Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

God exists

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Essentially you are stating that there could be reality without any consciousness in the world. And that consciousness only serves to observe and interpret this reality.

Yes, exactly. If everyone on the planet died tomorrow, the planet would not cease to exist. Existence does not depend on consciousness -- but consciousness depends on existence.

There could be but there isn't.

Yes, at the moment, both consciousness and existence exist.

Essentially you are saying absolutely nothing beside perpetuating my argument. There is always a reason for everything, so what is the reason consciousness is made.

I do not accept your premise that everything is "made" for some "reason". I note that you don't fully accept that premise either -- because if you did, you'd be seeking to know who or what made God and for what reason.

You have to prove I am "guilty" of the belief in God. You have said nothing here accept you think that the world would still exist if consciousness went away. You contradicted yourself by suffusing abstractions into this. CAN YOU ACTUALLY REFUTE THE EXAMPLES I LAID OUT WITHOUT SAYING O NO THATS NOT RIGHT BECAUSE GOD JUST DOENS"T EXIST???????

Can you refute the claim that there are gremlins on Venus studying Hegel?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 255
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You're proving Aisa's very well laid out point.

If a tree falls in the woods but there's no one there depriving himself of books to hear it. Does it make as sound?

We think yes, indeed it does. I'd assume you believe that it not only doesnt make a sound but it also doesnt exist until someone sees it.

The point remains that if there was no consciousness than it would have no relevance. And another point, your telling me that things don't stem from Consciousness. Well how about significance. If there was no consciousness then there would be no relevance to that and if there was no consciousness than there would be no one to make this ridiculous point. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE AT LEAST ATTEMPT TO ATTACK SOME OF MY THEORIES OR CAN'T THEY BE ATTACKED BECAUSE THEY JUST CAN'T

Link to post
Share on other sites
On closer inspection of your argument it amounts to God doesn't exist because I don't believe he exists.

No, it takes no belief to accept that he doesn't exist, it only takes belief to assert that he does. The burden of proof lies on the person making the case for existence.

My understanding of the Objectivism position is that there is NO evidence for the existence of God so such an assertion is arbitrary, just like an assertion that there is a Giant Purple Space Goat that pooped the universe out of his rear end. Additionally, the assertion of God's existence (primarily of the Christian variety) violates all known physical laws so it is sound reasoning to reject such assertion knowing what man knows about physical laws.

As to the "gateways" you talk about, where are they so I can find this god of yours?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, exactly. If everyone on the planet died tomorrow, the planet would not cease to exist. Existence does not depend on consciousness -- but consciousness depends on existence.

Yes, at the moment, both consciousness and existence exist.

I do not accept your premise that everything is "made" for some "reason". I note that you don't fully accept that premise either -- because if you did, you'd be seeking to know who or what made God and for what reason.

Can you refute the claim that there are gremlins on Venus studying Hegel?

Time is an energy in the natural world. God is in the supernatural. They are on two different planes. So conciousness and existence both exist now. That is a fact you can't refute. It could be one way but it isn't. And how do you now that the world would continue to exist. Prove it. O wait you can't because there is no consciousness.

No, it takes no belief to accept that he doesn't exist, it only takes belief to assert that he does. The burden of proof lies on the person making the case for existence.

My understanding of the Objectivism position is that there is NO evidence for the existence of God so such an assertion is arbitrary, just like an assertion that there is a Giant Purple Space Goat that pooped the universe out of his rear end. Additionally, the assertion of God's existence (primarily of the Christian variety) violates all known physical laws so it is sound reasoning to reject such assertion knowing what man knows about physical laws.

As to the "gateways" you talk about, where are they so I can find this god of yours?

again natural versus supernatural and the bible at least to me is not to be taken literally. So what physical laws are you talking about. The gateways are love, the moral code and the fundamental desire for God. In answer to the last one, you cannot contradict that yet because you have yet to truly step away from every day life and feel that desire

Link to post
Share on other sites
we can prove that the world existed before the emergence of consciousness, and you can simply got o antarctica or the moon and find existence without consciousness there, just as in most of the known universe.

Yes but there is still consciousness in the world, or universe I should say... And how are you proving this. I could say the big bang was perpetuated by god thus he was a consciousness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How do I prove that there's consciousness in this world? Behold! I exist

I am agreeing on that point. What I am saying is that how would you know what happens if there wasn't any consciousness. I was simply asking how he new the world was created before there was consciousness

Link to post
Share on other sites
Time is an energy in the natural world. God is in the supernatural. They are on two different planes. So conciousness and existence both exist now. That is a fact you can't refute. It could be one way but it isn't. And how do you now that the world would continue to exist. Prove it. O wait you can't because there is no consciousness.

Are you trying to argue that since both consciousness and existence exist at present, this proves that God exists? If so, that's a whopper of a non sequitur.

