Do you believe; and why?

[Lucidus]

(05-08-2019, 04:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then we move the debate to the meaning or point of life.  Would you rather live a happy life or a logical life?  What is the point of being right if you would be happier being wrong?

Those are not opposing states. You can easily experience both simultaneously. Truth and knowledge, whether pleasant or not, should be its own reward, in that you are not mistaken or confused about your reality; instead you are better equipped to deal with said reality.

Example: If one's partner is cheating on them, they may be happier if they're unaware or dismissive of the truth; but are they truly better off?

[CKwi88]

(05-08-2019, 04:03 PM)Lucidus Wrote: I apologize, I should have been more specific. Yes, a higher power in general, and a creative deity more specifically.

Gotcha. 

Yes to the first. To the second, possibly. 

I arrived at my belief by accepting that we are transient beings in an intransient universe. Could one make a philosophical argument that the universe itself is an aware, intelligent creator, and deserving of "deity" status? I personally don't, but it's not outside the realm of possibility. 

[Lucidus]

(05-08-2019, 04:46 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Gotcha. 

Yes to the first. To the second, possibly. 

I arrived at my belief by accepting that we are transient beings in an intransient universe. Could one make a philosophical argument that the universe itself is an aware, intelligent creator, and deserving of "deity" status? I personally don't, but it's not outside the realm of possibility. 

There has actually been some very interesting writing and ideas concerning that topic over the years. While I don't subscribe to that particular theory, and certainly don't find any reason to believe the universe is "aware" -- I'm also not opposed to referring to the universe as a "creator" in the most pragmatic and non-sentient sense.

[fredtoast]

(05-08-2019, 04:32 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Example: If one's partner is cheating on them, they may be happier if they're unaware or dismissive of the truth; but are they truly better off?

Yes.  They are definitely better off not knowing as long as there are no other bad consequences.

I am not talking about a type of ignorance that can lead to bad consequences.  Does it really hurt a person in this lifetime to believe that they are going to a better place when they die or that they will get to see again their loved ones they have lost?

Maybe it is easy for you because you live a relatively comfortable life.  But what if your daily existence was third world poverty where you work like a slave all day and still had to watch your children die for lack of food or medicine?  Would those people be better off believing that there was no reward in the hereafter?

[hollodero]

(05-08-2019, 04:13 PM)Dill Wrote: Er, the sun isn't just "emitting," energy; it is converting mass TO energy, right?

I'd say so. She (the sun) merges two hydrogens into one helium, which is slightly ligher... the mass deficit is turned into energy. e.g. photons. Heuristically speaking. That all is severely more complicated than that and this is the point where I should stop being educative about things I know very little about myself :)

...but it isn't quite like evaporating water. Evaporated/gassy H2O still is H2O and still has the same mass. With nuclear fusion, that's not the case.

[Dill]

(05-08-2019, 05:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: I'd say so. She (the sun) merges two hydrogens into one helium, which is slightly ligher... the mass deficit is turned into energy. e.g. photons. Heuristically speaking. That all is severely more complicated than that and this is the point where I should stop being educative about things I know very little about myself :)

...but it isn't quite like evaporating water. Evaporated/gassy H2O still is H2O and still has the same mass. With nuclear fusion, that's not the case.

LOL that energy "raining" down from the sun though, some of it is reconstituted as mass, right? 

Actually, I think that when we are talking about individual subatomic particles, there is no loss or gain of mass in this transfer, even when fusion occurs. I think.

(Not a physicist, but have internet access )

[CKwi88]

(05-08-2019, 04:53 PM)Lucidus Wrote: There has actually been some very interesting writing and ideas concerning that topic over the years. While I don't subscribe to that particular theory, and certainly don't find any reason to believe the universe is "aware" -- I'm also not opposed to referring to the universe as a "creator" in the most pragmatic and non-sentient sense.

Then it just becomes a more philosophical debate about what is awareness or sentience. They are both terms that were created by humans to define concepts on a human's level of understanding. What is awareness to a dog? A chimp? What is time to a mayfly? A pinus longaeva*? You'll say you "don't find any reason to believe the universe is 'aware'" and one could simply say that the universe operates on a different level of awareness or sentience than you (or any human) could ever understand. 




