God quote

[Metabolic]

BINGO BINGO BINGO BINGO YES YES YES YES YES

WE HAVE A WINNER FINNALY, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOsh.

Are you admitting your concept of god is egocentric and solipsist?  You are about the worse believer I ever met, and I mean this literally, your concept of god is as vague as the concept of Justice and Im guessing you act like you actually didnt have a god at all...

[OTHstrong]

Are you admitting your concept of god is egocentric and solipsist?  You are about the worse believer I ever met, and I mean this literally, your concept of god is as vague as the concept of Justice and Im guessing you act like you actually didnt have a god at all...

My concept of God is a s Vague as you knowing how much you love your family

[The True Adonis]

Exactly, states of mind cannot be proven to others directly and can hardly be proven undirectly, then again, the same applies to the idea of god, so god cannot proven, hence the best you can say is that "in my mind, much like love, I feel god" which sadly is too little to say or to convince anyone.  

In a traditional religion, a statement like above would be considered heresy, for them god is REAL in all terms, it IS, it even interacted with humans several times according to their scripts (talking to Abraham, for example).  Hence, I find your belief in god completely weak, and in general, the belief in god cannot be rationalized just like many other things.  If you say you believe in god because you like to or because it is practical for you, good for you, I cant rebuttal that, but rationalizing it does not do any good to your faith.

Uh, states of mind are easily proven and we have a whole slew of medication for depression and any other mental problem you can possibly have.

[Metabolic]

My concept of God is a s Vague as you knowing how much you love your family

Cool, you have just admitted that you are a practical atheist, you say you believe in "god" but you cant quite possibly act throught it because its a vague concept you cant even define nor show to others...

Welcome to the atheist world, bro.

[OTHstrong]

Uh, states of mind are easily proven and we have a whole slew of medication for depression and any other mental problem you can possibly have.

LMAO, now I got you 2 atheist against each other  

[The True Adonis]

LMAO, now I got you 2 atheist against each other  

He is wrong in his statement.  It was hopefully just a temporary error in judgement.

[OTHstrong]

Cool, you have just admitted that you are a practical atheist, you say you believe in "god" but you cant quite possibly act throught it because its a vague concept you cant even define nor show to others...

Welcome to the atheist world, bro.

Listen, I know I love my children, but can not prove it to anyone, I know I have experienced God (hence I know he exist) but can not prove it to anyone. So I am not a good believer cause I admit God can`t be proven  , the Bible says the only way to God is through faith, I am 100% on par with the scriptures, do you understand now. BTW where are you from, you said spanish is your first language as is mine.

[Metabolic]

Uh, states of mind are easily proven and we have a whole slew of medication for depression and any other mental problem you can possibly have.

This is going to turn into philosophy of science so its gonna take a lot of fucking walls of text...Ill try and keep it as short as possible

We never know states of mind directly, only undirectly through measurements of brain activity, which only works as a MODEL, science doesnt have today the pretention of knowledge, just funcionality.
Following that, the fact that it is, sometimes, funcional doesnt render it true, just an aproximation, and that is only under the assumption that there is something we can actually aproximate too (this is a Lakatos example not mine), its like walking in the absolute dark, how do you know you are getting closer to anywhere? You can be sure through experience (not really, but for simplifications) that certain medicine appears to help patients, do you know how many errors are made for actual results? The scientific method does not actually exist, and it is because of "unscientific science" that people thought that maybe the planet was not the center of the universe, going against the grain.

[citation needed]

Kuhn, Lakatos, Feyerabend

[OTHstrong]

He is wrong in his statement.  It was hopefully just a temporary error in judgement.

He is 100% right, you are wrong

[Kahn.N.Singh]

Spanish is my first language so bare with me, it is important in this kind of discussions.


I love the dialectic idea of "god" as a conscience unfurling in constant struggle.  I agree "god" could be all of it, the entire reality, existance, history itself, the mind, however you wanna call it, Id have no trouble with such a concept of a "neutral" god, not a creatinist god or anything like traditional religions or creeds defend (an "ethic god").

I have studied Hegel through Heidegger and Hegel´s political thoughts in Uni and HighSchool, I am not a Hegel scholar but I can defend myself against them, not that I have anything particularly smart to say about him but I know his thought.

Bien hecho!

