• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why would God fit into any box created by human thought?

sandandfoam

sandandfoam

Veteran Member
In my view both belief and non-belief in God are entirely subjective.
I think the concept/category distinction which regards concepts as things as they are in the mind and categories as things as they are in the world is very useful. It seems to me that all the laws of nature/physics/maths etc. are conceptual i.e. they are rooted in the human mind and not in the world as the world is in itself.
When discussing proofs and possibilities we are, at the end of the day, talking about ourselves, our limits and our potentials.
 
Breathe

Breathe

Hostis humani generis
I want to say something, but I dunno what else to say other than that I agree with you.
I agree with you entirely.

There. :D
 
Scarlett Wampus

Scarlett Wampus

psychonaut
stephenw said:
In my view both belief and non-belief in God are entirely subjective.
I think the concept/category distinction which regards concepts as things as they are in the mind and categories as things as they are in the world is very useful. It seems to me that all the laws of nature/physics/maths etc. are conceptual i.e. they are rooted in the human mind and not in the world as the world is in itself.
When discussing proofs and possibilities we are, at the end of the day, talking about ourselves, our limits and our potentials.
Click to expand...
If this was a more common understanding of what a god would be in relation to ourselves I would find RF a great deal more meaningful. :)
 
Wandered Off

Wandered Off

Sporadic Driveby Member
In a roundabout way, this isn't all that far removed from the ideas of Bishop Don Cuppitt...
From Sea of Faith:
The suggestion that the idea of God is man-made would only seem startling if we could point by contrast to something that has not been made by humans. But since our language shapes every topic raised in it, we cannot. In an innocuous sense, all our normative ideas have been posited by ourselves, including the truths of logic and mathematics as well as all our ideals and values. How else could we have acquired them? Thus God is humanly made only in the non-startling sense that everything is. That is modern anthropocentrism.
Click to expand...
From After God:
I put forward a new linguistic theory of religious practice and religious objects. Very briefly it runs as follows:

1. As both philosophy and religion have in the past taught, there is indeed an unseen intelligible world, or spirit world, about us and within us.

2. The invisible world is the world of words and other symbols.

3. The entire supernatural world of religion is a mythical representation of the world of language

4. Through the practice of its religion, a society represents to itself, and confirms, the varied ways in which its language builds its world.
Click to expand...
So in a sense, he is saying that God is limited by our language because God is derived from our language. When you said, "It seems to me that all the laws of nature/physics/maths etc. are conceptual i.e. they are rooted in the human mind and not in the world as the world is in itself," you could substitute 'God' or 'concepts of God' for 'the laws of nature/physics/maths etc.' and see how the ideas are similar - though not identical.




http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...nonrealism-god-imperative-not-indicative.html
 
Willamena

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
stephenw said:
In my view both belief and non-belief in God are entirely subjective.
I think the concept/category distinction which regards concepts as things as they are in the mind and categories as things as they are in the world is very useful. It seems to me that all the laws of nature/physics/maths etc. are conceptual i.e. they are rooted in the human mind and not in the world as the world is in itself.
When discussing proofs and possibilities we are, at the end of the day, talking about ourselves, our limits and our potentials.
Click to expand...
What creates the human thought? The world. . .
 
M

Man of Faith

Well-Known Member
You mean easily understood human thoughts such as the trinity and predestination? I doubt a human would have thought of a God that was three distinct beings and one at the same time, or that we have free will and are predestined at the same time. Mater of fact humans use that to try to say God isn't real. Also a God that came to earth and died on a cross for us? I can’t conceive a human creating a god that would die for Hitler.
 
Jeremiah

Jeremiah

Well-Known Member
"Why would God fit into any box created by human thought?"


Because "God" is of human thought and there is no pertinent "God" that you do not perceive.

Why should "existence" fit into any god created by human thought?
 
Last edited:
Scarlett Wampus

Scarlett Wampus

psychonaut
Man of Faith said:
You mean easily understood human thoughts such as the trinity and predestination? I doubt a human would have thought of a God that was three distinct beings and one at the same time, or that we have free will and are predestined at the same time.
Click to expand...
MoF I'm astounded anyone can underestimte human creativity to the extent you have here. If you view the imagination as so limited that the trinity & free will/predestination paradox seem outside the bounds of likely human thoughtfulness you could benefit from leaving the solitary confinement of the cave you've lived in your whole life!
 
Last edited:
NulliuSINverba

NulliuSINverba

Active Member
sandandfoam said:
In my view both belief and non-belief in God are entirely subjective.
Click to expand...

Let's set beliefs aside for a moment. What about the existence of a god or gods? Do you also view existence as a subjective matter?

I think the concept/category distinction which regards concepts as things as they are in the mind and categories as things as they are in the world is very useful.
Click to expand...

How so?

It seems to me that all the laws of nature/physics/maths etc. are conceptual i.e. they are rooted in the human mind and not in the world as the world is in itself.
Click to expand...

So are you saying that if there were no human minds to conceptualize about gravity ... there'd be no gravity?

When discussing proofs and possibilities we are, at the end of the day, talking about ourselves, our limits and our potentials.
Click to expand...

For an amusing variation on this theme, why not try the Deepak Chopra Quote Generator?

"Nature is an ingredient of positive opportunities"

"Transcendence opens precious brains"

"Infinity illuminates your own chaos"

...

Meanwhile, my Woo Detector® is pinging like a sonofa*****.
 
NulliuSINverba

NulliuSINverba

Active Member
sandandfoam said:
A simple yes or will not suffice. My answer stands.
Click to expand...

Your (non-) answer isn't acceptable. It's an evasion.

Shall we conclude that you're either unable or unwilling to provide a simple yes/no answer to a simple question such as "Does the universe exist without you?"

...

Do you suppose that it existed prior to your own existence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top