Rationalizing the existence of God

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Combo, Sep 14, 2013.

  1. Combo Registered Member

    Messages:
    20
    Overlooking the Linnaean influence which was prevalent at the time (early 20th century), here is an interesting quotation: -


    So let me ask: is atheism akin to a plant denying the existence of animals on the basis that it lacks the faculties to perceive and to comprehend them?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,719
    Unless you can show that the a priori assumption of God's existence is sound then you are merely begging the question of God's existence.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Combo Registered Member

    Messages:
    20
    Nature reveals endless examples of life which are incapable of comprehending other forms of life. Is it not anthropocentric and hubristic for atheism to declare man the exception: i.e. that there is no higher existence that man can not comprehend?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. geeser Atheism:is non-prophet making Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,305
    Yes it would if that is what atheists did.
    That is wrong! Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a deity, it doesn't declare man anything. Technically anything that has no belief in a deity is atheist, no matter how stupid that may sound.
    There is not one iota of unequivocal evidence that any God exists. a God cannot explain all that exists because God itself cannot be explained. This claim just gratuitously swaps one mystery for another. It is effectively an appeal to magic. Religious faith is generally indistinguishable from gullibility. Trust and faith, as human concepts, are normally based on experience and reason. Religious faith is necessarily based on belief in unproven and unknowable things. A god or anything that exists outside the realm of natural reality is necessarily unknowable, unintelligible and incoherent. Atheists do not invoke any concept of god to explain any phenomenon or solve any philosophical conundrum, and they see no compelling reason too. Atheist do not profess to have the truth, it is simply that it is unreasonable, without further qualifying evidence. An atheist is simply someone who does not posit a god-concept to explain anything or solve any problem. An atheist has no belief in god/gods, he also has no belief in fairies and elves etc. That’s not to say that any of these things couldn't exist, it is just simply unreasonable to have a belief in such things.
     
  8. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,290
    Undeniable logic here, folks. A rock cannot comprehend a plant, therefore God exists.
     
  9. Combo Registered Member

    Messages:
    20
    More like:
    A plant is incomprehensible to a rock, however the inability of a rock to comprehend the plant does not disprove the existence of the plant.
    An animal is incomprehensible to a plant, however the inability of a plant to comprehend the animal does not disprove the existence of the animal.
    [...]
    God is incomprehensible to man, however the inability of man to comprehend God does not disprove the existence of God.
     
  10. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,603
    I agree, that the inability of man to comprehend 'a god' does not disprove his existence. But, I don't believe that is the reason people are atheists. Atheism is a choice to not believe in that which has no evidence of existence, a deity. Atheism in a very general sense, is the rejection of the idea of a diety, or the supernatural. Less generalized, atheism states that there simply are no deities. The examples above, I don't believe are good analogies, because it doesn't come into play as to why someone believes in God, and why someone does not. (I believe in God, but that's my two cents worth)
     
  11. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,290
    And, none of that has anything to do anything. It is entirely irrelevant.

    We can say the same thing about leprechauns. Entirely irrelevant. You got nothing here but fallacies, dude.
     
  12. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,127
    So...you seem to base the question in your OP partially on the belief that "The mineral, vegetable, and animal realms are each incapable of understanding any creation beyond their own."

    Combo, so if there is no comprehension - on any level - of animals by plants, why do so many plants rely so heavily on animals and insects for reproduction and propagation?

    Also if there is no comprehension - on any level - of plants by animals, why do animals know where to look for and what parts of which plants will provide nourishment and conversely which are toxic?

    Combo, have you ever even heard of a "Symbiotic Relationship"? Could a "Symbiotic Relationship" come about with a total lack of "comprehension" on any level? Whether or not Humans could understand or conceive of it is totally irrelevant.

    At any rate, were not all Theologies or Religions and "gods" more or less conceived of and began by the philosophical wondering of human beings?
    Isn't a Theist just a person who believes in one of those Theologies?

    Atheism, from my understanding, is the choice of some human beings not to believe in Theisms, or the manufactured beliefs of just some other human beings.

    An Atheist still comprehends the existence of and can also believe in a greater meaning to life.

    And BTW , Combo, minerals - maybe, just maybe, their level of comprehension and understanding is so far above ours, and they find us so uninteresting that some of them would, possibly, just prefer that we take them for Granite!
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    14,035
    If one were to rationalize god , one would think that god is rational

    I have not found god to be rational
     
  14. Combo Registered Member

    Messages:
    20
    Here is another quotation from the same author on this theme: -

    From this perspective, observations of nature lead man to the possibility that he, in turn, may occupy a plane lower than another he is incapable of comprehending. Agnosticism accepts this possibility, whereas atheism rejects it.
     
  15. river

    Messages:
    14,035
    The only way that Humanity can get to a higher plane , is the thinking that Humanity will reach it

    Lets face it , any advanced being has reached this advanced development , they all have
     
  16. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,603
    Not sure I've ever heard this stated quite like this, very interesting!
     
  17. river

    Messages:
    14,035
    In what way ?
     
  18. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,603
    That an agnostic dares to stay open to the possibility of some"thing" being higher than him/her, while an atheist doesn't.
    I've never judged anyone's views in this regard, but it's just interesting "how" that was stated. Is it bothersome or disconcerting for someone who disbelieves in a deity, to fathom a "being" higher than he? That statement above seems to subtly infer that.
     
  19. river

    Messages:
    14,035
    Oh I know there is a being(s) with greater knowledge than Humanity has privy too , at least generally

    Investigations into the spectrum of many aspects of experiences leaves no doubt

    A deity to show respect to , a deity that has Humanity interests foremost , I have found , Gnosticism

    But even that thinking , that metaphysics , is not good enough for me

    What I want and strive for is a solid based philosophy , that puts Humanity First , anything less is unacceptable , for infinity
     
  20. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    What unacceptable to you? That's pretty arrogant isn't it to think you are so important in the scheme of things. Why do feel the way you do?
     
  21. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,603
    So, if you were to lean towards a particular spiritual persuasion if you will...it would be Gnosticism?
    I learn something new everyday on here.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    You say "that's not good enough for me." What do you mean?
    You don't think that spirituality places humanity first? I do.

    (Not talking religion, but just believing in a "higher power.")
     
  22. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Jesus being the link between humanity and God, so I suppose humanity is important, but is it first?
    So if I had to answer what else would come first? There seems to be this epic battle in the theologies between good and Evil. So maybe Righteousness and Good is more important than Humanity. I'm not saying I know but I'm interested to know why River made it essential.
     
  23. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,603
    Oh, definitely it's about humanity! We have evolved into humans, right? That was no mistake.
    So, going with that, I believe that God seeks the very best for his creation, for humanity.
    But, we too must seek the very best. I've often felt God's best, is better than "my" best.
    It might not be a popular idea here, but it is how I see things.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page