Proof of God

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands » March 11th, 2018, 12:32 am

Spectrum wrote:
March 10th, 2018, 11:37 pm
jerlands wrote:
March 10th, 2018, 11:03 pm
That is not my claim. Knowledge exists as probability and we prove things through the fact the premise is repeatable. To comprehend the entirety is a lot to bear therefore I perceive it's difficulty. I do not accept the notion of God solely through negation but also through affirmation.
I am able to see that man did not create the earth, the animals, the trees or anything else for that matter.
So how is do I explain the existence of that which seemingly is apart from self.
Note humans have evolved with dualism [subject versus object] as the default reality to facilitate basis survival. Without this embedded dualism it is like humans could have gone extinct by now.

But as humans evolved further its understanding of the nature, complexity, threats and opportunities of reality expanded. Thus the default subject - object [Self - God] view is relevant but not precise to deal with the expanded vision of reality.

Note the changes and progress in Physics from Newtonian [subject - object] to Relativity [subject influence reality] to Quantum Mechanics [reality dependent on when observed - Collapse Wave Function].
To deal specifically with Wave Function Collapse, you yourself illustrated the illusion of parallax. How we fool ourselves at times is dependant upon the view we're taking, how we form that view and the tools used to assist us in the formulation. That is my understanding as to what forms this phenomena known as wave function collapse.
Spectrum wrote:
March 10th, 2018, 11:37 pm
As in Philosophy there are also progress in philosophical thinking from
  • 1. Philosophical Realism - the concept of an external world that is absolutely independent of the Self to
    2. Philosophical anti-realism - an external world that is interdependent with the Self.
In view 1, there is the external God that created the external World which is apart from the Self.

In view 2, for most, there is no external God, the external World is co-created by the Self in which it is a part of.

For philosophy sake, you cannot insist on view 1 without understanding and countering view 2.
I am a dependant, I depend on my environment to provide those things necessary for my survival. On of the things provided me was a teaching that I found relation in. I was able to touch upon it and see that truth within myself.
Do I know absolutely that God exist? No but I clearly see evidence to support that conclusion.
As I had argued, we can speculate based on evidence [empirical] but what is speculated must be at least empirically possible.
For example I can speculate the external World is created/maintained by human-liked [thus empirical] aliens from billions of light years away within a computer program.

As I had argued the God that you speculated ultimately must be an absolute perfect God thus non-empirical thus not empirical possible i.e. an impossibility within an empirical-rational reality.

Why theists end up with a indefensible and unprovable God is due to psychological impulses that drive theists to conjure an idea of God to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.
How do you arrive at non-empirical? I suggest God exists in all things not as a whole but rather as a part. Man is the whole of creation but man is still a part of God, that part possibly is just reflection.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum » March 11th, 2018, 1:01 am

jerlands wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 12:32 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 10th, 2018, 11:37 pm
As in Philosophy there are also progress in philosophical thinking from
  • 1. Philosophical Realism - the concept of an external world that is absolutely independent of the Self to
    2. Philosophical anti-realism - an external world that is interdependent with the Self.
In view 1, there is the external God that created the external World which is apart from the Self.

In view 2, for most, there is no external God, the external World is co-created by the Self in which it is a part of.

For philosophy sake, you cannot insist on view 1 without understanding and countering view 2.

As I had argued, we can speculate based on evidence [empirical] but what is speculated must be at least empirically possible.
For example I can speculate the external World is created/maintained by human-liked [thus empirical] aliens from billions of light years away within a computer program.

As I had argued the God that you speculated ultimately must be an absolute perfect God thus non-empirical thus not empirical possible i.e. an impossibility within an empirical-rational reality.

Why theists end up with a indefensible and unprovable God is due to psychological impulses that drive theists to conjure an idea of God to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.
How do you arrive at non-empirical? I suggest God exists in all things not as a whole but rather as a part. Man is the whole of creation but man is still a part of God, that part possibly is just reflection.
If your God is not whole, i.e. not perfect nor complete but is a part, then your God will can be a part of other theists who claim their God is whole, complete, perfect and absolute.

Now if X claim his/her God is a part, Y can claim X's god is a part of sh1t stuck the whole God's ass. This proposition is logically possible.

If you don't want your God to be like X's, then you better claim your God to be absolutely perfect, so no other theists can downgrade your God at all.

But the catch is an absolutely perfect God cannot be empirical, i.e. impossible to the empirical thus impossible to be real in an empirical-rational reality.

Either way, you are in a checkmate position that God cannot be a possibility.

