Jump to content

Philosophy, Riddles and complete mind[bleep]s


Sam

Recommended Posts

I don't see much wrong with Zealot's idea of god. I basically agree with him, accept that I don't like to use the term "god". When I think of the word

"god" I tend to think of one higher-being that is somehow separate from others. The way I see it, god is before everything, but it is not something, rather god is nothing. So "everything" came from nothing to me is also synonymous to saying everything came from god. Though true personification of god is not possible, so any religious ideas or beliefs are strictly just ideas and beliefs like everything else and hold no absolute value. God is just aware, and everything we do to try and comprehend it just gives us a deeper illusion of what it might be. God is beyond ideas, beliefs, words,time,space... simply it is there before all of it. It caused all of it, and at the same time is it. There is just god, or there is just nothing. Either way you look at it doesn't matter, the idea by itself is not going to allow you to understand something beyond ideas.

 

Why is it like this? I have no idea, there is one thing we will never be able to truly answer and that is the question "Why?"

 

This just made me question my existence.

 

As for God? You either believe or don't believe. Logic won't get you anywhere because we have never experienced the great beyond. If we could be infinite, we would know.

I exist. But it is not a matter of if I exist but rather what is the "I" that exists. It is definitely not personality or an ego... that just seems to be an illusion that I am aware of. I just like to ask myself "Who is aware of this thought,feeling or situation?" I think: "The mind, signals formed by reactions in the brain." Then I ask "who is aware of those reactions between atoms and the signals that they form?" Then no answer comes to me... I just feel nothing. So, I that is truly aware of everything, seems to be nothing. I am simple and truly nothing, all words that label me are not really true, only relative to the mind they might be. But even the mind... is just some manifestation of nothing.

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 637
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That "nothing" is what religious folk call a soul. We all seem to have this "soul", and we can not exist without it.

In a sense we don't just have a "soul", we are nothing but the "soul". It doesn't matter what you call it really, it doesn't change the "it." To me it seems as if the "it" is empty, free, infinite and simply beyond ideas. I might as well call it nothing. But to each his own :)

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "nothing" is what religious folk call a soul. We all seem to have this "soul", and we can not exist without it.

In a sense we don't just have a "soul", we are nothing but the "soul". It doesn't matter what you call it really, it doesn't change the "it." To me it seems as if the "it" is empty, free, infinite and simply beyond ideas. I might as well call it nothing. But to each his own :)

 

Beyond, or below ideas?

"He is no fool who gives up that which he can not keep to gain that which he can not lose."

--Jim Elliot

 

"You must picture me alone in that room in Magdalen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England. I did not then see what is now the most shining and obvious thing; the Divine humility which will accept a convert even on such terms. The Prodical Son at least walked home on his own two feet. But who can duly adore that love which will open the high gates to a prodigal who is brought in kicking, struggling, resentful, and darting his eyes in every direction for a chance of escape? The words compelle intrare, compel them to come in, have been so abused by wicked men that we shudder at them; but, properly understood, they plumb the depth of the Divine mercy. The hardness of God is kinder than the softness of men, and His compulsion is our liberation."

--C.S.Lewis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "nothing" is what religious folk call a soul. We all seem to have this "soul", and we can not exist without it.

In a sense we don't just have a "soul", we are nothing but the "soul". It doesn't matter what you call it really, it doesn't change the "it." To me it seems as if the "it" is empty, free, infinite and simply beyond ideas. I might as well call it nothing. But to each his own :)

 

Beyond, or below ideas?

Beyond,below, before... it doesn't matter.

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure this soul is just a result of chemical reactions and neural transmissions.

Yep, and nothing is being aware of those reactions.

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure this soul is just a result of chemical reactions and neural transmissions.

Yep, and nothing is being aware of those reactions.

 

Damn.

I'm pretty sure that in the longest run, it will be shown that the dualist brain-mind model proves correct... Many Epistomologists already hold that view, though it is much more difficult for those pre-committed to a completely naturalistic ideology to accept. Simply put, if dualism is not correct, then everything really is meaningless and there is no good reason why we should have the ability to control nature as much as we manage.

