Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2018 18:14:15 GMT
Kant gives agnostics a bad name. Agnosticism is pious as a temporary view, but when it becomes permanent, it is a symptom of decay. Kant said that hylozoism is the death of natural philosophy yet no scientific mind today would deny that various animals have manifested self-awareness and that plants have demonstrated potential for consciousness (i.e. they can remember things).
|
|
revopt
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 6
Ethnicity: Portuguese
Hero: Tiberius Gracchus
Age: 22
|
Post by revopt on Apr 11, 2018 21:46:24 GMT
I was talking when they were still believed, the mythology you are talking about were more akin to moral stories. At that time people were extremely supersticious, no one wanted to incur the wrath of the gods.
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Apr 11, 2018 22:30:31 GMT
At the very least God exists in the same level as laws. We cannot see a law, but we can see its effects. A law is capable of changing the behavior of a person, as long as it's respected. God is an existance that can influence the behavior of its believers and also indirectly the non-believers. Like a law, God exist's, as long as someone believes in him. For example, the moment someone stopped believing in Zeus, its influence to the people vanished. So God must exist, at least in the same plane as a law exists. Anything else we associate with God is very much harder to prove, if not impossible. "God exists in the same level as laws" and, you may add, as geometrical figures (and more). Laws (usually prohibitions), Precepts (usually about what should be done), geometrical figures [the Circle, the Triangle, etc.] are ideas though different in kind, as laws and precepts are emotive for actions of ours. But my point is that, inasmuch as they are ideas, they are human conceptions -- generated by human minds. Not all human minds are equal in conceiving, in inventing, in understanding, in creating, in conceving dramatic characters, in conceiving gods (superhumanly powerful characters)....Those few people who have conceived gods have divulged their conceptions, have spoken of the gods, have become prophets of the gods (speakers on behalf of their gods). What makes plants and trees shoot leaves and blossoms in springtime? A god or, as the Romans said, a NUMEN, is responsible. The Greeks called it Demeter. What makes the seeds sprout and grow into plants? Haplos or Apollon...and so, for every event in nature, here is a hidden power (Numen) that makes it happen. When the 6th Century B.C. in Ionia, the physicists (the speakers of growth) began to see Nature as autonomous (not governed by gods),they created a problem for themselves: How is it possible for growth to take place spontaneously, without intentionality? The gods were abandoned, but still we do not understand how anything happens without the gods. We do not have good reasons to be either theists or atheists. Anyway, in view of the good and the bad effects of the gods on humans, we can understand why the Persians believed in a Good God and an Evil God, whereas the Hebrews believed in a good or providing God, who also punished human sins instead of acquiring the attribute of Badness. The gods are as they are conceived for their own sake and for ours. How are really the gods in themselves? There is no such a thing as a God in Himself.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Apr 12, 2018 10:22:51 GMT
You can’t disprove His existence either.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Apr 12, 2018 10:30:28 GMT
True. But that guy is some Christian denomination I believe so if the as atheist is right in the case then he meets the afterlife with nothing but if he is right and atheist is wrong then the atheist is in hell. So don't think chocodog is worried since for him it will be either heaven if right and nothing if wrong and for the atheist nothing if right and hell if he's wrong. Just saying it's not evidence for the existence of any deity, at least to non-theists At the same time there is no evidence proving God doesn’t exist either.
|
|
Sonny
Full Member
Posts: 248
Likes: 84
Ancestry: European
Religion: Christian
|
Post by Sonny on Apr 12, 2018 23:38:42 GMT
I would normally take a different approach to respond to this.
....I think it depends on your definition of God.
For example, does love exist? Does anger exist? It's a feeling, it's emotion. It's not a physical object that you can see and touch. It's a feeling brought about by chemical reactions in our brains.
So a belief in an independent observer has also existed for a very long time, maybe from the beginning. How can that not be real?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2018 16:20:17 GMT
Elevating the subjective nature of proof to an absolute which doe not change requires a necessity in placing the individual as:
1) ultimate measurer 2) necessity in infinity as foundation for what is constant 3) Points one and two as foundational definitions for God.
|
|
Mahaluz
New Member
Posts: 29
Likes: 16
|
Post by Mahaluz on Apr 19, 2018 16:31:00 GMT
We can't also disprove his existeance by applying the same logics.
|
|