[INTP] INTP and GOD

[Craft]

I think a lot of personal growth stems from realizing that basic truth.
(That we personally are not the reason the universe exists.)

Ya can't figure out who you are and what you can be and do and give until you accept what you're not.

An individual could be the sole reason why the universe exists. It is, after all, their perception and their reality.

Why wouldn't you believe in dragons?

What specific dragon exactly? One that's currently beside me?

There's maybe a different "space" that allows their existence as believable.

 

[Ozzy26]

You know, there are plenty of fictional stories involving dragons. He might be on to something here.

 

[olly_olly]

Well something would have to pop into existence or nothing would ever have existed ever.

But as it happens, black holes have 0 volume.

well I guess the only logical thing to say then is that everything always existed.
Even if you were right in saying a black hole can exist with a volume of zero (which your not and neither is whoever said that) then how do you explain it's mass since anything with mass has to have volume, otherwise it is impossible, you cant have mass without matter. Black holes have massive volumes.

 

[Totenkindly]

An individual could be the sole reason why the universe exists. It is, after all, their perception and their reality.

"Could" is a far cry from "is."
"Could" encompasses everything... thus signifying nothing.

(For example, you "could" be absolutely insane when you're posting here today. But probably not. I hope.)

What specific dragon exactly? One that's currently beside me?
There's maybe a different "space" that allows their existence as believable.

Oops.

Why wouldn't you believe in dragons?

This is a valid question.
Does anyone have a rebuttal? Statement of reinforcement?

That's cuz dragons are real, silly.

Dragons are angels and devils.
Dragons are the stars in the sky.
Dragons are the darkness that lurks inside humanity.

You never know where the dark dragons are lurking.

 

[olly_olly]

"Could" is a far cry from "is."
"Could" encompasses everything... thus signifying nothing.

(For example, you "could" be absolutely insane when you're posting here today. But probably not. I hope.)

Exactly, you have a right to state whatever what you want but that doesn't mean it's true.

Jennifer I like your take on dragons, maybe there should just be a dragon religion since somebody believes it it must be true right.

 

[FFF]

Personality does play a role in what people are willing to believe about God. N's and especially NT's are much more willing to say that there isn't a God and are much more willing to be independent and unorthodox. I would say being introverted would contribute to that even more cause they're less concerned about personal/social ramifications involved.

 

[goodgrief]

well I guess the only logical thing to say then is that everything always existed.
Even if you were right in saying a black hole can exist with a volume of zero (which your not and neither is whoever said that) then how do you explain it's mass since anything with mass has to have volume, otherwise it is impossible, you cant have mass without matter. Black holes have massive volumes.

At the center of a black hole as described by general relativity lies a gravitational singularity, a region where the spacetime curvature becomes infinite.[38] For a non-rotating black hole this region takes the shape of a single point and for a rotating black hole it is smeared out to form a ring shape lying in the plane of rotation.[39] In both cases the singular region has zero volume. It can also be shown that the singular region contains all the mass of the black hole solution.[40] The singular region can thus be thought of as having infinite density.

From Wikipedia. Here's a direct link. Black hole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And thus it would seem I am actually correct here and mass can exist without volume so long as it is of infinite density.

 

[Totenkindly]

Exactly, you have a right to state whatever what you want but that doesn't mean it's true.

The moon might be made of Gorgonzola cheese.

Jennifer I like your take on dragons, maybe there should just be a dragon religion since somebody believes it it must be true right.

Oh, I know there's one out there.
I made it up with a friend.

...Our dragons are badass.

Personality does play a role in what people are willing to believe about God. N's and especially NT's are much more willing to say that there isn't a God and are much more willing to be independent and unorthodox. I would say being introverted would contribute to that even more cause they're less concerned about personal/social ramifications involved.

Generally true.

This is why INTPs get into trouble.
Many people don't approach a personal topic like faith in this way and find that level of detachment (and the sort of comments and challenges that come with it) to be offensive in some way.

 

[olly_olly]

At the center of a black hole as described by general relativity lies a gravitational singularity, a region where the spacetime curvature becomes infinite.[38] For a non-rotating black hole this region takes the shape of a single point and for a rotating black hole it is smeared out to form a ring shape lying in the plane of rotation.[39] In both cases the singular region has zero volume. It can also be shown that the singular region contains all the mass of the black hole solution.[40] The singular region can thus be thought of as having infinite density.

From Wikipedia. Here's a direct link. Black hole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And thus it would seem I am actually correct here and mass can exist without volume so long as it is of infinite density.

