Do you believe in God and why

[amexpat]

10 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

I may as well reply to the lot of you with a single post.  Some of you might think that I'm religious and so are directing the above towards me.  Perhaps with the sole intention of getting a rise outta me. 

Paranoid much?

 

[mauGR1]

8 hours ago, Elad said:

Then you should know that the only reason you are having this conversation over the internet using a laptop/smartphone is due to our scientific theories in electromagnetism and quantum mechanics. In fact every single electrical device you use, from a washing machine, to a GPS in a car is only possible due to those theories.

 

You should also be aware that the same scientific methods and tools used in developing those theories were used to formulate the theory of evolution by natural selection. Since Darwin's time the evidence (especially the molecular evidence) has become so overwhelming that its about on par with the theory that the Earth orbits the Sun. You can take the genes of thousands of species of animals or plants, plot out the differences and it will produce a perfect hierarchy or family tree. Not only does it match all the fossil evidence, but it gave a few surprises such as whales being very closely related to hippopotamuses, and were once land mammals.  

It's quite ok to sing the praises of science, yet, with a bit of the rare intellectual honesty it's apparent that some scientific theories are full of holes.

Even the laws of gravity, which for many years seemed to me to be settled, are still frantically being discussed by the best minds.

Then, who said that science is against spirituality or the esoteric meaning of religion?

Spirituality is not against science, intended as the search of knowledge, it's quite the opposite. 

 

Now, if science is being used to make entire masses of people confused on the verge of stupidity, does it deserve to be called science?

 

[Skeptic7]

11 hours ago, formanth said:

This thread is getting more bizarre by the the hour....

Word. And seemed it had reached it's zenith long ago. 

[formanth]

11 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

Word. And seemed it had reached it's zenith long ago. 

Or its nadir....but friendly debate is healthy..until someone loses an eye, for an eye...

Better the incoming passengers not go blind or else how would we fill in that that pesky Thai Pass! You'd be tied up, and tongue thai'd.

[Skeptic7]

9 hours ago, Elad said:

the Earth orbits the Sun.

Oh no! Cue the geocentrists and "flerfs". ????

[steven100]

Do you believe in God and why   .......

 

no .....  because he hasn't given me the big lottery win .... so I could help so many family and friends. 

[Excel]

11 minutes ago, steven100 said:

Do you believe in God and why   .......

 

no .....  because he hasn't given me the big lottery win .... so I could help so many family and friends. 

Strange you should say that but perhaps, if there was a God, she has a twisted mindset which is perhaps why so many people believe in her, and that can be demonstrated by noticing how many people who have won a lottery simply don't deserve it  

[bert bloggs]

43 minutes ago, Excel said:

Strange you should say that but perhaps, if there was a God, she has a twisted mindset which is perhaps why so many people believe in her, and that can be demonstrated by noticing how many people who have won a lottery simply don't deserve it  

SHE? You think God is a she,not non binery? Come on we must be inclusive.

[xylophone]

4 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

Word. And seemed it had reached it's zenith long ago. 

One more to add to the list:-

 

[Sunmaster]

[ivor bigun]

12 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

trouble is ,nobody knows anything about the subject ,as no one has ever seen or spoken to God,even though they think they have .

[Sunmaster]

28 minutes ago, ivor bigun said:

trouble is ,nobody knows anything about the subject ,as no one has ever seen or spoken to God,even though they think they have .

You are stating this as a fact.
How would you able to determine if one had communion with God or not? 
 

[Tippaporn]

Just now, Sunmaster said:

You are stating this as a fact.
How would you able to determine if one had communion with God or not?

The crux of the disagreement between those of pure science and those of faith (who can also be proponents of science) revolves around the denial of the validity of subjective reality.

[mauGR1]

33 minutes ago, ivor bigun said:

trouble is ,nobody knows anything about the subject ,as no one has ever seen or spoken to God,even though they think they have .

Since when have you been appointed as a spokesman for the whole humankind past and present?

..just asking for a friend ????

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

The crux of the disagreement between those of pure science and those of faith (who can also be proponents of science) revolves around the denial of the validity of subjective reality.

... which is a crime imho..

...it's almost like they want to control what's in people's minds.

[Tippaporn]

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

... which is a crime imho..

...it's almost like they want to control what's in people's minds.

They inflict themselves more than anyone else.

[Tippaporn]

In my opinion, most of those who come onto this thread and gleefully disparage the beliefs of others have no interest and no intention of ever expanding their ideas beyond the boundaries of the box which science defines for them.  They will learn nothing beyond what they currently "know" until they are capable of at least temporarily suspending their beliefs long enough to consider fresh and unfamiliar ideas.  The only injustice they do is unto themselves.