Why the mess? It is because the idea of God [illusory] is conjured by theists to deal with a psychological issue to deal with an inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

Why are you not considering this view as probable when in reality such a view had been practiced for thousands of years by non-theistic Eastern spirituality.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands » March 11th, 2018, 1:22 am

Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 1:01 am
jerlands wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 12:32 am

How do you arrive at non-empirical? I suggest God exists in all things not as a whole but rather as a part. Man is the whole of creation but man is still a part of God, that part possibly is just reflection.
If your God is not whole, i.e. not perfect nor complete but is a part, then your God will can be a part of other theists who claim their God is whole, complete, perfect and absolute.
This is not what I said or even suggested. To understand how God might exists in a mouse you'd have to understand Actus Purus and how the the greatest echos down to the smallest.
Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 1:01 am
Now if X claim his/her God is a part, Y can claim X's god is a part of sh1t stuck the whole God's ass. This proposition is logically possible.

If you don't want your God to be like X's, then you better claim your God to be absolutely perfect, so no other theists can downgrade your God at all.

But the catch is an absolutely perfect God cannot be empirical, i.e. impossible to the empirical thus impossible to be real in an empirical-rational reality.

Either way, you are in a checkmate position that God cannot be a possibility.
You're not even on the same board yet. Think of the Sun's effect on the earth. The sun is basically life's energy source. Everything grows from the energy of the sun so you might assume everything comes from the sun. So can we see the sun in a worm and then see the same sun in a cow?
Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 1:01 am
Why the mess? It is because the idea of God [illusory] is conjured by theists to deal with a psychological issue to deal with an inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

Why are you not considering this view as probable when in reality such a view had been practiced for thousands of years by non-theistic Eastern spirituality.
What are you saying? Hinduism is different than any western religion because western religion is dealing with different criteria. The concept of God existed in Pharaonic Theology and arose around the same time as the Vedas. It's hard to say exactly when the notion of God arose but it's suggested it's illustrated when housing turned from being round in nature (maternalistic, mother goddess, womb) to rectangular (concepts, mind, spiritual, patriarchal.) As I suggested, to conceive the whole is not easy and jumping to any conclusions simply robs the individual of discovery.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum » March 11th, 2018, 3:06 am

jerlands wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 1:22 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 1:01 am

If your God is not whole, i.e. not perfect nor complete but is a part, then your God will can be a part of other theists who claim their God is whole, complete, perfect and absolute.
This is not what I said or even suggested. To understand how God might exists in a mouse you'd have to understand Actus Purus and how the the greatest echos down to the smallest.
OK get your point, but I don't agree with that.
You're not even on the same board yet. Think of the Sun's effect on the earth. The sun is basically life's energy source. Everything grows from the energy of the sun so you might assume everything comes from the sun. So can we see the sun in a worm and then see the same sun in a cow?
Note there are bacteria which feed on sulfur in some deep seas and underground which do not depend on the Sun.

You can use the analogical example of God = energy which is supposed to pervade everything.
But this cannot be a sufficient explanation of omnipresent God.
Point is there is no way you can use the empirical to explain a non-empirical thing, this is the fallacy of equivocation.

Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 1:01 am
Why the mess? It is because the idea of God [illusory] is conjured by theists to deal with a psychological issue to deal with an inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

Why are you not considering this view as probable when in reality such a view had been practiced for thousands of years by non-theistic Eastern spirituality.
What are you saying? Hinduism is different than any western religion because western religion is dealing with different criteria. The concept of God existed in Pharaonic Theology and arose around the same time as the Vedas. It's hard to say exactly when the notion of God arose but it's suggested it's illustrated when housing turned from being round in nature (maternalistic, mother goddess, womb) to rectangular (concepts, mind, spiritual, patriarchal.) As I suggested, to conceive the whole is not easy and jumping to any conclusions simply robs the individual of discovery.
I was not referring to Hinduism which a theistic religion.
I was referring to Buddhism, Jainism and others which are non-theistic and do not has leading violent elements in their doctrines.

My point is this;
  • 1. The existential crisis [psychological] drove the majority to invent theistic religions with side effects of evil and violence.

