1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured God is real; an axiom?

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Xavier Graham, Mar 30, 2022.

  1. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    A theist would argue the same, but you call that "Imagination".

    You claim something with no empirical evidence but that's called an "explanation".

    Thats the definition of double standards.
     
  2. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    23,865
    Ratings:
    +13,222
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    I think God could be axiomatic, internally. And maybe even always is. But that doesn't transfer to others, because we all have a somewhat different idea of what God is to us.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. blü 2

    blü 2 Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    11,426
    Ratings:
    +7,564
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    Except that my solution doesn't involve anything supernatural, hence is possible in reality.

    By contrast, supernatural explanations are essentially magic explanations and thus aren't explanations at all, since magic (just like 'God did it') explains nothing.
     
  4. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    Yep. But its still baseless. Just imagination. I think you have a bias that anything "supernatural" is just imagination, but if you basing that on just your imagination, it is still just your imagination.

    Hope you understand.
     
  5. blü 2

    blü 2 Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    11,426
    Ratings:
    +7,564
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    I have the concepts of 'supernatural' and I can imagine gods, and Spiderman, and Donald Duck.

    I simply distinguish what's only found internally from what can be found in nature, the world external to the self. In this case the hypotheses about gods that I put forward are based on observation of reality, so accurate reports about reality ('facts') are available to support or attack what I said.

    Whereas with gods ...
     
  6. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    Good for you. Its good to have an imagination like that. If you are boasting about imagination, its good.

    Great. But all you have said so far based on your imagination alone. Its not based on any kind of evidence. You are an empiricist so you should have your standard. So when you call other people are imagining things, when you present things without empirical evidence, based on your own standards, you are just imagining things.
     
  7. blü 2

    blü 2 Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    11,426
    Ratings:
    +7,564
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    You didn't answer my earlier question ─ how do you account for the fact that we don't know of any culture that has lacked supernatural beliefs, and the fact that there are so many gods in so many versions?

    What I said is not based on my imagination in the sense that the problem I'm addressing is imaginary' nor are the explanations I propose reliant on supernatural elements.
    No, that's not correct. What I said relied on possibilities that could happen in reality ─ something that no examinable evidence suggests gods can do.

    With supernatural explanations, so far no one can give me a definition of 'god' that's appropriate to a being with objective existence, such that if we find a real candidate we can tell whether it's God or not. If you come across such a definition, grateful if you'd let me know.
     
  8. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    Why should I "account for it"?

    "Possibilities", and "Reality". What is reality? Whats your epistemology?

    You are still making up a lot of things because you dont want to accept that you are making claims with no evidence. If you say you dont know, then that's valid. But you are making truth claims with out anything. Thats your imagination, just like you tell others.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. sealchan

    sealchan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    4,741
    Ratings:
    +2,100
    Religion:
    Christian
    Another approach is to find a better context for understanding God. For me that is understanding that God is an objective reality within the realm of psychology.

    For me the term God and the term consciousness are enmeshed in what the Swiss psychologist Carl Jung would call the ego-Self relationship. The same issues we have in understanding what consciousness is often apply to God. Objective experiences of God typically impact our sense of self (ego) in profound ways.

    But I can also appreciate your exploration of the notion of God from this logical context.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    Which books is that?
     
  11. blü 2

    blü 2 Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    11,426
    Ratings:
    +7,564
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    Because you have the normal curiosity of the informed human, perhaps?

    Why are you avoiding addressing the question?
    "Reality" is short for "objective reality", the world external to the self, which we know about through our senses.

    (I make three assumptions, and I assume them because I can't demonstrate that they're correct without first assuming they're correct ─ a perception that Descartes had, though his list isn't identical to mine. They are first, that a world exists external to the self, second that our senses are capable of informing us of that world, and third that reason is a valid tool. Fortunately for this conversation, in posting here you demonstrate that you share all three.)
    I put together some hypotheses after I'd looked at certain facts ─ as I said, accurate statements about reality. My imagination is deliberately limited by those facts. That's how I typically reason about reality.

    Do you do it any differently? If so, how?

    Or is that another question you wish to duck?:
     
  12. sealchan

    sealchan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    4,741
    Ratings:
    +2,100
    Religion:
    Christian
    Jung is a very intuitive writer and is not everyone's cup of tea. I will put some links here. Oftentimes those who followed in his footsteps wrote more approachable explanations:

    Looks like good general intro...
    The Jungian Model of the Psyche | Journal Psyche

    More to the point...
    Self in Jungian psychology - Wikipedia

    This looks like a selection of Jung's own words from a very long book of his...
    Phenomenology of the Self by C.G. Jung on the "Ego."
     
  13. Shaul

    Shaul Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2016
    Messages:
    6,790
    Ratings:
    +3,283
    Religion:
    Judaism
    The existence of an omnipotent god must be axiomatic. Such a Being can not be limited or it is not omnipotent. But if such a Being is required to be subordinate to empiricism or logic then it is not longer omnipotent. There is no logical basis for demanding that an omnipotent god must be subject to logic nor empiricism.
     
  14. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    Try your best not to be so cheap and condescending.
     
  15. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    I know Jung. I have one of his books about finding the soul. Cant remember the name.

