INTP and hating religion.

[Robert165]

This is what I mean: Theory of Forms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

no, seriously, whats the dual nature of a blade of grass
answer: there is none
there is no opposite or complimentary nature to grass
garss is just grass
it has no counterpart

 

[Synarch]

no, seriously, whats the dual nature of a blade of grass
answer: there is none
there is no opposite or complimentary nature to grass
garss is just grass
it has no counterpart

The idea of grass that exists in your mind. The idea of grass that would exist even if all human life and culture were obliterated.

 

[Robert165]

Does Romantic love exist? Is Love just a chemical transmission when you want to fuck someone's brains out?

maybe, maybe not. this is an area ripe with subjective process and speculation or opinon.

 

[Robert165]

The idea of grass that exists in your mind. The idea of grass that would exist even if all human life and culture were obliterated.

not my point
my point is an arguemnt aginst duality
if you claim duality is a valid precept
all i have to do is find some examples of
things that have no duality

 

[Synarch]

maybe, maybe not. this is an area ripe with subjective process and speculation or opinon.

Maybe. Maybe not.

This is my entire point. Knowledge and certainty is always suspect. Faith is all about choosing to accept what you can never know. Life is full of such articles of faith.

 

[Synarch]

not my point
my point is an arguemnt aginst duality
if you claim duality is a valid precept
all i have to do is find some examples of
things that have no duality

And all I have to do is find examples of the opposite!

 

[Robert165]

Maybe. Maybe not.

This is my entire point. Knowledge and certainty is always suspect. Faith is all about choosing to accept what you can never know. Life is full of such articles of faith.

no its not
all the things you say i have faith in i have
real life expereince that tells me the
degree to which its resonable
to get the same result again

 

[Synarch]

no its not
all the things you say i have faith in i have
real life expereince that tells me the
degree to which its resonable
to get the same result again

What do you believe that you can never prove? I'm sure there are many such things.

 

[Robert165]

And all I have to do is find examples of the opposite!

no, a blade of grass proves that the "dual nature" of the universe is nothing mroe than philsophical smoke and mirrors.

 

[Robert165]

What do you believe that you can never prove? I'm sure there are many such things.

i have "faith" in doctors and elevators but I know that neither one of them is infallibale.

 

[onemoretime]

I think of things like this:

Our brains are composed of networks of neurons and our thoughts are chemical interchanges in some fashion inside our brain. Everything we are and experience takes place inside our brains and yet you would be hard pressed to capture a consciousness simply by analyzing the physical structures. In a real way, even though consciousness is detectable and perceivable in some way, it also lacks reality. Just as a Word can exist as an idea held in our collective minds and yet not exist. Ideas exist and exert power in the physical world. Is it possible a god-like consciousness exists as a pattern that emanates in some fashion within the structure of reality much like a thought or idea? To me, while it is tied to the physical world it is also highly metaphysical.

I guess this all goes back to Platonic duality. Idealism.

Yeah, can't say I'm a huge fan of Plato, to be honest. Call me a cynic, but really, I generally understand ideas ("memes") to only self-propagate as far as they coincide with that other means of self-propagation, namely, genetics.

While we do not fully understand consciousness, there is no reason to assume it is anything other than a natural phenomenon.

 

[Ginkgo]

i have "faith" in doctors and elevators but I know that neither one of them is infallibale.

There is an amount to be gained from having even a speck of doubt in doctors and elevators. There is also an amount to be gained from having faith in them. When the latter outweighs the former, you make an investment.

The question in the context of the OP is: Do you invest in this life, or the next? The religious individual finds that he may invest in both by having faith in God; for the amount sacrificed is minimal in comparison the amount gained.

 

[Robert165]

There is an amount to be gained from having even a speck of doubt in doctors and elevators. There is also an amount to be gained from having faith in them. When the latter outweighs the former, you make an investment.

The question in the context of the OP is: Do you invest in this life, or the next? The religious individual finds that he may invest in both by having faith in God; for the amount sacrificed is minimal in comparison the amount gained.

ah but even now you speak of religious people as if the are more advanced! when its quite the opposite. it's insecurity that leads people to cling to things which have no proof.