    2. The same existential crisis [psychological] drove the minority to invent non-theistic religions without side effects of evil and violence, in addition these religions are more effective/optimal in resolving the existential crisis.
Why are you not considering this non-theistic view [2 above] as probable when in reality such a view had been practiced for thousands of years by non-theistic Eastern spirituality [Buddhism, Jainism, etc. - not-Hinduism].
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands » March 11th, 2018, 5:49 am

Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 3:06 am
jerlands wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 1:22 am
You're not even on the same board yet. Think of the Sun's effect on the earth. The sun is basically life's energy source. Everything grows from the energy of the sun so you might assume everything comes from the sun. So can we see the sun in a worm and then see the same sun in a cow?
Note there are bacteria which feed on sulfur in some deep seas and underground which do not depend on the Sun.
The sun's energy provides more than light to the earth. There's an interaction between the sun's gravitational force (slight but present,) it's plasma wind and what we think of as radiant energy all influence the earth.
Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 3:06 am
You can use the analogical example of God = energy which is supposed to pervade everything.
But this cannot be a sufficient explanation of omnipresent God.
Point is there is no way you can use the empirical to explain a non-empirical thing, this is the fallacy of equivocation.
As above so below. There are teachings that exist that reveal the order of creation and how all things relate to one another and from the initial cause. I've tried to relay what I'm able and you should have some notion of it but it seems you want to reject it as nothing.
Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 3:06 am
What are you saying? Hinduism is different than any western religion because western religion is dealing with different criteria. The concept of God existed in Pharaonic Theology and arose around the same time as the Vedas. It's hard to say exactly when the notion of God arose but it's suggested it's illustrated when housing turned from being round in nature (maternalistic, mother goddess, womb) to rectangular (concepts, mind, spiritual, patriarchal.) As I suggested, to conceive the whole is not easy and jumping to any conclusions simply robs the individual of discovery.
I was not referring to Hinduism which a theistic religion.
I was referring to Buddhism, Jainism and others which are non-theistic and do not has leading violent elements in their doctrines.

My point is this;
  • 1. The existential crisis [psychological] drove the majority to invent theistic religions with side effects of evil and violence.

    2. The same existential crisis [psychological] drove the minority to invent non-theistic religions without side effects of evil and violence, in addition these religions are more effective/optimal in resolving the existential crisis.
Why are you not considering this non-theistic view [2 above] as probable when in reality such a view had been practiced for thousands of years by non-theistic Eastern spirituality [Buddhism, Jainism, etc. - not-Hinduism].
The Judeo/Christian teaching did not arise out of some psychological crisis. The teaching is like a boat that carries us through a period of time. Put things in perspective. Out of Egypt we hear the words "go forth and populate the earth and the law was condensed and made transportable." Christ further condensed the law to two sentences. The purpose of the Bible was for the exodus and the Quran put a people not associated with the Exodus in perspective. The Exodus is the journey out of Egypt to the promised land. A very simple summation.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

Philosch
Posts: 427
Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Philosch » March 11th, 2018, 3:12 pm

Jerlands:

Your notion that human civilization's march forward to populate the earth as somehow a conscious choice based on Egyptian mythology or Egyptian civilization is odd and somewhat arbitrary. The fact remains that life in general spreads and tries to spread and increase in volume no matter what species you're looking at. This fact has it's roots not in any civilization but in the very nature of the DNA molecule. Humankind's march toward populating the earth started 3.5 billion years ago with the first life form. Homosapiens assimilated and/or annihilated Neanderthals as they spread in a very rapid process as a function of their larger brains.

In the same way the "need" for a god appears to be rooted in the evolution of the human psyche. That doesn't make god real, but it does describe a psychological need that arises out of the cognitive dissonance Spectrum referred to. This is fairly obvious to anyone who looks at the whole picture that science, psychology and comparative religion, mythology and even anthropology and archeology, paint. When taken together as a whole picture you can see this. You mention many times that we need to look at Egyptian history to understand the big picture and while one should be familiar with all of human history I don't believe it starts in Egypt. You've made a claim that Judeo-Christian beliefs don't arise out of a psychological crisis but that's not really what the point is. The original cognitive dissonance that's arises out of the birth of "self awareness" and mortality lead to a process of evolution of the human mind and psyche and that's what ultimately gives rise to the notion of the spiritual in all it's forms. That evolutionary process of the human mind will eventually lead to the transformation of the primitive spiritual view to a more sophisticated scientific and rational view of a healthy human psyche. It's already occurring now.

You should take your own advise and expand your knowledge base to other historical perspectives and a good place for you to start would be Joseph Campbell. His breadth of knowledge spanned all religions and his mastery of ancient languages gave him unparalleled perspective and understanding of the origin of all mythology.

