragon]

That's spirituality - it cannot be defined by logic and pragmatism - laying down one's life for another defies rationale

Altruism does not defy explanation.

 

[Little Dragon]

...it's a shame that you don't recognize your own sins enough, in order to perceive God's mercy

Its a shame you don't recognize that we don't really care about your God or it's mercy, or even, your notion of sin.
I know I don't, whatsoever. In fact comments like yours always amuse and always reassure me that not being a christian, is absolutely the best choice I could have ever made.

 

[Little Dragon]

since the majority of the earth's population has always been spiritual,

You mean ignorant?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

theists as a whole, do more good than any atheists possibly could

I guess you don't watch the news. Theists do nothing for me or anybody I know that depends on their theism.

You atheists keep appealing to evidence, when the irony is that the spiritual realm is right in front of your face, and you blatantly state that you can't see it

There's a way to test whether some people are seeing something that others can't see or whether they are not. Ask them what they see and compare the answers. If they are independent answers and correlate well, they likely are seeing what they claim to see. For example, if a person with red-green colorblindness wants to know whether people who report seeing them as different colors are correct, he can quiz people on what they are seeing and determine that they actually can see something he can't. Independent sources will give the same answers.

Tell me about what you are seeing that you call the spiritual realm? What does it look like? What are its features?

the man who demands evidence, based on his perception, of course, has induced that the plants, rocks, and jellyfish hold the key to contentment, edification and serenity.

Was that in reference to me? I do believe that empiricism is the only path to knowledge including knowledge of how the world works (intelligence) and knowledge of what brings "contentment, edification and serenity" to oneself (wisdom). We can use that knowledge to attempt to create a world for ourselves as close to our vision of paradise as possible with varying degrees of success depending on how well we do that.

Do you know what does that for you? I can answer for myself. This is from an earlier post:

"Imagine days filled with beauty, love, self-respect, the respect of others, and leisure while remaining free from anxiety, fear, shame guilt, boredom, loneliness, and physical suffering. Imagine a day filled with nice things to see, hear, taste, smell, and feel, and with stimulating things to think about and things to smile and laugh about. Those are good days."

To make that happen, assuming that there is a path to that or toward that, you must begin by examining the "plants, rocks, and jellyfish" and everything else out there you encounter. Learn which plants are spices and which are poison ivy, and use that information to build a savory, welt-free world for oneself.

You believe that symbiosis with the material realm will end the wars, hate crimes, rape, deceit and abuse, and all the wickedness in the world?

No. I don't expect any of that to end until man evolves sufficiently or goes extinct. I believe that humanism with its utilitarian ethics and rejection of faith for reason is the best answer to mitigating those things that we have or will ever have.

do the words 'morality', 'righteousness', 'justice' or 'love' even exist in a pantheist's dictionary?

Probably, except for righteousness, but you're asking an atheist. Righteousness in the religious sense is a meaningless word to me as are most religious terms like sin, grace, and salvation. I can and do use those words in their non-religious senses.

there is no spirituality without a spiritual source to endow men with such a comprehension

I asked, "Can you conceive of spirituality without spirits?" So your answer is no, you can't.

 

[Little Dragon]

I can and do use those words in their non-religious senses

Indeed, it is a sin to waste food. In my non religious doctrine.
Sin to me, means a slight to us all.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think, in the context of this thread, one could learn a great deal more by, instead of trying to imagine what a godless world would look like, trying to imagine yourself as the sort of god you believe in, and then consider what sort of world you would create. Would it, for example, include hideous parasites as brain-burrowing worms and flesh-eating bacteria, for example? Would you create a world with one "top creature" that gets to use all other creatures in any way it chooses, while all those other creatures live short and brutal lives?

Have a go -- create your world! Then compare it to the one we've got.

 

[Ostronomos]

Then give your evidence. I can test my lack of perception by looking at whether those who believe in a supernatural are consistent about details. They are not, which shows they are not actually perceiving things.

This, by the way, is the same way Dalton figured out he was color blind. He saw others make color distinctions he did not perceive and they were consistent between themselves.

No such consistency is found among theists.

"The fool says in his heart there is no God"

No truer words were ever spoken. It would probably be wise for you to claim agnosticism rather than atheism. As my prior post has already proven that the universe is an information processing system, similar to a mind. Care to address it?

 

[Ostronomos]

I think, in the context of this thread, one could learn a great deal more by, instead of trying to imagine what a godless world would look like, trying to imagine yourself as the sort of god you believe in, and then consider what sort of world you would create. Would it, for example, include hideous parasites as brain-burrowing worms and flesh-eating bacteria, for example? Would you create a world with one "top creature" that gets to use all other creatures in any way it chooses, while all those other creatures live short and brutal lives?

Have a go -- create your world! Then compare it to the one we've got.

Atheists always appeal to the problem of suffering and believe that is sufficient to dismiss an omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient Being, then ironically dismiss the suffering as trivial. But if you were a dying child, trust me, the only matter you would believe in is God. That explains why we do not taste the horrors of anti-creation and death.

Consider what I wrote about the information processing universe above. That can be considered a proof for the existence of God.

 

[Ostronomos]

Then give your evidence. I can test my lack of perception by looking at whether those who believe in a supernatural are consistent about details. They are not, which shows they are not actually perceiving things.

This, by the way, is the same way Dalton figured out he was color blind. He saw others make color distinctions he did not perceive and they were consistent between themselves.

No such consistency is found among theists.

I've already proven that the universe is an information processing system above. Now prove otherwise.

 

[Ostronomos]

Prove it. No, I have seen no evidence of such beings.

Evil, and the embodiment of such, is real. **mod edit**

 

[Polymath257]

"The fool says in his heart there is no God"

No truer words were ever spoken. It would probably be wise for you to claim agnosticism rather than atheism.

I am an atheist in the sense that I have no belief in any deity. I am open to the idea of it is proven.

As my prior post has already proven that the universe is an information processing system, similar to a mind. Care to address it?

No, you did not prove that. You suggested it, but when it comes to details it is clearly false. The distances are simply too large to allow for real communication. And with no communication, there is no mind.

 

[Little Dragon]

Evil, and the embodiment of such, is real. **mod edit**

Flattery won't work on Polymath.