And I'm still waiting for you to refute my claim that there are gremlins on Venus studying Hegel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
well I'm not an astrophycist, but I understand they come come up with evidence all around us that supports that matter and energy existed millions of years before the first living cell sprouted on Earth.

yes but god is a consciousness entirely separate from that

Are you trying to argue that since both consciousness and existence exist at present, this proves that God exists? If so, that's a whopper of a non sequitur.

And I'm still waiting for you to refute my claim that there are gremlins on Venus studying Hegel.

No if you look back i am not trying to prove god whatsoever through that thought process...merely stating that i do not belief reality can exist without consciousness

Fly to Venus until then use your experiences to make a rational descion if you believe there are by all means go ahead

Link to post
Share on other sites

how can you claim that?

If it's separate (I asume from another reallity), then how can you know it? Are you a gateway?

No if you look back i am not trying to prove god whatsoever through that thought process...merely stating that i do not belief reality can exist without consciousness

Without whose consciousness?

Link to post
Share on other sites
No if you look back i am not trying to prove god whatsoever through that thought process...merely stating that i do not belief reality can exist without consciousness

Do you think some amount or portion of reality goes out of existence each time you lose consciousness by going to sleep?

Fly to Venus until then use your experiences to make a rational descion if you believe there are by all means go ahead
No, the burden of proof is on you to disprove the existence of my gremlins. After all, I want to believe in these gremlins -- it's my desire and you've already said that all desires have fulfillment -- so isn't it logical to conclude that these gremlins are just as real as god?
Link to post
Share on other sites
how can you claim that?

If it's separate (I asume from another reallity), then how can you know it? Are you a gateway?

Without whose consciousness?

the consciousness that love and the moral code giv us

Do you think some amount or portion of reality goes out of existence each time you lose consciousness by going to sleep?

No, the burden of proof is on you to disprove the existence of my gremlins. After all, I want to believe in these gremlins -- it's my desire and you've already said that all desires have fulfillment -- so isn't it logical to conclude that these gremlins are just as real as god?

no because it is not a fundamental desire like Hunger or Thirst. I am sure you have heard stories about this desire. And if you allow it I am sure you will find it in time

Do you think some amount or portion of reality goes out of existence each time you lose consciousness by going to sleep?

No, the burden of proof is on you to disprove the existence of my gremlins. After all, I want to believe in these gremlins -- it's my desire and you've already said that all desires have fulfillment -- so isn't it logical to conclude that these gremlins are just as real as god?

You just said the burden of proof was on me to disprove the gremlins. YOU CONTRADICTED YOURSELF:: SEE THE BURDEN IS ON YOU TO DISPROVE GOD. In terms of sleep no, I am not talking about being awake but in death yes

Link to post
Share on other sites
"the consciousness that love and the moral code giv us"

so u state that the world exists by grace of OUR consciousness?

On another matter I'm trying to strap my boots but I just cant!

No our concsiousness is what gives meaning to the world... the meaning stems from love which is the key element of our consciousness

Link to post
Share on other sites
"the world without us" might be meaningless but not for that inexistent.

On another matter how does all of this relate to the philosophy of Ayn Rand?

I believe that there is no existence without meaning...it doesn't I was just looking for a forum to chat in with people who had different ideas then mine had intelligence and might one day see some of what I believe in

I believe that there is no existence without meaning...it doesn't I was just looking for a forum to chat in with people who had different ideas then mine had intelligence and might one day see some of what I believe in

i g2g but ill be back later to continue this

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it John Stuart Mill that said that? That's surprising.

Occam's Razor, or the law of parsimony, makes a lot of sense in this case. By creating these superfluous "Gods", we take the focus off man, and what for? What is your hypothesis based upon?

My personal evolution regarding faith was a follows:

1-Childhood passed in an atheist and social-liberal family

2-When teenager I enrolled and even baptized in a Christian-Protestant church because I liked a girl from there (!)

3-After some years atheist again (still social-liberal) , the kind of atheist that believed that EVERYTHING that happens to me and in the World was my responsibility or the responsibility of "powerful people", including the "unjust" living conditions of everyone else in need

4-Ten years ago I slowly turned by myself against social-liberalism. Disoriented and without philosophical roots I studied for a while some old traditions and religions in search for some basic truth, specially very old ones like the ancient Summer and Akkadian Gods and oriental mysticism from ancient China and Japan

With the time I became by my own intellectual growth very close to several principles of Objectivism but still mixed with other contradictory philosophies

5-Three years ago (I am 44 now) I finally knew about Ayn Rand and found the definitive "home" for my reason and my soul in Objectivism.

But even being Objectivist today, I still don't want to return to the mistake I made during great part of my life, described at point 3.

It is a hard load to carry over your shoulders thinking that EVERYTHING that happens to you is your sole responsibility, and more important it is NOT true. There are a lot of things you can control about your life, but there are a lot of things you can't.