User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands » March 11th, 2018, 4:05 pm

Philosch wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 3:12 pm
Jerlands:

Your notion that human civilization's march forward to populate the earth as somehow a conscious choice based on Egyptian mythology or Egyptian civilization is odd and somewhat arbitrary. The fact remains that life in general spreads and tries to spread and increase in volume no matter what species you're looking at. This fact has it's roots not in any civilization but in the very nature of the DNA molecule. Humankind's march toward populating the earth started 3.5 billion years ago with the first life form. Homosapiens assimilated and/or annihilated Neanderthals as they spread in a very rapid process as a function of their larger brains.

In the same way the "need" for a god appears to be rooted in the evolution of the human psyche. That doesn't make god real, but it does describe a psychological need that arises out of the cognitive dissonance Spectrum referred to. This is fairly obvious to anyone who looks at the whole picture that science, psychology and comparative religion, mythology and even anthropology and archeology, paint. When taken together as a whole picture you can see this. You mention many times that we need to look at Egyptian history to understand the big picture and while one should be familiar with all of human history I don't believe it starts in Egypt. You've made a claim that Judeo-Christian beliefs don't arise out of a psychological crisis but that's not really what the point is. The original cognitive dissonance that's arises out of the birth of "self awareness" and mortality lead to a process of evolution of the human mind and psyche and that's what ultimately gives rise to the notion of the spiritual in all it's forms. That evolutionary process of the human mind will eventually lead to the transformation of the primitive spiritual view to a more sophisticated scientific and rational view of a healthy human psyche. It's already occurring now.

You should take your own advise and expand your knowledge base to other historical perspectives and a good place for you to start would be Joseph Campbell. His breadth of knowledge spanned all religions and his mastery of ancient languages gave him unparalleled perspective and understanding of the origin of all mythology.
There is no species other than man that is not held within ecological check. The brain is one organ of Man, it isn't the seat of our intelligence nor is it the source of our intelligence. You can explain away things however you wish. I'm offering my view and I happen to see the view of God arising from man's imagination resulting from psychological necessity rather naive. You suggest to me I review Joseph Campbell whom you seem to have a connection with but I prefer other insight.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum » March 12th, 2018, 12:12 am

jerlands wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 5:49 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 3:06 am
I was not referring to Hinduism which a theistic religion.
I was referring to Buddhism, Jainism and others which are non-theistic and do not has leading violent elements in their doctrines.

My point is this;
  • 1. The existential crisis [psychological] drove the majority to invent theistic religions with side effects of evil and violence.

    2. The same existential crisis [psychological] drove the minority to invent non-theistic religions without side effects of evil and violence, in addition these religions are more effective/optimal in resolving the existential crisis.
Why are you not considering this non-theistic view [2 above] as probable when in reality such a view had been practiced for thousands of years by non-theistic Eastern spirituality [Buddhism, Jainism, etc. - not-Hinduism].
The Judeo/Christian teaching did not arise out of some psychological crisis. The teaching is like a boat that carries us through a period of time. Put things in perspective. Out of Egypt we hear the words "go forth and populate the earth and the law was condensed and made transportable." Christ further condensed the law to two sentences. The purpose of the Bible was for the exodus and the Quran put a people not associated with the Exodus in perspective. The Exodus is the journey out of Egypt to the promised land. A very simple summation.
My point is ALL religions arose out of a definite psychological crisis within ALL humans.

Theistic religions are ignorant and avoid of the inner workings of the human psychological factors and divert attention to a God.

There are already non-theistic religions who recognized the underlying issues related to a God is actually from their internal psychological mechanisms. This is why they focus on 'know thyself' and work on the psychological perspective to resolve the existential crisis.

I am asking why are you not directing yourself to 'know thyself' instead of looking at external variables like Egyptians, hermetics, etc. In this specific issue re God, you should understand your own self and its mechanism before trying to understand what is outside yourself.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands » March 12th, 2018, 2:20 am

Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 12:12 am
jerlands wrote:
March 11th, 2018, 5:49 am