"He is no fool who gives up that which he can not keep to gain that which he can not lose."

--Jim Elliot

 

"You must picture me alone in that room in Magdalen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England. I did not then see what is now the most shining and obvious thing; the Divine humility which will accept a convert even on such terms. The Prodical Son at least walked home on his own two feet. But who can duly adore that love which will open the high gates to a prodigal who is brought in kicking, struggling, resentful, and darting his eyes in every direction for a chance of escape? The words compelle intrare, compel them to come in, have been so abused by wicked men that we shudder at them; but, properly understood, they plumb the depth of the Divine mercy. The hardness of God is kinder than the softness of men, and His compulsion is our liberation."

--C.S.Lewis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there has to be a reason for existence, it doesn't have to be meaningful. I think people just get that idea because we always like to make ourselves feel important. But I will not say there is no reason, for I can not know, nor can anyone else. I just don't think there is.

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there has to be a reason for existence, it doesn't have to be meaningful. I think people just get that idea because we always like to make ourselves feel important. But I will not say there is no reason, for I can not know, nor can anyone else. I just don't think there is.

And yet... your actions betray you. If you truely believed what you say, then I can not imagine you actually caring enough about the question to answer it. That's the problem with Nihilism. It's so, so easy to say the words, but nobody ever actually behaves as though they believe the words coming out of their mouths. That is the real test of an ideal: will people actually act as though it were true?

"He is no fool who gives up that which he can not keep to gain that which he can not lose."

--Jim Elliot

 

"You must picture me alone in that room in Magdalen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England. I did not then see what is now the most shining and obvious thing; the Divine humility which will accept a convert even on such terms. The Prodical Son at least walked home on his own two feet. But who can duly adore that love which will open the high gates to a prodigal who is brought in kicking, struggling, resentful, and darting his eyes in every direction for a chance of escape? The words compelle intrare, compel them to come in, have been so abused by wicked men that we shudder at them; but, properly understood, they plumb the depth of the Divine mercy. The hardness of God is kinder than the softness of men, and His compulsion is our liberation."

--C.S.Lewis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there has to be a reason for existence, it doesn't have to be meaningful. I think people just get that idea because we always like to make ourselves feel important. But I will not say there is no reason, for I can not know, nor can anyone else. I just don't think there is.

And yet... your actions betray you. If you truely believed what you say, then I can not imagine you actually caring enough about the question to answer it. That's the problem with Nihilism. It's so, so easy to say the words, but nobody ever actually behaves as though they believe the words coming out of their mouths. That is the real test of an ideal: will people actually act as though it were true?

So someone who thinks there is no meaning or reason will do nothing? No. I know that I don't have to do anything. Though I still end up doing stuff just because it does no harm if I do them. It does not mean I care so much. I don't have to care much or put in much effort to do anything. It just happens, seemingly effortless. If I don't get what I am trying to get, then that is perfectly fine. Nothing is ever lost or gained. It just is the way it is. :)

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there has to be a reason for existence, it doesn't have to be meaningful. I think people just get that idea because we always like to make ourselves feel important. But I will not say there is no reason, for I can not know, nor can anyone else. I just don't think there is.

And yet... your actions betray you. If you truely believed what you say, then I can not imagine you actually caring enough about the question to answer it. That's the problem with Nihilism. It's so, so easy to say the words, but nobody ever actually behaves as though they believe the words coming out of their mouths. That is the real test of an ideal: will people actually act as though it were true?

[hide=My immediate thought:]

nihilism.png[/hide]

 

Not believing in a soul doesn't mean I can't feel curious about the nature of things, or passionate about other humans and our condition.

Besides, even if people "would never act as though it were true" does not make the idea false by itself.

This signature is intentionally left blank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there has to be a reason for existence, it doesn't have to be meaningful. I think people just get that idea because we always like to make ourselves feel important. But I will not say there is no reason, for I can not know, nor can anyone else. I just don't think there is.

And yet... your actions betray you. If you truely believed what you say, then I can not imagine you actually caring enough about the question to answer it. That's the problem with Nihilism. It's so, so easy to say the words, but nobody ever actually behaves as though they believe the words coming out of their mouths. That is the real test of an ideal: will people actually act as though it were true?