In order to understand Hegel's theory of anything, one has to grasp his theory of the concept (der Begriff), as related in the Science of Logic (a notoriously difficult work). I've done a lot of work on Hegel and have defended papers in front of some of the world's preeminent Hegel scholars. Keep in mind that there are a lot of misreadings of Hegel's philosophy (by, e.g., Marx, Kojeve, Popper, Arendt, and others), and remember that Hegel's so-called "dialectic" is not the thesis-antithesis-synthesis stuff that is sometimes thrown around in popular discussions. Also, with regard to God, when Hegel talks about God in his works on history and politics, he is not talking about God per se, but rather about Spirit’s (Geist) divine attribute of actively realizing itself, namely through self-reflective, speculative thinking.  In order to understand this dynamic process, we need to be clear on the rich definition Hegel accords to the terms ‘Spirit’ and ‘speculative,’ but that would take us too far afield.  

[The True Adonis]

This is going to turn into philosophy of science so its gonna take a lot of fucking walls of text...Ill try and keep it as short as possible

We never know states of mind directly, only undirectly through measurements of brain activity, which only works as a MODEL, science doesnt have today the pretention of knowledge, just funcionality.
Following that, the fact that it is, sometimes, funcional doesnt render it true, just an aproximation, and that is only under the assumption that there is something we can actually aproximate too (this is a Lakatos example not mine), its like walking in the absolute dark, how do you know you are getting closer to anywhere? You can be sure through experience (not really, but for simplifications) that certain medicine appears to help patients, do you know how many errors are made for actual results? The scientific method does not actually exist, and it is because of "unscientific science" that people thought that maybe the planet was not the center of the universe, going against the grain.

[citation needed]

Kuhn, Lakatos, Feyerabend

Try Science for once, not Psuedo-Science.


I guess all mental health professionals and the Billions spent on proven medication to treat Mental Diseases and Mental States are all a sham right?  A waste of time.  All the Peer Reviewed literature should be rounded up in a big pile in front of Times Square and burned because its useless.  Is that what you are saying?

[Metabolic]

Listen, I know I love my children, but can not prove it to anyone, I know I have experienced God (hence I know he exist) but can not prove it to anyone. So I am not a good believer cause I admit God can`t be proven  , the Bible says the only way to God is through faith, I am 100% on par with the scriptures, do you understand now. BTW where are you from, you said spanish is your first language as is mine.

This is the deal, you said that god cannot be proven, its a state of mind, well then, because of that, you cannot possibly share states of mind, hence your feeling of god cannot be contrasted to ther feelings of god of other people, rendering all concepts of god useless in practice (like I said, Im a utilitarist so I dont have to explain myself all the way).  

Your concept of god is solipsist, and if you believe in the scriptures then YOU CANNOT agree that god is a state of mind but an actual real thing/being whatever that has actually interacted with humans, that is a contradiction in terms of your faith and the scriptures, Descartes actually was a revolutionary thinker because of that.

[Man of Steel]

whatever one considers love and he-she chooses to demonstrate by a certain action can also be done by someone who doesn`t love so this can not be counted as proof. Don`t forget proof is an absolute, it is non negotiable, it is 100%, not anything short of this and love can not fallinto this category and yes I read your post already. And that brain scan shows a certain feeling, does not show love.

The brain scan records the subjective response to a stimulus, but provides no definitive proof of a specific response (ex: love).   Does the brain scan provide any secondary proof for the stimulus itself?

[Raymondo]

Try Science for once, not Psuedo-Science.


I guess all mental health professionals and the Billions spent on proven medication to treat Mental Diseases and Mental States are all a sham right?  A waste of time.  All the Peer Reviewed literature should be rounded up in a big pile in front of Times Square and burned because its useless.  Is that what you are saying?

Peer reviewed literature in psychiatry 
Almost all journals are financed by the pharmaceutical industry, there's not much room for objectivity there

[The True Adonis]

The brain scan records the subjective response to a stimulus, but provides no definitive proof of a specific response (ex: love).   Does the brain scan provide any secondary proof for the stimulus itself?

"Love" is subjective and just a juvenile term to describe a billion different neurological interactions.

[Metabolic]

Try Science for once, not Psuedo-Science.


I guess all mental health professionals and the Billions spent on proven medication to treat Mental Diseases and Mental States are all a sham right?  A waste of time.  All the Peer Reviewed literature should be rounded up in a big pile in front of Times Square and burned because its useless.  Is that what you are saying?

I am saying the model sometimes works, simetimes it doesnt, it sometimes changes radically (Aristotle, Galileo, Newton, Einstein) and sometimes stays the same.  Seriously, for a man who praises to know so much I am in awe you cannot grasp the basic references to Kuhn´s Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

Theres only one thing worst than a religious fanatic, a science fanatic...this is, and I am not kidding, Philisophy 101, I think that Ill leave this discussion here and continue with the god one because this one is going to get NOWHERE and will sprial in no time in epic walls of text that nobody will bother read or understand.