The Judeo/Christian teaching did not arise out of some psychological crisis. The teaching is like a boat that carries us through a period of time. Put things in perspective. Out of Egypt we hear the words "go forth and populate the earth and the law was condensed and made transportable." Christ further condensed the law to two sentences. The purpose of the Bible was for the exodus and the Quran put a people not associated with the Exodus in perspective. The Exodus is the journey out of Egypt to the promised land. A very simple summation.
My point is ALL religions arose out of a definite psychological crisis within ALL humans.
This is speculation. Man has held various beliefs likely since humans developed cognition. These beliefs I see arising as natural progressive thought, associating those things outside of man with concepts man could see in himself. An example is Göbeklitepe in Anatolia where prior to agriculture hunter gatherers worked stone and built structures apparently for ceremonial use. Were there thoughts and emotions (psychological) formed in the associations? That I can't see not happening but I do not see it as a state of crisis but rather as a state of growth.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 12:12 am
Theistic religions are ignorant and avoid of the inner workings of the human psychological factors and divert attention to a God.
Again, this is your speculation. Man at one time had a very close relationship with nature. Possibly one so deep we fail today to recognize it. How they perceived their environment goes far beyond a dinner plate but gets into that introspective relationship other things hold with self.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 12:12 am
There are already non-theistic religions who recognized the underlying issues related to a God is actually from their internal psychological mechanisms. This is why they focus on 'know thyself' and work on the psychological perspective to resolve the existential crisis.

I am asking why are you not directing yourself to 'know thyself' instead of looking at external variables like Egyptians, hermetics, etc. In this specific issue re God, you should understand your own self and its mechanism before trying to understand what is outside yourself.
What do I find in Egyptian Theology or Hermeticism and how does that relate to introspection? Well, that's kinda personal but I was brought up Catholic and that teaching leads to introspection, examining self, motives, relationships etc., and all these notions I had gathered I later found more fully expressed in those teachings. Self examination is the basis for both teachings. As above so below.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum » March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am

jerlands wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:20 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 12:12 am
My point is ALL religions arose out of a definite psychological crisis within ALL humans.
This is speculation. Man has held various beliefs likely since humans developed cognition. These beliefs I see arising as natural progressive thought, associating those things outside of man with concepts man could see in himself. An example is Göbeklitepe in Anatolia where prior to agriculture hunter gatherers worked stone and built structures apparently for ceremonial use. Were there thoughts and emotions (psychological) formed in the associations? That I can't see not happening but I do not see it as a state of crisis but rather as a state of growth.
Note the very obvious.

Since humans developed cognition [millions of years ago] the first thing they are aware is humans die within a certain age and no one is immortal.

Don't you think whoever has observed death everywhere would have worried it can happen to them? even millions of years ago. Evidence of burial of the death is one sign of religion.

Natural catastrophe [earthquakes, droughts, floods, etc,] happened and they threatened the life of those involved and when they know they cannot do anything about the next one, what do you think they do? They will pray to some thing [deity, gods, God] more powerful and hope.
Humans has been building pyramids, elaborate tombs re the afterlife.

Don't you think those people who were exposed to the above fact of certain death and catastrophe did experience some kind of psychological crisis re fear, worries, anxieties. It is this psychological crisis that triggers humans to invent religions and gods and God.

Do you deny the above, i.e. did not happened in the past?

Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 12:12 am
Theistic religions are ignorant and avoid of the inner workings of the human psychological factors and divert attention to a God.
Again, this is your speculation. Man at one time had a very close relationship with nature. Possibly one so deep we fail today to recognize it. How they perceived their environment goes far beyond a dinner plate but gets into that introspective relationship other things hold with self.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 12:12 am
There are already non-theistic religions who recognized the underlying issues related to a God is actually from their internal psychological mechanisms. This is why they focus on 'know thyself' and work on the psychological perspective to resolve the existential crisis.

I am asking why are you not directing yourself to 'know thyself' instead of looking at external variables like Egyptians, hermetics, etc. In this specific issue re God, you should understand your own self and its mechanism before trying to understand what is outside yourself.
What do I find in Egyptian Theology or Hermeticism and how does that relate to introspection? Well, that's kinda personal but I was brought up Catholic and that teaching leads to introspection, examining self, motives, relationships etc., and all these notions I had gathered I later found more fully expressed in those teachings. Self examination is the basis for both teachings. As above so below.
If you have done self-examination why do you think your religious tendencies has nothing to do with any worry/anxiety [at least subliminally] of certain death?
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum » March 12th, 2018, 4:34 am

jerlands wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:39 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am

Note the very obvious.

Since humans developed cognition [millions of years ago] the first thing they are aware is humans die within a certain age and no one is immortal.

Don't you think whoever has observed death everywhere would have worried it can happen to them? even millions of years ago. Evidence of burial of the death is one sign of religion.
Some groups of man, Natufians, would bury the dead beneath their fire hearth, while other buried them beneath their beds, either way they were buried inside the dwelling and in both instances the skull was later removed from the grave and placed inside so it was seen. I'm not certain if they believed they could communicate with the dead or possibly they did communicate with the dead but that ritual is interesting to me. The act of burial and respect for the dead though goes back before the migrations out of Africa possibly only to protect the body from scavengers. The thing about death though is I don't know it was feared as you suggest but rather considered a passage as is indicated with burial goods.
You side stepped my question,

Don't you think whoever has observed death everywhere would have worried it can happen to them? even millions of years ago?