    I asked you what the specific book you referred to was about God and ego-self. Specific book. So that I can purchase it and read up. Thanks for your help. I will see if I can find his collected works to read up.

    I am curious because he seems to be a contemporary of Freudian lineage on this particular matter. I want to see what he thinks of psychoanalysis and this ego-self you said is God which is very similar to the projection theory of God as dad. So this seems to follow the same school of thought, but also differs which seems to have a bit of an eastern influence or asian influence.

    Thanks.
     
  16. sealchan

    sealchan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    4,741
    Ratings:
    +2,100
    Religion:
    Christian
    It is hard to point at one book because Jung worked on his ideas in a very "organic" way. His ideas tended to hang together in groups and were always applied to various contexts. There really isn't "a book" to point you to.

    Jung was, at one point, Freud's presumptive heir...but Jung famously broke with Freud over a fundamental disagreement on the nature of libido. Freud had a more reductive understanding of psychic energy as driven by the instincts. Jung believed in what could later be called a more systems thinking model of the psyche as "greater than the sum of its parts" given that it is interconnected with biology, spirituality and all the forces of life and society. Jung also had a long lasting intellectual and therapeutic relationship with Wolfgang Pauli. Out of their collaboration came the book on synchronicity where each speculated on the intersection of psychology and physics.

    If you have the time and the inclination then his Collected Works are definitely out there. I had that ambition once. Still would be nice to read through his collected works from before when he was a student of Freud and worked in the psychiatric hospital through to when he forged his own path, confronting his own demons and becoming the lesser known but great influence on modern thought. It might be instructive to get a fly over first so that you have a good understanding of the context of his ideas. I haven't read most of his writings but I have tackled some (including Symbols of Transformation and Psychological Typology).

    For a first approach I recommend:

    The Portable Jung
    https://www.amazon.com/Portable-Jung-Library/dp/0140150706

    Man and His Symbols
    https://www.amazon.com/Man-His-Symbols-Carl-Jung/dp/0440351839/ref=pd_lpo_1?pd_rd_i=0440351839&psc=1

    His extremely readable autobiography...
    Memories, Dreams, Reflections
    https://www.amazon.com/Memories-Dreams-Reflections-Carl-Gustav-ebook/dp/B004FYZK52/ref=sr_1_1?crid=N5YD9O2VGAOH&keywords=memories+dreams+and+reflections+by+carl+jung&qid=1648785535&s=books&sprefix=memories,stripbooks,163&sr=1-1
     
    #36 sealchan, Mar 31, 2022
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2022
  17. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    22,277
    Ratings:
    +5,843
    Religion:
    Islam
    Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

    Quick point. I am no psychologist. I am only interested in their epistemic projections of theology and atheism. Other parts I won't even understand.
     
  18. blü 2

    blü 2 Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    11,426
    Ratings:
    +7,564
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    I was answering your question. I routinely answer your questions.

    You tempt me to the conclusion that you adopt an indignant tone so as to duck out yet again on answering my questions.
     
  19. Mark Charles Compton

    Mark Charles Compton Pineal Peruser

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2022
    Messages:
    602
    Ratings:
    +311
    Religion:
    Deist? Oneism? Hermeticism? (SDA parents)
    However, there is so much we cannot detect with our limited array of senses. You do accept that our limited senses require supplementation from our ever-improving tools, such as the Hubble Space Telescope and soon the JWST for viewing the electromagnetic spectrum, correct?
    [​IMG]
    There are definitely things we know we know: Axioms. There are certainly things we know we do not know: Future. There are potentially things we did not know that we knew: Instinctual/subconscious. Perhaps there are things that we did not know that we do not know: Reality? ;)

    If I approach the speed of light in a ship, our objective realities are relatively subjective. Likewise, if you look into the experimental studies of Dean Radin, PhD. in regards to the psychological effects on photons and the results of those studies thus far... Things get 'woo-ey'... I'm pretty sure it's still inconclusive... You tell me:

    Psychophysical interactions with entangled photons: Five exploratory experiments – IONS
     
  20. Link

    Link Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    10,233
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    I use to think that, but realized, there needs to be a means or vessel or a pointer to God that we are connected to, to be connected to God. Now because that proof of God is with all beings, and creatures, it can seem like an axiom, but it's actually based on experience and something showing us and pointing us to God whether we realize that light and proof is with us. Of course, God being unlimited, we see him from a distance, no matter how close we are to God, it's still a distance. Even Mohammad (s) who was to arch bows or rather less and closer then that, God is beyond, and can never be reached. It's the signs that point to God. The highest sign in the unseen is the utmost limit which is the inward and real reality of Mohammad (S) and his family (a).

    How God's glory and manifesting light is linked with him, and how his highest and chosen signs point to him, is a secret that at the same time is manifest and cannot be hidden.

    They are with every creature, but the dark magic may make people hate that light and be blind or averse to it. Some people don't even realize it's with them, others see, but see it as dark and see Satanic light as good and bright. The believers are those of course who love it and make it their vision by which they walk by and are guided by.

    The truth, is we need to recognize God's sword within us, there is only one true sword and one true path "There is no weapon but Zulfiqar and no hero but Ali".

    Without recognition of God's path, we are lost, and the path even if we fall off of it, remains a door of light like a star in the darkness or moon light that calls us back to God.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...