So someone who thinks there is no meaning or reason will do nothing? No. I know that I don't have to do anything. Though I still end up doing stuff just because it does no harm if I do them. It does not mean I care so much. I don't have to care much or put in much effort to do anything. It just happens, seemingly effortless. If I don't get what I am trying to get, then that is perfectly fine. Nothing is ever lost or gained. It just is the way it is. :)

 

The human brain is designed to keep the body alive. A person will naturally try to stay alive even if he or she doesn't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's strange, but what's the point? Does each soul have its own set of moods and reactions or something?

 

How it was explained no they would not. Each soul is exactly the same, there is no soul that desires greatness and another mediocrity, nor one that desires good or evil. Argued with the case of twins with the same experience but take different paths in life, such as one becomes someone who helps people like a Dr. and another becomes a serial killer. It isn't the soul that is different but the experiences a person might have had that would influence their path in life.

Right, but I'm asking why they have the whole theory about the soul if it really has no function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there has to be a reason for existence, it doesn't have to be meaningful. I think people just get that idea because we always like to make ourselves feel important. But I will not say there is no reason, for I can not know, nor can anyone else. I just don't think there is.

And yet... your actions betray you. If you truely believed what you say, then I can not imagine you actually caring enough about the question to answer it. That's the problem with Nihilism. It's so, so easy to say the words, but nobody ever actually behaves as though they believe the words coming out of their mouths. That is the real test of an ideal: will people actually act as though it were true?

So someone who thinks there is no meaning or reason will do nothing? No. I know that I don't have to do anything. Though I still end up doing stuff just because it does no harm if I do them. It does not mean I care so much. I don't have to care much or put in much effort to do anything. It just happens, seemingly effortless. If I don't get what I am trying to get, then that is perfectly fine. Nothing is ever lost or gained. It just is the way it is. :)

 

The human brain is designed to keep the body alive. A person will naturally try to stay alive even if he or she doesn't care.

Exactly. I think if one appreciates how limitless and subjective everything is, then they will find themselves enjoying and really living life even more then when they were before. This scares people if they think they are important... but get rid of that idea too and then you're all good :)

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there has to be a reason for existence, it doesn't have to be meaningful. I think people just get that idea because we always like to make ourselves feel important. But I will not say there is no reason, for I can not know, nor can anyone else. I just don't think there is.

And yet... your actions betray you. If you truely believed what you say, then I can not imagine you actually caring enough about the question to answer it. That's the problem with Nihilism. It's so, so easy to say the words, but nobody ever actually behaves as though they believe the words coming out of their mouths. That is the real test of an ideal: will people actually act as though it were true?

So someone who thinks there is no meaning or reason will do nothing? No. I know that I don't have to do anything. Though I still end up doing stuff just because it does no harm if I do them. It does not mean I care so much. I don't have to care much or put in much effort to do anything. It just happens, seemingly effortless. If I don't get what I am trying to get, then that is perfectly fine. Nothing is ever lost or gained. It just is the way it is. :)

 

The human brain is designed to keep the body alive. A person will naturally try to stay alive even if he or she doesn't care.

Exactly. I think if one appreciates how limitless and subjective everything is, then they will find themselves enjoying and really living life even more then when they were before. This scares people if they think they are important... but get rid of that idea too and then you're all good :)

 

True Nihilism doesn't exist. People have their values, be it health, taste in music, choice in politics, etc. You may be saying "nothing" is the base of everything and accept the pointlessness of everything including living however you are an emotional being. You will actively seek out things that make you feel good. You will eat when you are hungry, wear warmer clothes when you are cold, talk to people when you are lonely, try and avoid pain when possible, etc.

 

No one, not even the morbidly depressed person that never leaves their room truly cares about nothing.

Sure, I agree.

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am quoting all the bolded text

 

1.) You take the cheap way out, to say God transcends logic is a statement not a proof. I ask you for a way to support this claim other then the claim itself.

 

2.) I am not saying nothing exists but rather why cant nature (by nature I mean the universe, or rather the whole of every universe) existing for all eternity rather then a God existing forever to make it. You didnt answer the question of why you would necessarily need a God for it to come to be.