Re burial, it is related those buried with artifacts. Do you think that was to frightened the scavengers?
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
Natural catastrophe [earthquakes, droughts, floods, etc,] happened and they threatened the life of those involved and when they know they cannot do anything about the next one, what do you think they do? They will pray to some thing [deity, gods, God] more powerful and hope.
Humans has been building pyramids, elaborate tombs re the afterlife.
First to clear up this notion that the pyramids were built as tombs. As above so below. Everything in Egypt is considered to be a manifestation of a cosmic principle. Everything is a teaching. The pyramids can be understood by the crown they bear, the pyramidion or benben stone. They were expressions of manifestation from which man arose, similar to kephra (the dung beetle) which emerges from the buried egg in the soil.
There could be other reasons.
Do you discount the mummifications and pyramids has anything to do with the concern of the afterlife? Thus the link with ancient religions and the afterlife.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
Don't you think those people who were exposed to the above fact of certain death and catastrophe did experience some kind of psychological crisis re fear, worries, anxieties. It is this psychological crisis that triggers humans to invent religions and gods and God.

Do you deny the above, i.e. did not happened in the past?
Different people believed different things no doubt but in the case of Egypt, a catastrophe was viewed as an imbalance, a disharmony in the universe. They believed man could affect everything in nature (things we consider out of our control) by maintaining Ma'at (truth.)
Any catastrophic event is going to bring about a psychological response and some cultures would offer human sacrifices. The Hawaiians had Pele, the fire god of thunder, wind and volcanoes but really those elements are related because they all have this difference in potential energy as the driving factor (which really is true for anything that moves.} You summarize it was a catastrophe that necessitated the first god which may be true if you consider lightening a catastrophe. I don't know what early man held in his mind. You see the cave paintings from Europe and Eurasia and really have to wonder what they were expressing (I'm sure any conclusion could be drawn.)
It is a common view that the ancient people prayed to a higher power to save them from catastrophe and eternal life. This is an expression of their internal fears that translated to prayer to a deity, gods and God.
My point is the starting point is the psychological fears and existential crisis, not that there was a God then that pre-existed.

Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
If you have done self-examination why do you think your religious tendencies has nothing to do with any worry/anxiety [at least subliminally] of certain death?
It's not death I concern myself with but the importance is in life and establishing and maintaining truth. The correct perspective within myself about all things.

[/quote]In general the majority do not have a conscious fear of death because it has been suppressed.
But if you analysed your own internal self, the root cause is the existential crisis [a mater of fact] hidden within yourself that drive you to cling to theism as a psychological comforter.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands » March 12th, 2018, 4:39 am

Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
jerlands wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:20 am

This is speculation. Man has held various beliefs likely since humans developed cognition. These beliefs I see arising as natural progressive thought, associating those things outside of man with concepts man could see in himself. An example is Göbeklitepe in Anatolia where prior to agriculture hunter gatherers worked stone and built structures apparently for ceremonial use. Were there thoughts and emotions (psychological) formed in the associations? That I can't see not happening but I do not see it as a state of crisis but rather as a state of growth.
Note the very obvious.

Since humans developed cognition [millions of years ago] the first thing they are aware is humans die within a certain age and no one is immortal.

Don't you think whoever has observed death everywhere would have worried it can happen to them? even millions of years ago. Evidence of burial of the death is one sign of religion.
Some groups of man, Natufians, would bury the dead beneath their fire hearth, while other buried them beneath their beds, either way they were buried inside the dwelling and in both instances the skull was later removed from the grave and placed inside so it was seen. I'm not certain if they believed they could communicate with the dead or possibly they did communicate with the dead but that ritual is interesting to me. The act of burial and respect for the dead though goes back before the migrations out of Africa possibly only to protect the body from scavengers. The thing about death though is I don't know it was feared as you suggest but rather considered a passage as is indicated with burial goods.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
Natural catastrophe [earthquakes, droughts, floods, etc,] happened and they threatened the life of those involved and when they know they cannot do anything about the next one, what do you think they do? They will pray to some thing [deity, gods, God] more powerful and hope.
Humans has been building pyramids, elaborate tombs re the afterlife.
First to clear up this notion that the pyramids were built as tombs. As above so below. Everything in Egypt is considered to be a manifestation of a cosmic principle. Everything is a teaching. The pyramids can be understood by the crown they bear, the pyramidion or benben stone. They were expressions of manifestation from which man arose, similar to kephra (the dung beetle) which emerges from the buried egg in the soil.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
Don't you think those people who were exposed to the above fact of certain death and catastrophe did experience some kind of psychological crisis re fear, worries, anxieties. It is this psychological crisis that triggers humans to invent religions and gods and God.