Ok but...
The average density of a supermassive black hole (defined as the mass of the black hole divided by the volume within its Schwarzschild radius) can be very low, and may actually be lower than the density of air. This is because the Schwarzschild radius is directly proportional to mass, while density is inversely proportional to the volume. Since the volume of a spherical object (such as the event horizon of a non-rotating black hole) is directly proportional to the cube of the radius, and mass merely increases linearly, the volume increases by a much greater factor than the mass as a black hole grows. Thus, average density decreases for increasingly larger radii of black holes (due to volume increasing much faster than mass)
Supermassive black hole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also off of wikipedia, so IDK which wikipedia page to believe but I would have to say that you cant have mass with a volume of zero that's impossible because since "(defined as the mass of the black hole divided by the volume within its Schwarzschild radius)" and you can't divide by zero, It's impossible.

 

[goodgrief]

Oh well I don't know then. That's the limit of my knowledge.

 

[FFF]

My high openness has allowed me to take a rather unorthodox faith in Christ. Perhaps I will post stuff about it soon. I should probably try to organize stuff, so it doesn't come out as a mess, though.

 

[Night]

What do people make of scripture? Of Bronze Age mythology? Is the Bible to be trusted at all, as a definitive resource for the governance of modern behavior?

 

[goodgrief]

My high openness has allowed me to take a rather unorthodox faith in Christ. Perhaps I will post stuff about it soon. I should probably try to organize stuff, so it doesn't come out as a mess, though.

I think that the epitome of open-mindedness is agnosticism. It is physically impossible for us to know what exists beyond the realm of reality so to firmly believe in a particular unjustifiable possibility seems a bit closed minded. Though honestly I think atheism has more credibility than religion.

 

[rogue1]

just wondering if INTP can be very faithful to god or not since we need evidence and facts to prove something is real.

Even Einstein said that just because something could not be confirmed with science doesn't mean that it is not a fact....and that sometimes there are "unexplained factors" therefore it should not be dismissed just because it cant be confirmed. He also talked about science being limited in their sight because of it. He thought outside of the box.

 

[Totenkindly]

Even Einstein said that just because something could not be confirmed with science doesn't mean that it is not a fact....and that sometimes there are "unexplained factors" therefore it should not be dismissed just because it cant be confirmed. He also talked about science being limited in their sight because of it. He thought outside of the box.

But then again, Einstein still chose to not believe in a personal God.
Apparently that seemed less likely to him than Spinoza's god.

At best, he was a mechanistic deist.
He placed limits of what he thought was probable.

And I don't know if he would still try to label faith as a 'fact'.
Facts and truth are not necessarily synonymous terms.

 

[goodgrief]

But then again, Einstein still chose to not believe in a personal God.
Apparently that seemed less likely to him than Spinoza's god.

At best, he was a mechanistic deist.
He placed limits of what he thought was probable.

And I don't know if he would still try to label faith as a 'fact'.
Facts and truth are not necessarily synonymous terms.

Wasn't he the one who said "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

Though I still withstand my agnosticism. I'm just pedantic. I once saw a religious documentary with an atheist saying Einstein was atheist and I was like Grr! Don't use arguments that aren't true!

 

[Totenkindly]

Wasn't he the one who said "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

That's one of the soundbites people toss around, yes.
(He also thinks Imagination is more important than Intelligence.)

I once saw a religious documentary with an atheist saying Einstein was atheist and I was like Grr! Don't use arguments that aren't true!

Exactly.

I get tired of it, it's like listening to evangelicals insist the Founding Fathers held the same religious beliefs they do nowadays.

Einstein is just a deist, at best.
And so was Jefferson, at best.

There's faith there in some grand design.

 

[Craft]

"Could" is a far cry from "is."
"Could" encompasses everything... thus signifying nothing.

Which is what I'm trying to say, it reflects the uncertainty of science. Science itself is a "could". It signifies nothing. Our "verifiable" knowledge is really but a speck yet why do we trust it so willfully? More epistemology....what is a "fact"?

It is physically impossible for us to know what exists beyond the realm of reality so to firmly believe in a particular unjustifiable possibility seems a bit closed minded. .

Is reality itself justifiable? I would say adhering that idea would be more close minded. To deny possibilities out of simple experimental consistency is one I perceive as short-sighted. We could bend these natural laws we so hold onto; this model we attached ourselves into. Time Travel, Ghosts, Alien visits. I'm not saying go crazy. I'm saying consider the "impossible". Science is not a rulebook; it's a more flexible material of study.

 

[Totenkindly]

Which is what I'm trying to say, it reflects the uncertainty of science. Science itself is a "could". It signifies nothing. Our "verifiable" knowledge is really but a speck yet why do we trust it so willfully? More epistemology....what is a "fact"?

That's why I'm agnostic.

Not to avoid commitment to truth claims, but because the validity of truth claims is negotiable to begin with... although we can discuss "seeming probabilities" well enough.

 

[think2much]

whoa, six pages over night.... will read once I get back home.