Words and things, and the existence of God.

[Pachomius]

Dear colleagues here in RF, let us work together to come from words and things, to reach the existence of God.

Words are in our mind indicating something in the world outside our mind, or even just in our mind without representing anything outside.

Things are all things that are outside our mind and independent of our mind.

What about God?

God is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

My thesis is that with thinking on words and things, man does reach the existence of God.

What about you, dear colleagues here, what is your thesis?

 

[Skwim]

.

My alone time is for everyone's safety.​

.

 

[danieldemol]

Dear colleagues here in RF, let us work together to come from words and things, to reach the existence of God.

Words are in our mind indicating something in the world outside our mind, or even just in our mind without representing anything outside.

Things are all things that are outside our mind and independent of our mind.

What about God?

God is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

My thesis is that with thinking on words and things, man does reach the existence of God.

What about you, dear colleagues here, what is your thesis?

My hypothesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either due to genetic hardwiring, ingrained cultural stories, or both.

 

[osgart]

Language is identifiers of things that are of necessity. For one thing!

Take the word honesty. It is a condition of the heart of being. It is necessary for cooperation and understanding each other. Everything we do requires our judgments on what things deserve. Honesty is a reality and a capability of being.

Is this reality and concept of honesty an accident? I would say no. We are tailor made to conceive of necessities. Honesty is a powerful capacity. We are made to invent by necessity, and have to wonder has some other being been here before all of us.

We have many reasons and many motivations other than necessity. Everything the mind does is meant to serve us if we use it correctly. The heart is made to feel the experiences we have; it has that capacity.

Innumerable capacities and functions that are dynamic through constructing meaning. And the heart desires to take in worthy causes and experiences in its healthiest condition. Happening upon love or happening upon ambivalence or things to hate, we are ever learning or discovering. We trial and error til we hone in and perfect things.

This is not to say that everything is precisely perfect and things are as they should be. It's just to say that functions and purposes are built in potentials of being. The powers of being are there.

Often times meaning and purpose feels more than accidental byproducts that have no significance. Amidst all the things that can and do go wrong we still have these powers and abilities. There are tremendous highs, and unbearable lows that happen to people.

But perhaps the more humans live the more we can negate a lot of our sufferings.

The ideal condition is to possess virtues. To walk in them and to realize their functions and importances. To be someone trustworthy vs. someone who isn't.

I don't feel that ideals of virtues are accidental. Nor are words and language unreflective of reality.

 

[Heyo]

Dear colleagues here in RF, let us work together to come from words and things, to reach the existence of God.

Words are in our mind indicating something in the world outside our mind, or even just in our mind without representing anything outside.

Things are all things that are outside our mind and independent of our mind.

What about God?

God is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

My thesis is that with thinking on words and things, man does reach the existence of God.

What about you, dear colleagues here, what is your thesis?

The "world of things" (reality) is trivially described by simple observation, either of the thing itself or its effects.
If god was a thing we could point to it or its effect and agree that it was there. The fact that you can't point to god or its effect is a strong indicator that god isn't a thing.

 

[MNoBody]

case in point
words can be ambiguous
meanings can differ greatly
which adds to the complexity
small wonder the Babel story exists

 

[Pachomius]

Dear colleagues here in RF, let us work together to come from words and things, to reach the existence of God.

Words are in our mind indicating something in the world outside our mind, or even just in our mind without representing anything outside.

Things are all things that are outside our mind and independent of our mind.

What about God?

God is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

My thesis is that with thinking on words and things, man does reach the existence of God.

What about you, dear colleagues here, what is your thesis?

My hypothesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either due to genetic hardwiring, ingrained cultural stories, or both.

Dear danieldemol:

Would it be all right with you if I just rehash your words, namely:

"My hypothesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either due to genetic hardwiring, ingrained cultural stories, or both."

Into as follows:

"My thesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either by things like genetic hardwiring, or words like cultural stories, or both"?

You see, it is my advocacy that issues cannot be resolved definitively, unless parties to the issue concur on what is the issue, and what is the method to be employed.

My issue or thesis is that God exists, and my method is thinking on things and words.

 

[danieldemol]

Dear danieldemol:

Would it be all right with you if I just rehash your words, namely:

"My hypothesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either due to genetic hardwiring, ingrained cultural stories, or both."