Do you deny the above, i.e. did not happened in the past?
Different people believed different things no doubt but in the case of Egypt, a catastrophe was viewed as an imbalance, a disharmony in the universe. They believed man could affect everything in nature (things we consider out of our control) by maintaining Ma'at (truth.) Any catastrophic event is going to bring about a psychological response and some cultures would offer human sacrifices. The Hawaiians had Pele, the fire god of thunder, wind and volcanoes but really those elements are related because they all have this difference in potential energy as the driving factor (which really is true for anything that moves.} You summarize it was a catastrophe that necessitated the first god which may be true if you consider lightening a catastrophe. I don't know what early man held in his mind. You see the cave paintings from Europe and Eurasia and really have to wonder what they were expressing (I'm sure any conclusion could be drawn.)
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
Again, this is your speculation. Man at one time had a very close relationship with nature. Possibly one so deep we fail today to recognize it. How they perceived their environment goes far beyond a dinner plate but gets into that introspective relationship other things hold with self.


What do I find in Egyptian Theology or Hermeticism and how does that relate to introspection? Well, that's kinda personal but I was brought up Catholic and that teaching leads to introspection, examining self, motives, relationships etc., and all these notions I had gathered I later found more fully expressed in those teachings. Self examination is the basis for both teachings. As above so below.
If you have done self-examination why do you think your religious tendencies has nothing to do with any worry/anxiety [at least subliminally] of certain death?
It's not death I concern myself with but the importance is in life and establishing and maintaining truth. The correct perspective within myself about all things.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2952
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Proof of God

Post by Fanman » March 12th, 2018, 5:59 am

Spectrum:
Since humans developed cognition [millions of years ago] the first thing they are aware is humans die within a certain age and no one is immortal.
In general the majority do not have a conscious fear of death because it has been suppressed.
But if you analysed your own internal self, the root cause is the existential crisis [a mater of fact] hidden within yourself that drive you to cling to theism as a psychological comforter.
If you don't have a qualification or training in psychology which enables you to practice as a psychologist, attempts at psychoanalysis are speculative and are likely to be labelled as pseudo psychology – you can't really object to that description if you don't have any qualifications in that field. You are attempting the extremely broad psychoanalysis of all human beings dating back to our origins, and claiming that you've isolated the cause of all religious beliefs, which is of course highly speculative. As has been explained to you, existential crisis can be related / attributed to many human behaviours, but in saying that, as I'm not a psychologist and don't have a qualification in psychology, it is a speculative statement, not a certain reflection of the truth. So I think it is an error of judgement or logic on your part, to claim that you've established your claims re existential crisis as a matter of fact.

There could be any number of factors working together which cause someone to be a theist, your isolation of existential crisis as a root cause is something which can be falsified simply by a theist disagreeing with that conclusion and explaining a different “root cause” than you postulate, how could you prove the theist wrong? If you are going to insist that existential crisis is the root cause of theism despite theist's claims to the contrary based upon your ideas, you are only confirming your ideas and beliefs to yourself without having any evidence which supports that claim, not necessarily making a substantive claim about reality. I think that with any claim that cannot be verified or that is based upon our inferences, we have to accept the strong possibility that we could be wrong, but you've gone to the opposite end of the spectrum and are claiming that your ideas are a “matter of fact”. In this case, perhaps your overlap of psychology with philosophy is too extreme.

In many cases you refer to statistical evidence as a reference for supporting your claims. If statistical evidence showed that existential crisis was not a huge factor in why people are theists (note, that I believe it is a / one factor), would you acknowledge that evidence as an accurate reflection of theism or persist with your claim that existential crisis was the root cause of theism as a matter of fact?
Once a theist, now agnostic.