 

[Ginkgo]

ah but even now you speak of religious people as if the are more advanced! whenits quite the opposite. it's insecurity that leads people to cling to things which have no proof.

It's also insecurity that leads people to doubt; for they belief that you can "prove" a thing. Nothing in the universe can be proven but one's self. When one looks outside one's self, one may find God.

The investment in the self and the self's abilities is an investment in walking on a burning tight-rope. Because God is infallible, he is the only investment worth making.

EDIT: It is for this reason that Jesus was scorned. He claimed to be that which cannot be - A man-God. Once he "proved" that He was, people amassed faith, but even then there were doubters who confided in themselves.

 

[Robert165]

It's also insecurity that leads people to doubt; for they belief that you can "prove" a thing.

no, its rationality that leads to doubt

Nothing in the universe can be proven but one's self. When one looks outside one's self, one may find God.

according to those standards you cant even prove yourself

The investment in the self and the self's abilities is an investment in walking on a burning tight-rope. Because God is infallible, he is the only investment worth making.

which god though?

EDIT: It is for this reason that Jesus was scorned. He claimed to be that which cannot be - A man-God. Once he "proved" that He was, people amassed faith, but even then there were doubters who confided in themselves.

you have a curious defintion of the word proof.

 

[Ginkgo]

no, its rationality that leads to doubt

When a person relies solely on ration, they become insecure - without faith. Hence, God bears faith; for he knows every corner of everything.

according to those standards you cant even prove yourself

I can only prove my existence to myself. My abilities are detached from my existence, which are quite inadequate.

which god though?

The Creator.

you have a curious defintion of the word proof.

My definition of "prove" is to remove all doubt from knowing.

 

[Robert165]

When a person relies solely on ration, they become insecure - without faith.

well first of all i dont know any human thats completly rational, but you've not proven that the more rational a person is the more insecure they are.

I can only prove my existence to myself. My abilities are detached from my existence, which are quite inadequate.

no, see, you can't prove yourself to yourslef. it could all be an illusion. and if you thought your were real, and you were an illusion, you'd be wrong, and the conclusion you'd drawn would be wrong.

The Creator.

meaningless, ambiguous title

My definition of "prove" is to remove all doubt from knowing.

well thats not what the legal or scientific defintion of prove

 

[Ginkgo]

well first of all i dont know any human thats completly rational, but you've not proven that the more rational a person is the more insecure they are.

The more rational person believes he can progress by gathering proof.

no, see, you can't prove yourself to yourslef. it could all be an illusion. and if you thought your were real, and you were an illusion, you'd be wrong, and the conclusion you'd drawn would be wrong.

You know that you are thinking. Therefore, you know that you are (in some form or another).

meaningless, ambiguous title

Only to you. I do not believe that you or anyone else is superior to me; faith or lack there of. Though, we may be materialistically separate; we are equal in God's eyes.

well thats not what the legal or scientific defintion of prove

Now you're just gratuitously disagreeing with me. I have an idea! Dirt is dirt. Feel free to retort.

 

[Robert165]

The more rational person believes he can progress by gathering proof.

well, in intellectual realms, its the only way to make progress

You know that you are thinking. Therefore, you know that you are (in some form or another).

no, if you thought you were real but you were an illusion you'd have the wrong understanding of reality and the "proof" you had would be false proof.

Only to you. I do not believe that you or anyone else is superior to me; faith or lack there of. Though, we may be materialistically separate; we are equal in God's eyes.

I don't really care how I look in your god's eyes. If he's going to send me to hell, that matters. Thinking well of me while I suffer doesnt do me any good.

 

[Ginkgo]

well, in intellectual realms, its the only way to make progress

Proof is fallible in the first place; so progress may be quite static. Maybe.

no, if you thought you were real but you were an illusion you'd have the wrong understanding of reality and the "proof" you had would be false proof.

Cogito ergo sum.

I don't really care how I look in your god's eyes. If he's going to send me to hell, that matters. Thinking well of me while I suffer doesnt do me any good.

The concept of hell has already been addressed.