Metaphysical paradox

Tools    





You ready? You look ready.
Ah, gotcha. Well, I'll keep up-to-date in this thread from now on and chime in. Although, you already know me thoughts on free will.

"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza

Why is that wasting time? I'm just asking people to question stuff. Thats pretty logical.

And my post wasn't really an "attack".
Um, you came in here talking about "schizophrenic medicine," "completely unbelievable stories," stuff being illogical, and asking people to see that religions make "no sense." If that's not an attack...what was it? Because it certainly reads and looks like an attack.
__________________
"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza



Yikes, I wasn't expecting an apology or anything. And I realize you probably didn't intend much by it. This kinda happens in every debate; people want to weigh in, but understandably don't want to read through three pages of dense theological speculation.

Didn't know you were majoring in metaphysics. Very interesting. How has that influenced your beliefs (if it has)?
hey no problem, it's the kind of person I am

Well I am going into Philosophy in my second year. It's so interesting, I love it. It has completely changed my way I think about things. While I am not, I was raised catholic, so I had the catholic biased way of looking at things. For example, I have come to accept death, not because of an 'afterlife' or anything, but mainly because of views of those like Socrates and Epicurus on the subject (again with epicurus... I don't even agree with him on most matters :P).

I really like Socrates' views about evil and I believe his often misrepresented quote " To Socrates, the only evil that can harm someone is injustice, and if you are 'good' it can't harm you.
And that just raises more questions, like what is a good life?
Some would say a happy one, or a pious one. Many philosophers believe (which I find amusing, yet partially true) that the life of contemplation and reason such as philosophers and poets are the best.

Some recommended reading for something deep (and somewhat pertaining to this thread ) is Nietzsche's writings on "God is Dead". The Death of God would challenge mankind to look at what justifies our moral framework. We can't think of the world in theological terms, we can't believe the world to have purpose and order given to it by some greater power. Which goes on well with Satre's views that Humanity is the only thing in which existance precedes essence, mankind needs to give life its own purpose and meaning...

I'm rambling again aren't I? suffice to say I love philosophy

__________________
One day you will ask me, what's more important...me or your life. I will answer my life and you will walk away not knowing that you are my life



You ready? You look ready.
Outbreak: I declared my major, Philosophy, a few short months after I transferred to my current college. This fall will be the start of my third year of college, and my first semester directed totally towards Philosophy and Religion. I'll probably be minoring in the latter.



Why is that wasting time? I'm just asking people to question stuff. Thats pretty logical.

And my post wasn't really an "attack".
I'm sure you didn't mean me personally when you typed your directions on what to do "the next time you pray." My advice concerning "you" typing was as generally directed at atheists as your remark was directed at Christians and didn't necessarily apply to you personally. But if the shoe pinches . . .

Meanwhile, there's nothing logical about a non-believer advising believers to question their beliefs. Unless, of course, you (yourself this time) are willing to question your own non-beliefs. And from the general tone of your (personal) posts, that obviously is not going to happen.

The thing that burns me about self-proclaimed atheists is that they are always talking about god, which is about as logical as someone lecturing on space aliens that he (or she) are certain do not exist. Atheists are as religious in their denial of deity as any Christian or other religion is in its support of god. I keep expecting atheists to show up at my door with pamplets on Saturday mornings like the Watchtower folks used to do.

A true atheist, secure in his own non-belief, wouldn't give a damn if someone else believes in god or not. Since he knows there's no god, the true atheist would also know that other people believing in a deity will have no effect on the universe. Only self-proclaimed (usually at the top of their voices) atheists keep picking at that spiritual scab.



I've found that in the grand scope of things there really isn't that much evil in the world. Perhaps through history there can be noted a few prime examples of evil, but just a few along the timeline. The world is not an evil place and its inhabitants are trying to do good things. It is primarily a good world and people do good things, or what they believe to be good things with a sprinkling of what could be perceived as evil.

Computers may take over the world one day, in fact they already have--how would you feel if all of the computers shut down all over the world? are computers evil? Is yours? Well they started out being helpful and good.
You're absolutely right. If it wasn't a good world, evil wouldn't stand out like a blood stain on a white shirt.



You ready? You look ready.
I'm sure you didn't mean me personally when you typed your directions on what to do "the next time you pray." My advice concerning "you" typing was as generally directed at atheists as your remark was directed at Christians and didn't necessarily apply to you personally. But if the shoe pinches . . .