*I expect great things from this board about that name

[Lucidus]

(05-08-2019, 05:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.  They are definitely better off not knowing as long as there are no other bad consequences.

I am not talking about a type of ignorance that can lead to bad consequences.  Does it really hurt a person in this lifetime to believe that they are going to a better place when they die or that they will get to see again their loved ones they have lost?

Maybe it is easy for you because you live a relatively comfortable life.  But what if your daily existence was third world poverty where you work like a slave all day and still had to watch your children die for lack of food or medicine?  Would those people be better off believing that there was no reward in the hereafter?

You honestly believe a person is better off not knowing that their partner is cheating on them? The cheating person is violating a trust and being dishonest among other things. Even worse there could be very real consequences if the cheater contracts an STD and transmits it to the unknowing partner. I see no situation in which the person being cheated on would not be in a better position knowing the truth. Once they know the truth, then they have options other than "ignorance is bliss". Having one's eyes opened to the truth seems to me to be far more empowering and allows the person the opportunity to seek a more fruitful situation.

As to your last paragraph; I'm speaking to those in this forum who have access to information and can discuss the topic with knowledge of the arguments for and against believing. It is those types of people, in general, that I am most perplexed by; those who have had access to education, information and discussions such as this. Why they still choose to believe in what I find intriguing and enjoy discussing.

It's not at all hard to imagine why people in 3rd world countries who are uneducated, downtrodden and suffering daily would believe in almost anything to alleviate the pressures of their existence. In situations where hope in the face of desperation is all one has available to them, then yes my friend, it's understandable why they would cling to the notion of reward after the suffering ends. 

[*bfine32*]

I think the title is the answer "Why do you believe". I believe because I believe. If I were to need proof I wouldn't believe. Some things I have pointed to when asked is:

What's the one thing God didn't give man? The knowledge of good and evil. God wanted man to be obedient stewards of his creations, but man stole the knowledge of good and evil and that question for knowledge has motivated many to prove the good does not exist.

How the story of creation pretty much mirrors the theory of evolution in sequence.

A rock cannot become alive.

[Bengalzona]

I believe because I choose to believe.

That's pretty much it.

[fredtoast]

(05-08-2019, 05:41 PM)Lucidus Wrote: You honestly believe a person is better off not knowing that their partner is cheating on them? The cheating person is violating a trust and being dishonest among other things. Even worse there could be very real consequences if the cheater contracts an STD and transmits it to the unknowing partner. I see no situation in which the person being cheated on would not be in a better position knowing the truth. Once they know the truth, then they have options other than "ignorance is bliss". Having one's eyes opened to the truth seems to me to be far more empowering and allows the person the opportunity to seek a more fruitful situation.

We are getting side tracked with marital indiscretion, but I can see a situation where a person who was cheated on was not damaged at all by the cheating, and knowledge of the cheating would just make them suffer terribly.  Let's just drop that example because it does not fit what we are talking about.

(05-08-2019, 05:41 PM)Lucidus Wrote: As to your last paragraph; I'm speaking to those in this forum who have access to information and can discuss the topic with knowledge of the arguments for and against believing. It is those types of people, in general, that I am most perplexed by; those who have had access to education, information and discussions such as this. Why they still choose to believe in what I find intriguing and enjoy discussing.

It's not at all hard to imagine why people in 3rd world countries who are uneducated, downtrodden and suffering daily would believe in almost anything to alleviate the pressures of their existence. In situations where hope in the face of desperation is all one has available to them, then yes my friend, it's understandable why they would cling to the notion of reward after the suffering ends. 

So tell me about the bad consequences of believing in a higher power?  I guess some people stop trying to help themselves and just depend on prayer to save them, but that is kind of rare.  Other than that I don't see any harm.

My example of third world living conditions were extreme, but the fact is that even in countries like the United Sates people suffer horribly when they lose loved ones.  Even highly educated people suffer from the loss.  Even very smart people get lonely when the only person they love in the world dies and is gone forever.  Even the most logical parent will be crushed by the death of their child.

So how exactly are people harmed by their belief in an afterlife where they will see their loved ones again.