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

They inflict themselves more than anyone else.

Well, I just read a couple of articles, the theory is that quite a few "natural spirits" (for the lack of a better definition) are incarnated in a human shape, but in fact they are not human at all.

Those "people ", as a distinctive trait, are totally devoid of empathy. 

[Tippaporn]

8 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

In my opinion, most of those who come onto this thread and gleefully disparage the beliefs of others have no interest and no intention of ever expanding their ideas beyond the boundaries of the box which science defines for them.  They will learn nothing beyond what they currently "know" until they are capable of at least temporarily suspending their beliefs long enough to consider fresh and unfamiliar ideas.  The only injustice they do is unto themselves.

I should append the above to include anyone who refuses to set toe outside of the boundaries of reality they've set for themselves.

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

In my opinion, most of those who come onto this thread and gleefully disparage the beliefs of others have no interest and no intention of ever expanding their ideas beyond the boundaries of the box which science defines for them.  They will learn nothing beyond what they currently "know" until they are capable of at least temporarily suspending their beliefs long enough to consider fresh and unfamiliar ideas.  The only injustice they do is unto themselves.

Agree, the fact that those against the freedom of thought are the majority, is indeed a sign of the times. 

Unfortunately it's getting worse before it gets better.

 

[Tippaporn]

57 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Agree, the fact that those against the freedom of thought are the majority, is indeed a sign of the times. 

Unfortunately it's getting worse before it gets better.

In my view the greater majority of the current mass accepted ideas are false in the sense that they do not reflect what actual reality is and how it works.  Any idea which is not grounded in actual reality is inescapably bound to produce problems before it fails outright.  (Think of jumping off a tall structure with the idea of flying.)

The problem, as the profoundly perceptive Mark Twain so eloquently puts it, is this:  “What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so.”

While we have learned much regarding how reality truly operates and the laws by which it is bound (many thanks to science) we are still quite ignorant as to the many other laws which govern not only this reality but all others.  Freedom is one such law.  (Not that I view it as a law per se but as an inherent attribute of existence itself.)  Those who attempt to suppress freedom do so with an at best limited understanding of this unalterable aspect of reality.  The attempt to suppress freedom, as with all attempts to defy reality, is akin to jumping off a high precipice whilst having the expectation of flying.  It is bound to lead to failure.  After suffering disastrous and painful consequences, of course.

Importantly, always keep in mind that Twain's astute observation is in prolific play in our world.  And that the state of our world is always an absolute perfect reflection of those ideas which we hold, both individually and en masse.  The further divorced the ideas which we attempt to employ are from the actual reality the greater the problems we can expect to encounter.  All problems are, in fact, the unmistakable tell that an idea is in divergence with the true representation of reality.

Now, in my mind there's much more to consider in order to give full justice to my explanation but from my vantage point I think we are witnessing the myriad results of an accumulation of some of the most disconnected ideas from reality that we have ever encountered in our long history.  For instance, the idea that an individual can determine their sex despite the most obvious physical evidence presented by their own corporeal image.  Please convince me that that idea will not lead to problems.

It is my firm opinion that we, as a species, need to seriously begin examining those ideas which we hold in our heads with the express intention of reconsidering whether or not they have true validity.  For it is unequivocally true to say that much of what we believe to be true and fact and take to be an unquestionable aspect of reality is, in truth, nothing more than a belief about reality.

And so, in my estimation we are at a juncture at which, again, as a species we either correct our false assumptions of reality or succumb to the calamitous and destructive results of our current mass held and mass accepted distorted, misleading and inaccurate ideas of what reality is and how it operates.

We have the freedom of choice.  Always.  Make the best use of it.

 

[mauGR1]

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

as a species we either correct our false assumptions of reality or succumb to the results of our current mass held and mass accepted distorted, misleading and inaccurate ideas of what reality is and how it operates.

Yes, i subscribe to your view and i have to say that I have a lot of esteem for M.Twain too.

On a positive note, it's difficult if not impossible to free all the people, but it's surely possible to free ourselves. 

Plato's cave is a good metaphor ????

[Tippaporn]

5 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Yes, i subscribe to your view and i have to say that I have a lot of esteem for M.Twain too.

On a positive note, it's difficult if not impossible to free all the people, but it's surely possible to free ourselves. 

Plato's cave is a good metaphor ????