 

3.) I am not smart enough to work out the theories of how a universe can spontaneously create itself and what would be outside the universe to be able to allow this to happen, but rather presenting the possibility that this could be the case without the need for a God to direct it.

 

4.) I am just proposing that nature can work without a God to direct it. If you look at the earth function at one point in time everyone would say that Gods and spirits were controlling the wind, the water, the seasons, etc. I am saying that natural forces that are beyond humans ability to comprehend allow everything to exist by sheer chance rather then by divine will. Of course you could say that God controls these forces but I say that you dont need intelligent design for things to exist.

 

5.) Alright that was just clarifying what you might have meant

 

6.) My goal is to explain that it isnt necessary for a God to operate the universe but rather nature could exist on its own. So until you can prove that there are aspects of nature that would be unable to have always existed or spontaneously existed (such as a universe by forces we humans do not fully understand) I stand by my belief that a God would be unnecessary. I am not asking you to force me to accept a God but rather you to prove that nature cannot have existed on its own without the aid of a God.

 

1: There are some things which transcend logic, on which logic depends. Aristotle wrote a fair amount about what he called "Axioms" in various places (mostly Metaphysics. If you can explain to me the logic of Aristotle's axioms, then I will conceed that perhaps it is necessary for me to give a logical account of God's existance. If not then it is enough to say that His presence/absence is the fundamental fact about all reality (including logic). I would not ask for a proof that a predicate of a predicate of a thing is a predicate of the thing itself, or that the only valid answers to a yes/no question are in fact yes and no, or that a thing can not possess both a property and that property's inverse at the same time, in the same way. Yet show me the logic for any of these things. They are all essential for conducting logic...

 

I think that when you try, you will find yourself arguing in circles, or forced to say simply that the axioms are true and there is little to be gained by arguing with somebody who denies them.

 

2: That's the problem! "Nothing exists" is the simplest possible Metaphysic (that is, explanation of everything that exists). I'm sure that you have heard of Occham's Razor, the metaphysical principle that "the simplest explanation is preferable." One of the things which can be derived from it is that when there is surprising complexity we should immediately start wondering why... That is actually the basis of what are today called the sciences. So, obviously the explanation that "nothing exists" does not actually reflect reality--why not? What prevents this state from prevailing? Christianity, by positing a fundamental reality that can not help but exist (God), can overcome this problem, how do you propose to do so?

 

3: So, basically you just want to insist that a model of reality does not have to include God? If so then we are in agreement. I just doubt that such a model is actually simpler in the way that real Metaphysicians use the word. You have to account for all natural forces and their relations with one another, some form of perpetual energy to feed the system, the system itself, our models of the system, and so on. Occahm's Razor indicates that such a model probably is less preferable to one which really only requires the existance of One Thing.

 

4: So sheer chance has become your god? Fair enough. However you refer to things which drive our lives and are beyond our control, that is what they are. You can have all the faith that they are out of God's hands you want, and in the end I have no objection to that. I will simply keep my faith that HE is fundamental reality.

 

6: That was never my intention. Honestly, provided God's existance, He wouldn't want you to be forced to believe in HIM. All the more I hope is to show you that faith in God is reasonable. As long as you recognize that you are building your models based on faith in the base premise (NOT GOD) and that I am building my models based on faith in the base premise (GOD), and that the truth of either of our models depends primarilly on which of the two possibilities really is the case, then I am completely happy.

"He is no fool who gives up that which he can not keep to gain that which he can not lose."

--Jim Elliot

 

"You must picture me alone in that room in Magdalen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England. I did not then see what is now the most shining and obvious thing; the Divine humility which will accept a convert even on such terms. The Prodical Son at least walked home on his own two feet. But who can duly adore that love which will open the high gates to a prodigal who is brought in kicking, struggling, resentful, and darting his eyes in every direction for a chance of escape? The words compelle intrare, compel them to come in, have been so abused by wicked men that we shudder at them; but, properly understood, they plumb the depth of the Divine mercy. The hardness of God is kinder than the softness of men, and His compulsion is our liberation."