[fredtoast]

(05-08-2019, 06:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What's the one thing God didn't give man? The knowledge of good and evil. God wanted man to be obedient stewards of his creations, but man stole the knowledge of good and evil and that question for knowledge has motivated many to prove the good does not exist.

I think you missed a major point in that story.  Man was evil (disobeyed God) and knew it was wrong before he ever ate any fruit of the tree.

So why did God make man evil in the first place?

[*bfine32*]

(05-08-2019, 07:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I think you missed a major point in that story.  Man was evil (disobeyed God) and knew it was wrong before he ever ate any fruit of the tree.

So why did God make man evil in the first place?

God didn't make man evil. 

[fredtoast]

(05-08-2019, 07:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: God didn't make man evil. 

Then who did?  They certainly knew the difference between good and evil before they ate any fruit.  They knew it was wrong to disobey God, but the did it anyway.

[Dill]

(05-08-2019, 05:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.  They are definitely better off not knowing as long as there are no other bad consequences.

I am not talking about a type of ignorance that can lead to bad consequences.  Does it really hurt a person in this lifetime to believe that they are going to a better place when they die or that they will get to see again their loved ones they have lost?

Maybe it is easy for you because you live a relatively comfortable life.  But what if your daily existence was third world poverty where you work like a slave all day and still had to watch your children die for lack of food or medicine?  Would those people be better off believing that there was no reward in the hereafter?

Yes.  There is a reason why those "comforting" aspects of religious belief have been woven into the maintenance of class hierarchies.


Fred, have you ever read Plato's Republic, or at least the first two books?

[fredtoast]

(05-08-2019, 08:10 PM)Dill Wrote: Fred, have you ever read Plato's Republic, or at least the first two books?

No, but I saw the movie.

[*bfine32*]

(05-08-2019, 07:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then who did?  They certainly knew the difference between good and evil before they ate any fruit.  They knew it was wrong to disobey God, but the did it anyway.

I think the question you should ask is why God gave man freewill. As God didn't make man evil; he made man in his image. God tempted man and man chose to be disobedient. 

Next question in before it's asked: Why did God allow man to make this choice?  My best answer is "I don't know". There are 100s of theodices out there that try to explain it, but who are they to know the mind of the Lord? 

[Dill]

(05-08-2019, 07:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then who did?  They certainly knew the difference between good and evil before they ate any fruit.  They knew it was wrong to disobey God, but the did it anyway.

Every Christian knows that "Man" fell by exercising his own free will. Somehow. 
Cannot assign responsibility and blame without recourse to some conception of free will.

Hate to keep dropping these philosopher references, but have you read Nietzsche?
Geneology of Morals? Beyond Good and Evil?

NB: Well, actually, "Man" would not have fallen on his own, endowed as he was with REASON.  But some rib-born humans are rather less endowed, and because "Man" is attracted to them, there is an angle for שָׂטָן  to work.

[fredtoast]

My question is this.

If man did not know the difference between right and wrong before he ate from the tree than how did he know it was wrong to disobey God before he ate the fruit?

[Lucidus]

(05-08-2019, 06:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think the title is the answer "Why do you believe". I believe because I believe. If I were to need proof I wouldn't believe. Some things I have pointed to when asked is:

What's the one thing God didn't give man? The knowledge of good and evil. God wanted man to be obedient stewards of his creations, but man stole the knowledge of good and evil and that question for knowledge has motivated many to prove the good does not exist.

How the story of creation pretty much mirrors the theory of evolution in sequence.

A rock cannot become alive.

He created a scenario in which the knowledge of good and evil would be accessible, yet he made that access forbidden. If he did not want them to be exposed to, or curious about, said knowledge -- then it seems to be rather capricious to tempt them with it in the first place. 

As for our quest for knowledge motivating people to prove that God does not exist; I would propose that its more the case that the accumulation of knowledge has often eliminated God as a plausible or relevant explanation. For instance, people once thought lightning and thunder were the result of an angry super being. We now know what cause lighting and thunder, which eliminates the need to insert a god as the cause. As the knowledge of how our universe actually works continues to bottleneck, there is less and less need and opportunity for supernatural explanation.