Meanwhile, there's nothing logical about a non-believer advising believers to question their beliefs. Unless, of course, you (yourself this time) are willing to question your own non-beliefs. And from the general tone of your (personal) posts, that obviously is not going to happen.

The thing that burns me about self-proclaimed atheists is that they are always talking about god, which is about as logical as someone lecturing on space aliens that he (or she) are certain do not exist. Atheists are as religious in their denial of deity as any Christian or other religion is in its support of god. I keep expecting atheists to show up at my door with pamplets on Saturday mornings like the Watchtower folks used to do.

A true atheist, secure in his own non-belief, wouldn't give a damn if someone else believes in god or not. Since he knows there's no god, the true atheist would also know that other people believing in a deity will have no effect on the universe. Only self-proclaimed (usually at the top of their voices) atheists keep picking at that spiritual scab.
I disagree. And I think you and I had this same discussion in another thread? Correct me if I'm wrong.

These atheists that harp on and on about no God, in my own experience, imagine themselves to possess superior knowledge about the world and why things are the way they are. They want people to know that *they* got it right and not those crazy Christian preachers.

Kinda like when in school and there was always at least one kid that was damn smug whenever he got the right answer and he made sure the other students knew about it. This just, in my experience, tends to be the overwhelming reason for some atheists harping on and on about it. I certainly know it was the reason *I* talked about it so much.

Although, I totally agree on the last part of your post. A comfortable atheist just doesn't give a hoot.



king_of_movies_316's Avatar
The King of Movies

A true atheist, secure in his own non-belief, wouldn't give a damn if someone else believes in god or not. Since he knows there's no god, the true atheist would also know that other people believing in a deity will have no effect on the universe. Only self-proclaimed (usually at the top of their voices) atheists keep picking at that spiritual scab.
I pick at that scab for two reason.

One reason is so in the future, people don't think of our society the way we think of ancient civilisations that worshiped the sun and thought that lightning meant that god was angry.

Another reason, is because i generally believe religion slows down our society and has stopped society from evolving.
__________________
http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=17475 - My movie reviews



I disagree. And I think you and I had this same discussion in another thread? Correct me if I'm wrong.

These atheists that harp on and on about no God, in my own experience, imagine themselves to possess superior knowledge about the world and why things are the way they are. They want people to know that *they* got it right and not those crazy Christian preachers.

Kinda like when in school and there was always at least one kid that was damn smug whenever he got the right answer and he made sure the other students knew about it. This just, in my experience, tends to be the overwhelming reason for some atheists harping on and on about it. I certainly know it was the reason *I* talked about it so much.

Although, I totally agree on the last part of your post. A comfortable atheist just doesn't give a hoot.
After re-reading your post several times, I still can't find where we disagree. I, too, think that atheists operate on the asumption that they're smarter than religious worshipers and their egos drive them to flaunt their "wisdom" over and over and over. Our only difference is that you obviously stated it better than I did.



I pick at that scab for two reason.

One reason is so in the future, people don't think of our society the way we think of ancient civilisations that worshiped the sun and thought that lightning meant that god was angry.
You alone are going to do that, post by post by post? I suspect to get your message to folks hundreds of years into the future, you'll need to use something more durable than emails.

Another reason, is because i generally believe religion slows down our society and has stopped society from evolving.
And you personally have moved society forward in what way?



there's a frog in my snake oil
Originally Posted by rufnek
I, too, think that atheists operate on the asumption that they're smarter than religious worshipers and their egos drive them to flaunt their "wisdom" over and over and over.
Interesting that you like to tar all atheists with one brush. Don't you know it's a broad church?

(I know you're talking in particular here about vocal 'god bothering' atheists, but it's not the first time you've used blanket phraseology)
__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here



My life isn't written very well.
Joke interlude: My sentences are cold, I need a blanket phraseology!
__________________
I have been formatted to fit this screen.

r66-The member who always asks WHY?



You ready? You look ready.
After re-reading your post several times, I still can't find where we disagree. I, too, think that atheists operate on the asumption that they're smarter than religious worshipers and their egos drive them to flaunt their "wisdom" over and over and over. Our only difference is that you obviously stated it better than I did.
Oh, I just disagreed with your true atheist only statement. I guess since you didn't state it well that I was confused. Glad to see we're on the same page, though.

Interesting that you like to tar all atheists with one brush. Don't you know it's a broad church?

(I know you're talking in particular here about vocal 'god bothering' atheists, but it's not the first time you've used blanket phraseology)
Don't assume I'm doing the same!

