Philosophy are you made of philo or are you a sophist?
#1
Posted 03 April 2008 - 03:34 AM
I myself lean towards existentialism which is generally an athiest, individualist deal. We generally believe that god, laws, morality etc are not foreign written in stone concepts but are created by existence and the individual.
And here's a good question. Someone said that faith is not wanting to know the truth. Any thoughts?
This statement is interesting to me because it leaves the meaning of Truth open. If one has faith that means certainty of something without clear evidence. We must thus assume that the truth is uncertainty and the statement is saying that faith is a comfort against uncertainty.
For instance, none of us are certain to live out the day tomorrow, but those with faith can say they will go to heaven should they die, thus adding certainty to uncertainty(truth). However, interestingly enough in my view, Truth does not preclude the existence of God or so forth, because it simply demands an acceptance of uncertainty, and faith in nihilism or atheism is still faith.
Quote
#2
Posted 03 April 2008 - 10:48 AM
As far as life philosophies go, I think I kind of have my own, that is a blend of many well-known philosophies mixed in with personal experience.
One thing I like to experiment with though, is the Jungian philosophy of a shared subconsciousness. It explains a lot of the weird things about the world, and even explains some weird things about myself. Also it would just be awesome to one day be able to communicate to each other through dreams or something. I try to manipulate my dreams a lot, and sometimes I find myself in a dream that seems to be someone else's. I'm not saying it is someone else's dream, it's just a neat concept. What if you could travel into other people's dreams? With enough study into this "shared subconscious," could that kind of thing be possible?
I'm not saying I'm a hardcore believer in this stuff, but I do like to experiment with it and I like the idea.
#3
Posted 03 April 2008 - 11:55 AM
That is one badass baby.
#4
Posted 07 April 2008 - 03:06 AM
Casual- Maybe you could share with us an example of such an experience, if not one of yours at least a made up example. I will sometimes give thanks to a higher power when something unexpectedly good happens, or grumble when something bad happens. Perhaps this is a way of shirking my own responsibility, but then why do we thank god when good things happen as often as when bad things happen?
And since no one else is joining in on this one, here's another question:
Does existence (IE: The universe) precede perception (IE sentient beings) Or is it merely a product of some sentient being either human or divine? Kind of the tree falls in the woods deal.
My answer would have to be affirmative. I think that without beings to percieve, things simply don't matter, and losing their gravity and bearing they may as well cease to be. But this goes further. Could such an idea thus justify the idea of a god? Yes, perhaps, but the core of it is that existence, consciousness, is the great building block of the universe and no one consciousness could come before. I find it absurd that God had power to create both the universe and consciousnesses, the consciousness which, thus percieving him and his universe, justified his existence. It's a bit of a logical loop really.
It is more likely to me that the consciousness forces of all of us simply existed, and that needing something to percieve so as to judge and quantify that existence, they somehow willed the universe into being. And perhaps willed god into being. It was nietzche I think who said that if God didnt exist we would have to create him.
Quote
#5
Posted 07 April 2008 - 08:42 AM
I for one believe God to be the force that started everything, if that even exists. Technically, there could be no beginning, just like there could be no end. God for me doesn't necessarily have to be sentient or purposeful, and I believe that makes more sense. God is the chaos, the fire starter, the chances in every moment and existence is simply the outcome. I don't know if this sort of belief is filed under any sort of philosophy, but maybe someone else can tell me if there is one.
By this standard, I still appreciate life. I think I got a lucky hand, even if it's a just a pair of eights on a cosmic scale. Sometimes I wonder if there really is a big dude in the sky, ready to whisk me off to a happy place or sit me next to a lake of fire. Either way, the ability to think and perceive these notions is pretty cool.
I think I get what J m said. I find the logic interesting. But I wonder about justification of the universe through perception. What force creates the need for justification? Is it God himself? That would definitely make the three inseparable.
Hope I didn't ramble on too much. I'm not much of a debate forum type.