Into as follows:

"My thesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either by things like genetic hardwiring, or words like cultural stories, or both"?

You see, it is my advocacy that issues cannot be resolved definitively, unless parties to the issue concur on what is the issue, and what is the method to be employed.

My issue or thesis is that God exists, and my method is thinking on things and words.

I think we are agreed on the issue, I guess it remains to be demonstrated whether God can be demonstrated by thinking on things and words

 

[Pachomius]

Dear RF colleagues, the title of the thread is the following:

Words and things, and the existence of God.

And my thesis is as follows:

"My thesis is that with thinking on words and things, man does reach the existence of God."

Please state your thesis concisely and clearly.

Of course, feel welcome to contribute anything at all to this thread, that is not contrary to the rules of the forum.

Dear colleagues here in RF, let us work together to come from words and things, to reach the existence of God.

Words are in our mind indicating something in the world outside our mind, or even just in our mind without representing anything outside.

Things are all things that are outside our mind and independent of our mind.

What about God?

God is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

My thesis is that with thinking on words and things, man does reach the existence of God.

What about you, dear colleagues here, what is your thesis?

 

[MNoBody]

well there is thinking and then there is thinging
which is a different mode of mentation
which is how some people i have read have phrased it.

which i think is on point with the topic of the thread, as it relates to the mechanism by which we image things in our minds using words as a medium, and form further things like positions and emotional attachments and such, which then guides acts, deeds and further words.

and case in point here is how we do this regarding this image of God we hold to individually and corporately..... which is what i was hopefully addressing with whatever i added [i am working at staying on point and building the thread content, just so you know]

 

[Pachomius]

Just state your thesis, concisely and clearly.

well there is thinking and then there is thinging
which is a different mode of mentation
which is how some people i have read have phrased it.

which i think is on point with the topic of the thread, as it relates to the mechanism by which we image things in our minds using words as a medium, and form further things like positions and emotional attachments and such, which then guides acts, deeds and further words.

and case in point here is how we do this regarding this image of God we hold to individually and corporately..... which is what i was hopefully addressing with whatever i added [i am working at staying on point and building the thread content, just so you know]

 

[MNoBody]

Just state your thesis, concisely and clearly.

sorry did I walk into a classroom, i thought this was the cafe

 

[Pachomius]

Dear danieldemol, you say to me:

"I think we are agreed on the issue, I guess it remains to be demonstrated whether God can be demonstrated by thinking on things and words."

Okay, let us we two continue together.

You say about things, namely, an example is "like genetic hardwiring, or words like cultural stories, or both."

Tell me what you know about genetic hardwiring, make it concise and clear.

Dear danieldemol:

Would it be all right with you if I just rehash your words, namely:

"My hypothesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either due to genetic hardwiring, ingrained cultural stories, or both."
Into as follows:

"My thesis is that man acknowledges the existence of God either by things like genetic hardwiring, or words like cultural stories, or both"?

You see, it is my advocacy that issues cannot be resolved definitively, unless parties to the issue concur on what is the issue, and what is the method to be employed.

My issue or thesis is that God exists, and my method is thinking on things and words.

I think we are agreed on the issue, I guess it remains to be demonstrated whether God can be demonstrated by thinking on things and words

 

[danieldemol]

Dear danieldemol, you say to me:

"I think we are agreed on the issue, I guess it remains to be demonstrated whether God can be demonstrated by thinking on things and words."

Okay, let us we two continue together.

You say about things, namely, an example is "like genetic hardwiring, or words like cultural stories, or both."

Tell me what you know about genetic hardwiring, make it concise and clear.

Hi Pachomius,
Sorry I missed your reply. Basically it’s not my area of specialty (as I’m not a biologist) but here goes;

‘The God gene hypothesis proposes that human spirituality is influenced by heredity and that a specific gene, called vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2), predisposes humans towards spiritual or mystic experiences.[1] The idea has been proposed by geneticist Dean Hamer in the 2004 book called The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired into our Genes.

The God gene hypothesis is based on a combination of behavioral genetic, neurobiological and psychological studies.[2] The major arguments of the hypothesis are: (1) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (2) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (3) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2; (4) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels; and (5) spirituality provides an evolutionary advantage by providing individuals with an innate sense of optimism.’

From God gene - Wikipedia

Hope that was reasonably clear and concise lol