One reason is so in the future, people don't think of our society the way we think of ancient civilisations that worshiped the sun and thought that lightning meant that god was angry.
Yea, when I think about the Romans I only think about how ass backwards their society was...I mean, those guys weren't advance at all.

Another reason, is because i generally believe religion slows down our society and has stopped society from evolving.
You might want to take another look at history then. Numerous advancements in society were started by religious societies as well as non-religious societies. You ever heard of medieval Christians believing in a flat Earth? Yea, that one is a myth. Then again, I guess religion does slow us down...what with getting the shape of the Earth right.



Banned from Hollywood.
I don't follow religion (but this is not a religious topic)...on the other hand i am more of a spiritual person, and i do believe in a higher power that created all forms of life...so if people chose to call it god, so be it.


Cliche i know but these are my thoughts on the subject.



(As for the scientific part of the topic that's a totally different subject, long one too )



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
Physics and metaphysics really do go hand in hand. There really isn't any way to get away from the idea unless you just plain dismiss one, and I'd say that's like saying that I'm God and starting a new religion or science (take your pick). I really do think the word "religion" scares off a lot of people because of the baggage it seems to connote concerning hell, death, sin, intolerance, etc. I believe that you can be intolerant and believe that religion is backwards or even evil whether you believe in religion or not. Of course, it's this modern era of terrorism which seems to confuse some people into thinking that religion is responsible for all these wars and terrorist acts, but the truth is that all the people who do these things are just vengeful zealots, and they're not religious zealots, they're hateful, killing zealots who are trying to settle some personal vendetta. They always have been and they always will be and they use their "religion" (what a joke!) to pathetically mask their personal hatefulness, insecurity and quest for power (always have, again).

On the other hand, there are a few "zealots" who never seem to go to outright war, but try to post the banner of science and intellectualism, and I'll be the first to remark that this often scares off what I might call the religious types. Certain people who profess a strong faith in certain religions are downright antagonistic toward scientists who they see as atheists who are almost more evil than actual terrorists because they are somehow subtle in what they profess and do. Now, sometimes there are multiple reasons to believe these scientists are "out there". For one thing, they're mostly politically-lliberal and seemingly borderline-socialist. You know, they're the tree-huggers. Well, whenever someone calls a group of people an insulting name, no matter if they aren't really a group but may fall under some enormous umbrella, it's a way to "demonize" them and not have to deal with whatever reality they have to bring to the table of various subjects. In other words, in dealing with politics and religion, one always gets caught in the never-ending circle of each group calling the other names and anathema to a form of reality. People just never seem to understand that Peace is far preferable to War, whether it's a hot war or a cold war, and no matter whether you are providing physical pain to the opposition or emotional pain.

Of course, politics has raised its head (where's that thread again before I get too off topic?) Oh yeah, the thread named "Obama!". It could be seen as a thread where a parent wants to know where his/her child is or why he did what he just did (so they could spank him). It could also be someone praising somebody. It could also just be somebody crying out for attention, but which somebody or how many of them are there? I hope some of this makes sense because I've run out of time, but I'll come back as long as you don't throw too many tomatoes at me.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



To add kindling to Golgot's free will conundrum, what of those who's attitudes and actions are at least some-what a result of environment, or what's more genetic predisposition? Let's say someone is born into an abusive home and suffers from a neurological defect, which causes them to react more assertively and aggressively than an average adult. As a result they live a harsh and ultimately short life. How much of a choice really exists for such a person to avert the aforementioned fate?
__________________


...uh the post is up there...



there's a frog in my snake oil
I think a theist could still make a case for a 'human component' (societal, environmental) playing a role in such genetic expression. You seem to be referring to the infamous MAOA gene, which is a great example (impulsive aggression which can be tempered above the norm or expressed in highly antisocial form depending on family upbringing etc)

I do find this whole human-influence angle to environmental forces intriguing (it's easy to perceive 'world events' as completely impartial & divorced from us - a form of thought which i think may have become more prevelant in modern times). The idea of people who's free will is consequently limited by the actions of others seems a bit murkier to me tho. (I'm still most intrigued now by how a theist would react to someone in the deepest form of coma who seems to not even have the possibility of mental choices, or of ever returning to such a state).



My life isn't written very well.
I've always wondered why the 6 million Jews didn't rise up and strike back against the Nazi's....



there's a frog in my snake oil
Meh, the theists have an easy opt out on that one. They just say it was the Nazi's choice to be bad

(And then occasionally go on to blame it on 'secular vegetarianism' or some such )