You can associate these last things with "chance" "fate" "gods" whatever you want (diseases, accidents, government decisions, other people's actions, been born in this country in this age, my 5 months child born complete and healthy, etc.)

I choose just for fun to invent some Gods and make them "responsible" for these things that are obviously never causeless, but which real causes are out of my reach in practice.

But why in the hell I like to invent Gods?

Because this little harmless game helps me to conceptualize things and symbols and remember my wrong past in order to be now more "balanced" between the things I can change and the things I can't

This is the case of the "God" Akatosh I described before which is obviously an poetic irony, just to play a little with ideas :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe that there is no existence without meaning...it doesn't I was just looking for a forum to chat in with people who had different ideas then mine had intelligence and might one day see some of what I believe in

Dear US12345:

This long discussion seems to me a little "byzantine", the last place to discuss about the real existence of God is an Objectivist forum.

Beside this neither God nor love exist outside human mind. Both are our invents.

The entire Universe is neutral to the existence of men on this little rock called Earth. Universe is not inimical against us, nor "love" us. There is no consciousness (like ours at least) outside man's mind, only the cold eternal? Universe that don't care if we live, die, love, do good or evil, make planes, satellites, Bibles, Giocondas or whatever.

Edited by Tonix777
Link to post
Share on other sites
again natural versus supernatural and the bible at least to me is not to be taken literally. So what physical laws are you talking about. The gateways are love, the moral code and the fundamental desire for God. In answer to the last one, you cannot contradict that yet because you have yet to truly step away from every day life and feel that desire

As was mentioned, your feelings as evidence has no place on an Objectivist forum. I have loved, I do have a moral code, and I have no desire to believe in something for which there is no evidence of that existence. Unless you can point to facts regarding the existence of your god, you needn't bother with the rest. Objectivists aren't concerned with your feelings as evidence.

But if feelings are evidentiary to you, I feel god doesn't exist so therefore he doesn't exist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a hard load to carry over your shoulders thinking that EVERYTHING that happens to you is your sole responsibility, and more important it is NOT true. There are a lot of things you can control about your life, but there are a lot of things you can't.

You can associate these last things with "chance" "fate" "gods" whatever you want (diseases, accidents, government decisions, other people's actions, been born in this country in this age, my 5 months child born complete and healthy, etc.)

I choose just for fun to invent some Gods and make them "responsible" for these things that are obviously never causeless, but which real causes are out of my reach in practice.

But why in the hell I like to invent Gods?

Because this little harmless game helps me to conceptualize things and symbols and remember my wrong past in order to be now more "balanced" between the things I can change and the things I can't

This is the case of the "God" Akatosh I described before which is obviously an poetic irony, just to play a little with ideas :)

2 important points are brought up here:

By being conscious of your invention of those gods, to satisfy your needs or elevate yourself, that makes is it ok (rational).

It's the same with the study of religion. As long as one draws the psychological boundary between volitional investigation/creation and superstition one is able to deal with these subjects.

I once tried to learn hebrew and read the scriptures at a Chabad Luvavitch center, a real sect, , now i seldom read different versions of the old testament.

Ayn Rand made it clear what we all know, religion is a proto-religion, a neccesary step. Philosophy could not have evolved without it, as it's sprung from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You just said the burden of proof was on me to disprove the gremlins. YOU CONTRADICTED YOURSELF:: SEE THE BURDEN IS ON YOU TO DISPROVE GOD.

No, I didn't contradict myself -- I merely adopted your standard of proof to illustrate why it is invalid. Are you truly incapable of grasping an example? Do you not see that the fact that we cannot "disprove the existence of god" is just like the fact that you cannot "disprove the existence of gremlins" -- and that the lack of such disproof does not prove that either thing exists?

I suspect that you can see that fact quite clearly -- you simply don't want to face its implications. Read what I wrote about the nature of proof in post 9.

In terms of sleep no, I am not talking about being awake but in death yes

So now you are saying that existence is dependent on the presence of human life, not human consciousness? Why on earth would you believe such a thing?

You have a major problem with the primacy of consciousness fallacy. That fallacy is a rejection of the most fundamental of axioms, the axiom that existence exists. As Miss Rand points out, that rejection leads to the notion that knowledge of reality is gained by looking inward at one's own consciousness (or at revelations from some other, superior consciousness). In practice, what this "looking at one's consciousness" generally means is that one is moved by one's feelings, wishes, urges, etc. -- i.e. one is guided by emotion.

That certainly seems to be true of your belief in god. That belief is not based on reason, but on feelings -- which is why, when it is challenged, you respond in all capitals.

Apparently, you have never learned to grasp the distinction between your inner world and the existence that exists outside your consciousness. Until you do, you will continue to confuse your feelings with the facts of reality. There is no more disastrous confusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...