User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands » March 12th, 2018, 8:01 am

Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:34 am
jerlands wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:39 am

Some groups of man, Natufians, would bury the dead beneath their fire hearth, while other buried them beneath their beds, either way they were buried inside the dwelling and in both instances the skull was later removed from the grave and placed inside so it was seen. I'm not certain if they believed they could communicate with the dead or possibly they did communicate with the dead but that ritual is interesting to me. The act of burial and respect for the dead though goes back before the migrations out of Africa possibly only to protect the body from scavengers. The thing about death though is I don't know it was feared as you suggest but rather considered a passage as is indicated with burial goods.
You side stepped my question,

Don't you think whoever has observed death everywhere would have worried it can happen to them? even millions of years ago?
No, death has been an experience in life forever. Who doesn't fear death to some degree may be someone who has lost love for all things.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:34 am
Re burial, it is related those buried with artifacts. Do you think that was to frightened the scavengers?
Early artifacts were simple adornments but the Natufians placed large stone atop the chest.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:34 am
First to clear up this notion that the pyramids were built as tombs. As above so below. Everything in Egypt is considered to be a manifestation of a cosmic principle. Everything is a teaching. The pyramids can be understood by the crown they bear, the pyramidion or benben stone. They were expressions of manifestation from which man arose, similar to kephra (the dung beetle) which emerges from the buried egg in the soil.
There could be other reasons.
Do you discount the mummifications and pyramids has anything to do with the concern of the afterlife? Thus the link with ancient religions and the afterlife.
The afterlife was key to all Egyptian motivation. It was all about the future.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:34 am
Different people believed different things no doubt but in the case of Egypt, a catastrophe was viewed as an imbalance, a disharmony in the universe. They believed man could affect everything in nature (things we consider out of our control) by maintaining Ma'at (truth.)
Any catastrophic event is going to bring about a psychological response and some cultures would offer human sacrifices. The Hawaiians had Pele, the fire god of thunder, wind and volcanoes but really those elements are related because they all have this difference in potential energy as the driving factor (which really is true for anything that moves.} You summarize it was a catastrophe that necessitated the first god which may be true if you consider lightening a catastrophe. I don't know what early man held in his mind. You see the cave paintings from Europe and Eurasia and really have to wonder what they were expressing (I'm sure any conclusion could be drawn.)
It is a common view that the ancient people prayed to a higher power to save them from catastrophe and eternal life. This is an expression of their internal fears that translated to prayer to a deity, gods and God.
My point is the starting point is the psychological fears and existential crisis, not that there was a God then that pre-existed.
Man reacts out of situational awareness. I don't think the notion of God arose out of fear though the fear of God may have been present.
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:34 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 2:46 am
If you have done self-examination why do you think your religious tendencies has nothing to do with any worry/anxiety [at least subliminally] of certain death?
It's not death I concern myself with but the importance is in life and establishing and maintaining truth. The correct perspective within myself about all things.
In general the majority do not have a conscious fear of death because it has been suppressed.
But if you analysed your own internal self, the root cause is the existential crisis [a mater of fact] hidden within yourself that drive you to cling to theism as a psychological comforter.
I never said I don't have a fear of death. I said I don't have anxiety over it. I will die one day but I'd like to fulfill myself as much as possible.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum » March 12th, 2018, 11:04 pm

jerlands wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 8:01 am
Spectrum wrote:
March 12th, 2018, 4:34 am
In general the majority do not have a conscious fear of death because it has been suppressed.
But if you analysed your own internal self, the root cause is the existential crisis [a mater of fact] hidden within yourself that drive you to cling to theism as a psychological comforter.
I never said I don't have a fear of death. I said I don't have anxiety over it. I will die one day but I'd like to fulfill myself as much as possible.
ALL [with rare exceptions] humans are programmed not to fear mortality in their daily life. So I don't expect you to fear mortality consciously. But you ought to 'know thyself' re what is going on with your subconscious re the knowledge of the certainty of mortality. Note the subconscious is 90% critical to one's life while the conscious is only 10%.

Humans are programmed to have terrible fears over the threat of premature death, i.e. dying before due time.
If anyone suspect someone is going to kill him/her now, surely you will have death related anxiety [subconsciously and consciously] till you resolve the problem.

For those who are very concern over their health and thus strive to eat healthy food, take loads of supplement, exercise regularly, - this is driven by the premature-death anxiety at the subliminal level. They will think they just want to be healthy, but they are not aware what is driving them to be healthy is the premature-death anxiety pulsing in the subconscious and subliminal level.

It is the same with theism. Theists believed in a God which they think they are doing for various reasons [social, belongingess, ???] but they are unaware what their subconscious mind is doing, i.e. soothing the existential angst driven by an existential crisis re the certainty of mortality.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Post Reply