My my, nothing like a little irony, hyperbole and iconoclasm to bring dogma defenders out of the woodwork!
Issues with recent posts include: 1. The use of texts as authoritative proof of anything. . . texts from mystics like Talbot to revealed texts like the Bhagavada Gita. Even though current day scientific texts are not addressed in this thread, I include them. 2. Attempts at proofs of anything or against anything and their nature when it comes to epistemology. 3. The apparent dichotomy of ‘existence’ (of anything) being in the mind or not in the mind. 4. Assumptions about ‘mind’ in general. 5. Either/or epistemology. 6. Beliefs about atheism vs. theism RE: ethics, wars and proofs. 7. Theological assumptions when it comes to cause and effects such as lack of religious beliefs and war, religious beliefs and peace and other classes of ‘morality’. 8. Tenets involved with reason(s) for and causes of living. 9. Comparisons of and basis of Social structures such as Fascism, Capitalism, Communism and associated theological beliefs. 10. Notions of boredom and uselessness in conjunction with epistemology. 11. Beliefs about current day ethos contrasted to the ethos of previous times and cultures. When I started this post, I was going to address all of these points associated with the last few posts. Alas, it is too great a task. For now, I will just point at what to me appears to be tacitly assumed ‘truths’. . . perhaps the term tenets is preferable…used by the posters. In most cases I can only guess that these underlying beliefs are not well examined. On Nov 5, 1:13 pm, Ellen Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > I cannot understand holy war, but after Hitler (atheist,pagan), Stalin, Mao, > Pol, Kim, Enver, gosh - just about every educated government but the U.S. was > atheist and genocidal (some still), and the non Judeo Christian countries in > pagan times were brutal...do you stupidly think people can bring about world > peace on their own after last century...There is no monogamy in relationships > anymore...people have no use for anyone else - and why should they? No love, > no families, shallow hookups, technologies that Mengele and Ceucescu would > have killed for...you guys have a rotten track record - instead of people > loving each other and commiting to each other - the adage should be screw > everyone but thyself...when I was younger, I wanted one man to commit to and > every child would be sacrosanct...good luck today! It is too easy to label > any believer in god as a nutcase but what is your reasoning for living? How > do you prove your case in light of Communism or Facism or paganism which were > brutal societies? > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:47:22 -0800 > > Subject: [epistemology 10931] Re: God and Consciousness. > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > > Hi orn > > > Nice, I love proofs of God, not those too scientific :-) but those > > from non believers as this was the case > > > I dont like of course all those boring proofs of not existence of god. > > > Whatever. > > > What I consider yes a piece of talk is Abraham telling his wife that > > God said to him in private, to lie down with Hagar so to conceive an > > heir :-) > > > And now, some 6000 years away (or million, who cares ) persons blow > > themselves, trying to kill the rest because that promise > > > heyy I`m not joking, holy war is just warming up > > > On 5 nov, 18:05, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > *** chuckles*** > > > > And, since the very term “Ornitologicum” could be interpreted as an ad > > > hominem … implying I’m for the birds….;-), I thought I’d add a few > > > more proofs for god: > > > >http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm > > > > On Nov 5, 11:30 am, einseele <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Argumentum Ornitologicum > > > > > I close my eyes and so I see a flock of birds. The vision elapses a > > > > second, may be less; I don´t know how many birds I saw. Was the number > > > > of birds definite or indefinite? The problem involves the existence of > > > > God. If God exists, the number is definite, because God knows how many > > > > birds I did saw. If God does not exist, the number is indefinite, > > > > because no one could have that counted. At any rate I saw less than > > > > ten birds (let´s say) and more than one, but I did not see nine, > > > > eight, seven, six, five, four, three or two birds. I saw a number > > > > between ten and one, which is not nine , eight, seven, six, five, and > > > > so on. That integer is inconceivable. Therfore, God exists. > > > > > On 5 nov, 11:34, socratus <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > God and Consciousness. > > > > > > Mr. ‘FF ’ wrote: > > > > > > ‘ There is only one place where "God" has been > > > > > demonstrated, even proven to exist - in human brains.’ > > > > > === . > > > > > God and Consciousness. > > > > > > It seems you are right saying: ‘There is only one place > > > > > where "God" has been demonstrated, even proven > > > > > to exist - in human brains.’ > > > > > Why? Because if God exist, HE /SHE/ IT must be > > > > > in every place it means in human brains too. > > > > > Question: is it possible to prove this ? > > > > > I will try. > > > > > Our brain works on dualistic basis: usually consciousness > > > > > (logically) and rarely unconsciousness ( at first it seems > > > > > illogically but at last it shows as very wise act) . > > > > > In his book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ Michael Talbot > > > > > on the page 160 explained this situation in such way: > > > > > ‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be > > > > > the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness > > > > > that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’ > > > > > But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says: > > > > > Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. > > > > > They do not know My transcendental nature and > > > > > My supreme dominion over all that be. > > > > > / Chapter 9. Text 11./ > > > > > ========== . . > > > > > Best wishes. > > > > > Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus. > > > > > >http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15http://www.ph... > > > > > > ================== . .- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > _________________________________________________________________ > Windows 7: Unclutter your > desktop.http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9690331&ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:W...- > Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