--C.S.Lewis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nihilists value the knowledge of the nature of existence.

 

How's that for obscurity?

It's not that obscure, it's just a couple big words. It's not very specific either, but yes, Nihilism is a branch of Existentialism (meaning the study of existence), not to be confused with Existentialism (the branch of Nihilism that claims in a meaningless world one must find one's own meaning, through God or otherwise) or Pure Nihilism (my own term, referring to Nihilists who disagree with both Existentialists of the latter type and Absurdists, saying that there is never any reason to live at all).

 

The confusion with Nihilism stems from the fact that it is still developing, and we won't have solid names or ideas (which, by the way, are never entirely accurate) until later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6: That was never my intention. Honestly, provided God's existance, He wouldn't want you to be forced to believe in HIM. All the more I hope is to show you that faith in God is reasonable. As long as you recognize that you are building your models based on faith in the base premise (NOT GOD) and that I am building my models based on faith in the base premise (GOD), and that the truth of either of our models depends primarilly on which of the two possibilities really is the case, then I am completely happy.

 

That's the thing with weak atheism. It pretends to be the neutral stance by formulating such a term, implying that we are all born atheists, a rock does not have belief in a god therefore is atheist, etc. Just look at the word "atheism". You have consciously built a set of beliefs based on the notion of god not existing. There's a difference between having the self-ascribed label "without god" and having a reserved opinion on theology. But I guess they really want that sort of leverage.

 

It's not that obscure, it's just a couple big words. It's not very specific either, but yes, Nihilism is a branch of Existentialism (meaning the study of existence), not to be confused with Existentialism (the branch of Nihilism that claims in a meaningless world one must find one's own meaning, through God or otherwise) or Pure Nihilism (my own term, referring to Nihilists who disagree with both Existentialists of the latter type and Absurdists, saying that there is never any reason to live at all).

 

I don't know if you got the point or not. Nihilism is about a lack of value when it comes to the nature of existence, yet in order to have such a position, you must first value knowledge. Therefore it is a paradox, suggesting high levels of obscurity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not that obscure, it's just a couple big words. It's not very specific either, but yes, Nihilism is a branch of Existentialism (meaning the study of existence), not to be confused with Existentialism (the branch of Nihilism that claims in a meaningless world one must find one's own meaning, through God or otherwise) or Pure Nihilism (my own term, referring to Nihilists who disagree with both Existentialists of the latter type and Absurdists, saying that there is never any reason to live at all).

 

I don't know if you got the point or not. Nihilism is about a lack of value when it comes to the nature of existence, yet in order to have such a position, you must first value knowledge. Therefore it is a paradox, suggesting high levels of obscurity.

That is correct. In fact, Nihilism is by definition a contradiction because, as humans, it is impossible for us to actually value nothing. To do so would require us to act the same way in every situation, which nobody does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Nihilism makes sense. Though, if you say nothing exists then you are already saying that "nothing" exists. Therefore at least "nothing" exists, even if it is of absolute no value or purpose. If matter and space came from nothing, then that nothing must of been at least... there is no proper word for it, it must of at least been somehow "aware" of itself. Then somehow out of itself manifestations formed and eventually our brains formed to perceive that "nothing" as something. Basically, everything is made out of "nothing", it just seems like something to the brain, which itself was formed out of nothing. Yea.. it might be tough to grasp :P

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nihilism makes sense. Though, if you say nothing exists then you are already saying that "nothing" exists. Therefore at least "nothing" exists, even if it is of absolute no value or purpose. If matter and space came from nothing, then that nothing must of been at least... there is no proper word for it, it must of at least been somehow "aware" of itself. Then somehow out of itself manifestations formed and eventually our brains formed to perceive that "nothing" as something. Basically, everything is made out of "nothing", it just seems like something to the brain, which itself was formed out of nothing. Yea.. it might be tough to grasp :P

 

That is Buddhism not Nihilism.

 

A Nihilist is closer to an athiest then a Buddhist.

Buddhists are atheists...

99 Hunter - November 1st, 2008

99 Cooking -July 22nd, 2009

99 Firemaking - July 29th, 2010

99 Fletching - December 30th, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.