#6
Posted 07 April 2008 - 12:17 PM
I think the universe would exist whether we were here to perceive it or not. If you put a box in a sealed room and no one observes it, it still exists. And the only thing I've heard contrary to that is God is still perceiving it, which requires a deity to work in the first place, which is still up in the air. It also places a good bit of arrogance on our perceptions, especially when you consider that we're smaller than the atoms of grains of sand on a beach in the cosmic scale.
I'm an agnostic existentialist with some Buddhist and Discordian tendencies.
#7
Posted 07 April 2008 - 09:20 PM
So, agree with reiner on the tree/forest thing.
As for deities as agents of creation, I see thenm evidence that mankind created those stories. I don't see the evidence of the deities themselves. Therefore I believe the stories are fiction created by folks to fill the gaps of human knowledge.
#8
Posted 07 April 2008 - 09:49 PM
You're right on in your ideas of depersonifying god if you ask me. I think God is a force within all of us, and not necessarily one single being in the clouds.
It's us of course. We think therefore we are as they say. That brings up the question of why we need to justify our existence and give it form at all. That's a question I havent quite gotten my head around yet but the simple answer is that questions like that are an integral part of being human and how we answer them defines us.
Also, yeah, ramble on. Thats kinda what philosophy and debate are about.
Pope-
Nonsense. If the universe didnt have to, and doesnt, have to follow the law of cause and effect, than why do any of us? Every action should have an equal and opposite reaction whether its the first action or the last. For the universe to come to exist something had to will it to form, and for it to be percieved there had to be something to percieve it.
It still exists because you know it exists, or some consciousness at some point is aware of it, even perhaps after death. The theory that existence would continue without the collective human consciousness is quite meaningless speculation. It is entirely possible that our perceptions and will are all that hold reality together in the first place. I think the idea that we are unimportant on a universal scale takes away from the value and, moreover, the impact of life. The two to me are wholly different things though.
Quote
#10
Posted 09 April 2008 - 04:02 PM
To me this whole tree-in-forest/box-in-room argument implies a fundamental belief in non-tangible aspects of the human nature; a spirit or soul, if you will. I truly fail to see how, say, light triggering reactions in the human eye and brain could have created the light in the first place; it would seem that some unknown force must be responsible, which is leading us back to deist concepts. Unless of course we assume that the generally accepted rules of cause and effect, that the cause must precede the effect, don't apply, but that's getting into physics that I don't know.
The problem, at least for me, is that saying "circular logic" has always seemed to me like saying "shining light," or something to that effect. At some point, in all logical processes, an assumption must be made about something. That assumption, and nothing else, is what colours a philosophical debate.
I'm not really trying to answer any specific argument with this, just rambling.
#11
Posted 10 April 2008 - 07:49 PM
Whoops better late than never I always say, I suppose a good example for most people would be the day you met someone important in your life that shaped many of the days that followed. Sometimes I wonder what my life would be like if I had never met some of the people that matter to me, what if I had decided to stay in bed that day and watch crappy daytime TV? Was I "fated" to meet these people or do things really just happen? To be honest I try not to deal too much in "what if's" because that's the first step on the path to crazy.
P.S. I too find myself praising or cursing god at odd moments despite not believing in him, I've always put it down to a force of habit form a Christian childhood. Either that or because people on TV do it.
That is one badass baby.
#12
Posted 10 April 2008 - 11:28 PM
Also: The Chefelf.com Lord of the Rings | RoBUTZ (a primative webcomic) | KOTOR 1 NPC profiles |
Music: HYPOID (industrial rock) | Spectrox Toxemia (Death Metal) | Cannibalingus (80s style thrash metal) | Wasabi Nose Bleed (Exp.Techno) | DeadfeeD (Exp.Ambient) |||(more to come)
#14
Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:24 PM
#15
Posted 13 April 2008 - 10:52 PM
Also: The Chefelf.com Lord of the Rings | RoBUTZ (a primative webcomic) | KOTOR 1 NPC profiles |
Music: HYPOID (industrial rock) | Spectrox Toxemia (Death Metal) | Cannibalingus (80s style thrash metal) | Wasabi Nose Bleed (Exp.Techno) | DeadfeeD (Exp.Ambient) |||(more to come)