There's no need to free anyone, really.  In truth there is never anything to "save."  But that's an understanding that only comes with an understanding of what and who we truly are, and what the hell we're doing here in the first place.

 

It is also true that one can only do for oneself.  There's only one life to ever live.  That is your own.  And that is something you do the best with, too.
 

[Tippaporn]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

Agree, the fact that those against the freedom of thought are the majority, is indeed a sign of the times. 

Unfortunately it's getting worse before it gets better.

Erm, I doubt the majority but would argue the loudest.

[Tippaporn]

On 5/22/2022 at 6:26 PM, mikebike said:

On 5/22/2022 at 6:20 PM, Tippaporn said:

I agree that pain does not guarantee growth.  It can lead to, as you say, even greater pain.  But I would aver that ultimately all pain leads one back to happiness.  Perhaps not in a particular lifetime but in due "time" it's an eventuality.

I have no idea what this means. "Not in a particular lifetime"? "All pain leads one back to happiness"? WTH does any of that mean? If your "theory" is even remotely correct, shouldn't humanity be overcome with neverending happiness by now? I mean we humans HAVE been suffering pain for thousands of years - why are we not reaping the rewards of all that ultimate happiness in 2022?

Think of it this way, mikebike.  Take all of the information that exists and create two mathematical sets; one for me and one for yourself.  Your set will contain information which is not in my set, my set will contain info that's not in your set, and there will be an overlap which contains information that exists in both our sets.  Finally, there will the rest of the existing information which will not be found in either of our sets.  That visualisation should make it easy for you to see at least one explanation for why you have "no idea what it means."
 

If you were taking a class on certain subject matter and there were concepts of which you were entirely unfamiliar being discussed would you a) politely ask questions or b) call the teacher a moronic dumbwit and hurl other insults?

 

[mauGR1]

58 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

But that's an understanding that only comes with an understanding of what and who we truly are, and what the hell we're doing here in the first place.

I know it sounds simplistic, but imho we are here to learn.

The lessons are different for everyone, however, working on one's ego, seems to be something which is good for everyone. 

[Fat is a type of crazy]

Science isn't against your subjective thoughts. It just does not treat them as reliable evidence. If we said that that guy on the internet says he feels or senses this or that, so lets believe him and change society to cater to such a belief, where would we be. Religion or faith I suppose. Find evidence or just be happy and find contentment in your subjective experience. 

[Tippaporn]

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

I know it's sounds simplistic, but imho we are here to learn.

The lessons are different for everyone, however, working on one's ego, seems to be something which is good for everyone. 

To me learning is synonymous with growth.  Growth is never ending.  I would say that there is more than a single reason for why we're here.  Offhand, another is the innate desire for self expression, which would employ an endless number of mediums.  There are others that I know of.

I absolutely agree with your observation that the lessons are different for everyone.  And I'll use that observation to make another point.  Not everyone is here to be healthy, wealthy and wise.  That may not serve their intended purposes.  Hence there is no one to free or save.  Aiding them in their purpose may seem, and thus be interpreted, as an interventionist attempt to save them.

[Tippaporn]

10 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Science isn't against your subjective thoughts. It just does not treat them as reliable evidence. If we said that that guy on the internet says he feels or senses this or that, so lets believe him and change society to cater to such a belief, where would we be. Religion or faith I suppose. Find evidence or just be happy and find contentment in your subjective experience. 

Science attaches zero credibility to subjective reality and precisely for the reasons you give.  The moment they accept subjective reality as real is the point at which they become synonymous with religion.

And yet, again, there is not a one of us who can deny the existence of subjective reality.  The question, and the dilemma, becomes - what do we do with it?  Currently, sciences chooses to simply ignore it completely, hoping that that is the correct solution.  Knowing what I know, at least, I can't help but then conclude that it's a very bad choice and a terrible solution.

This really does point to the fact that, overall, we know very, very little.  Yet it's been said that every generation sincerely believes that they know most of what there is to know and that there's very little left to discover.  Every generation.

 

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Hence there is no one to free or save.  Aiding them in their purpose may seem, and thus be interpreted, as an interventionist attempt to save them

I can see your point, but i can see that you are posting here your truths, even for people who don't listen to you, and make a mockery of your wisdom. There might be no need for it, but still you're doing it.

Like in Plato's cave metaphor, the ones who have seen the light, for some reason, feel compelled to spread that awareness. 

I don't see anything wrong with that, it's part of our nature. 

In fact i heard that it's worse, and it would be pointless to keep that knowledge just for yourself.