[OTHstrong]

This is the deal, you said that god cannot be proven, its a state of mind, well then, because of that, you cannot possibly share states of mind, hence your feeling of god cannot be contrasted to ther feelings of god of other people, rendering all concepts of god useless in practice (like I said, Im a utilitarist so I dont have to explain myself all the way).  

Your concept of god is solipsist, and if you believe in the scriptures then YOU CANNOT agree that god is a state of mind but an actual real thing/being whatever that has actually interacted with humans, that is a contradiction in terms of your faith and the scriptures, Descartes actually was a revolutionary thinker because of that.

I don`t care what term you title my belief with, it means nothing to me, the Bible makes it clear the way to God is by faith and that is what I have faith.

anyway I will be back in a few hour, you will have your hands full with TA



lol, divide and conquer, you guys are to easy  

[The True Adonis]

Peer reviewed literature in psychiatry 
Almost all journals are financed by the pharmaceutical industry, there's not much room for objectivity there

I see Katie let you keep the Laptops.

There are mountains of data not financed by Big Pharma.  Even if they were, thats not a bad thing.  They still have to go through the Scientific Method.  

[OTHstrong]

The brain scan records the subjective response to a stimulus, but provides no definitive proof of a specific response (ex: love).   Does the brain scan provide any secondary proof for the stimulus itself?

No it doesn`t

[Raymondo]

I see Katie let you keep the Laptops.
 

 

There are mountains of data not financed by Big Pharma.  

The smaller journals that noone pays attention to.

Even if they were, thats not a bad thing.  They still have to go through the Scientific Method.

Compromise is a bad thing, to use your term. P-docs get serious grants from pharmas. Wrong results, no more grants.

[Metabolic]

Bien hecho!

In order to understand Hegel's theory of anything, one has to grasp his theory of the concept (der Begriff), as related in the Science of Logic (a notoriously difficult work). I've done a lot of work on Hegel and have defended papers in front of some of the world's preeminent Hegel scholars. Keep in mind that there are a lot of misreadings of Hegel's philosophy (by, e.g., Marx, Kojeve, Popper, Arendt, and others), and remember that Hegel's so-called "dialectic" is not the thesis-antithesis-synthesis stuff that is sometimes thrown around in popular discussions. Also, with regard to God, when Hegel talks about God in his works on history and politics, he is not talking about God per se, but rather about Spirit’s (Geist) divine attribute of actively realizing itself, namely through self-reflective, speculative thinking.  In order to understand this dynamic process, we need to be clear on the rich definition Hegel accords to the terms ‘Spirit’ and ‘speculative,’ but that would take us too far afield.  

Gracias.

Yeah, thats what I dont like about the concept of god in general philosophy, it tends to have certain attributes depending on the context of the use of the term, overcomplicating an already complicated concept.  PLus Hegel is one hard bitch to read and I only read it in english...so yeah.  I likek the idea of the developing god-history but I particularly think its ethically void, useless and should be avoided in the real world, its only mental masturbation (Im much closerto english analytics and contemporary utilitarism).

Also, I think Hegel himself had a too grandious idea of god rendering it too ambiguous, its beautiful, I agree, but disposable (much like heideggers Da-Sein, interesting descriptive metaphysics but ultimately useless).

What do you think of Strawsons "Individuals"?

[Metabolic]

Also, I am from Chile Onetimehardon.

[The True Adonis]

Philosophy is useless to my dog.

[Metabolic]

I don`t care what term you title my belief with, it means nothing to me, the Bible makes it clear the way to God is by faith and that is what I have faith.

anyway I will be back in a few hour, you will have your hands full with TA



lol, divide and conquer, you guys are to easy  

oh, I know you dont care, I am not here to change you mind, just to show anybody reading the inner contradictions and para-concistent premises of the concept of god and faith in general.

[El Diablo Blanco]

I don`t care what term you title my belief with, it means nothing to me, the Bible makes it clear the way to God is by faith and that is what I have faith.

anyway I will be back in a few hour, you will have your hands full with TA



lol, divide and conquer, you guys are to easy  

What makes your bible the official word of God?  Just as how you beleive in your bible, Jews believe in their Torah, Muslims believe in their Koran, Buddhists believe in their teachings etc...  So why is it that Christians make their God and Jesus so absolute and disregard other religions?