User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 97

  1. #11
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    Thank you SW, I prefer ignosticism. Your point is well taken though.
    Fair enough.

    P.S.,

    So the truth is out...you're really an INTJ! I suspected you might not be ENTJ when I read your post on that thread about pointing out the ways in which you don't fit your type mold...and you sounded pretty introverted to me.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  2. #12
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Alienated Feeling.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post

    So the truth is out...you're really an INTJ! I suspected you might not be ENTJ when I read your post on that thread about pointing out the ways in which you don't fit your type mold...and you sounded pretty introverted to me.

    The secret is out, drat! Does this mean my membership in the cool kids' club is going to be revoked?

  4. #14
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    ^ Nah, I like most INTJs better than their E counterparts anyway.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Phew! I left you something very E in the song dedications btw. Perhaps that will help me get some cred.

  6. #16
    Member ADISCIPLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    Don't assume I'm making that mistake. The point is that there's still nothing there. If god is just existence, or the sum total of everything, the term itself has no independent meaning and is, therefore, essentially useless. This is why philosophers have such an easy time making short work of these kinds of explanations.
    What comes to mind when thinking about life, especially conscious life, there must be a greater order. To assume that God is in everything or is just an existence is not really meaningless because there are consequences for action. With the idea of God being in all things life than there is a specific purpose or order to follow, obstructing this order would be to meddle with the order of life, in general. Do you see how humans are distinct by all measure in building what is around us, to determine success above biological success (i.e. reproduction). Do the birds in the sky feel the need to question such existence? Do the trees? The Sky? Only mankind has the function of accomplishing these sorts. Therefore we are the only lifeform that voluntarily disobeys the order in place. Because of this we build nations against one another, people against people, we take pills and eat bad foods, we build towers and transportation, We kill in conquer for wants far outside our needs. But to survive we must build shelter, kill food, make clothing, and have clean water. It is obvious to me that with the idea of God in everything states that naturally life will run its course and in the long term cleanse itself of any undoing. The thought isn't meaningless, because our existence would depend on it.

  7. #17
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    If you took the whole universe - including everything, and I mean everything, matter, energy, antimatter, everything in any dimension or timeframe and somehow managed to sum it all up (although that's really impossible) whether it be on the physical or another plane, that'd be God.

    But it's not one thing - it's simply everything. And it's not a being (physical or otherwise). It just is. And interestingly enough if you look at all religious traditions, they basically say the same thing in different words.

    God is simply a word denoted to the summation of all space, time, and matter and the lack of all three combined. It is and is not.

    That's why you can't prove or disprove it.
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ADISCIPLE View Post
    What comes to mind when thinking about life, especially conscious life, there must be a greater order. To assume that God is in everything or is just an existence is not really meaningless because there are consequences for action. With the idea of God being in all things life than there is a specific purpose or order to follow, obstructing this order would be to meddle with the order of life, in general. Do you see how humans are distinct by all measure in building what is around us, to determine success above biological success (i.e. reproduction). Do the birds in the sky feel the need to question such existence? Do the trees? The Sky? Only mankind has the function of accomplishing these sorts. Therefore we are the only lifeform that voluntarily disobeys the order in place. Because of this we build nations against one another, people against people, we take pills and eat bad foods, we build towers and transportation, We kill in conquer for wants far outside our needs. But to survive we must build shelter, kill food, make clothing, and have clean water. It is obvious to me that with the idea of God in everything states that naturally life will run its course and in the long term cleanse itself of any undoing. The thought isn't meaningless, because our existence would depend on it.
    So I'm not exactly clear on what god designates here. Is this some form of the teleological argument? I'm having a little trouble finding the "god" in this passage. Is god in the stuff of life or is god the stuff of life? Is it purpose? If so, how do you know you're evaluating it correctly?

    Also how do you know that our "disobedience" isn't a part of the order? In evolutionary terms, it seems obvious that this supposed disobedience has worked quite well for us.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little Linguist View Post
    If you took the whole universe - including everything, and I mean everything, matter, energy, antimatter, everything in any dimension or timeframe and somehow managed to sum it all up (although that's really impossible) whether it be on the physical or another plane, that'd be God.
    Hmmm, I seem to be going in circles here. Why is 'everything' God? Why isn't 'everything' just everything?

  10. #20
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Because the essence of god incorporates everything and nothing. That's why it's not everything.

    In essence, God is our limited way of envisioning all there is and all there is not on a physical plane with a physical body and a physical mind.
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

Similar Threads

  1. What is the significance of this dream, do you suppose?
    By Oberon in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-23-2010, 07:31 PM
  2. Who, or what, is this "God"?
    By Iriohm in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 08-04-2010, 09:09 PM
  3. What is the god of this world?
    By Risen in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07-23-2010, 01:43 AM
  4. [INTP] What is this fun you speak of?
    By Cerpin_Taxt in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-10-2008, 12:46 PM
  5. What is this indicative of?
    By Ezra in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-05-2008, 11:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO