Is self-delusion possible?

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1168
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Is self-delusion possible?

Post by Newme » August 3rd, 2018, 12:54 am

Spectrum wrote:
July 15th, 2018, 12:40 am
Newme wrote:
July 13th, 2018, 2:56 pm
Spectrum,
Of the almost 1,000 biblical words to describe God, the 100 Islamic interpretations of God (one being no words can truly describe), and the many other religious and individual definitions of God, which one do you cling to to make it easier to deny? ;)
You are lost on the principles of the theistic God.
Re God or anything there is the view of 'substance versus forms.'
Whatever the infinite of forms there is only one substance or essence to God.
Due to the limitation of words, God can only be best and ultimately described in the negative.
The ultimate definition of God has to be the ontological God, i.e.
"God is being than which no greater can be idealized"

As I had argued the ultimate ontological God is an impossibility to be real.

The only reason why the idea of a God [by default is ontological] emerged is because of the existential psychological impulses.
Why do you deny these psychological impulses that drive you to be theistic?
If you make an effort to understand these primal theistic impulses you will understand [not necessary give up] why you need to cling to a God.
Ha ha! Spectrum, my rock-ribbed friend, you jump to conclusions about me. You want to box me in - slap a label on me so I’m easier for you to deal with? So while you’re telling me about me - what form of Theism do I believe in? Maybe you know me more than I do, but I don’t buy into any one theology or religion. I deem Christianity as warped into deifying a personification of pain body by human sacrifice scapegoat. But I see positive aspects and symbolism in it and other religions.

First you claimed God can only be defined by what God is not, but then you assert, “The ultimate definition of God has to be the ontological God.”
What do you mean by “God is being than which no greater can be idealized
As I had argued the ultimate ontological God is an impossibility to be real”?
Are you suggesting God as the highest GOoD imagined but never realized?

What’s funny is that unknowingly you are supporting what Buddha and Jesus taught - that the experience of God/Buddha (whatever word you prefer) is within you. Where else would it be? I think with you and most Atheists - the problem is semantics. You believe and have faith in things that are not proven & you have ultimate concerns that you worship/prioritize - but you just don’t label it God.

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1168
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Is self-delusion possible?

Post by Newme » August 3rd, 2018, 1:23 am

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
July 16th, 2018, 5:10 pm
If I am agnostic about dark matter, must I know what is would be made of exactly if it were to exist?
No, but you’d at least define it as “(in some cosmological theories) nonluminous material that is postulated to exist in space and that could take any of several forms including weakly interacting particles (cold dark matter) or high-energy randomly moving particles created soon after the Big Bang (hot dark matter).”

God is a much more subjective term and is defined (in part) as other subjective term like truth, spirit and love. I’d say I’m (& most are) agnostic about some ascribed details of God, but I believe that God is in part, love, spirit and truth. And when I live as if I believe that, I tend to live better than if I didn’t.

User avatar
Frewah
Posts: 45
Joined: September 30th, 2018, 3:30 pm

Re: Is self-delusion possible?

Post by Frewah » October 31st, 2018, 7:22 pm

People certainly fool themselves but I don’t think they have any wish todo so. If you google ”common logical fallacies”, you will some 15 common ones. I have noticed one fallacy that I think hasn’t been covered.

Suppose you want to buy a car but find it very difficult to understand what cars are good and what qualities really matter to you. The more people you ask, the more confused you get. But you do understand people, at least you have opinions about people. So, instead of examing the car, you examine the seller and buy a car from the seller that you identify with. Maybe you don’t trust white-collar people so you buy from a blue-collar person.

The fallacy is that the perceived qualities that the seller has are not inherited by the car they sell. The nicest people can sell you the worst lemons, even worse than the cars in a scrapyard except for those that have been in an accident. The opposite is also true, you can buy a great car from a positively disgusting person.

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1168
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Is self-delusion possible?

Post by Newme » November 10th, 2018, 9:48 pm

Frewah,
Some logical fallacies are also cognitive distortions. Assuming something is related to the person selling it may be partially jumping to conclusions, all-or-nothing thinking and over generalizing.

It seems that the most common one that trips people up is emotional reasoning (or appeal to emotion). For one thing, emotion affects physiology. When feeling extreme anger, the brain doesn’t think rationally.

Post Reply