> On 16 Jan 2015, at 5:18 am, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 1/15/2015 3:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> It is the reason why I stopped, a long time ago, to qualify myself as an
>> atheist. I realized that atheists believe to much in the christian God,
>> paradoxically enough.
>
> By your logic one cannot disbelieve in anything because to do so you have to
> conceive of what it is your are failing to believe (otherwise you don't know
> what you're talking about);
Well, yes. Of course you have to be able to conceive of what you are going to
make a choice to believe in or not! Implying that you "have the right" to
disbelieve in something you cannot conceive of is the height of sophistry. You
are merely testifying to the limitation of your own, or of human imagination
but that is precisely the terrain we are treading here: the interface of human
ignorance with what is really real.
Of course the human imagination cannot conceive of God the way God is. This is
because WE ARE ALL THE EYES AND EARS OF GOD. The eye cannot see itself. The
hammer cannot hit itself. It can only infer it's true nature using the
imagination and HOPE that the description adopted is exact. It never is. We
cannot know what or who we are. It's a pretty miserable state of affairs,
particularly if you are a hard-nosed scientist, I gather.
> and therefore you believe in it because you conceive it.
>
> Brent
Not BECAUSE you conceive it but because you find it ATTRACTIVE to believe
in it (caps for italics, not shouting) having successfully conceived it. Nobody
adopts a definition of God that they hate. You cannot find something attractive
or unattractive if you cannot conceive of it, obviously.
"Seeing is believing" the saying goes.
Actually, it's the reverse. "Believing is seeing" which is "the reversal" of
comp. There is a knower to start with. That's God or the One. What comes next
is what the knower knows. That's what we call "the universe". This is the
fracturing of the One into all the numbers that follow zero I don't know what
my number is but I doubt I could tattoo it on my wrist.
Like Russell, I tend to feel (or believe, if you prefer) that this One or what
the physicalists call "the beginning" also includes observers. I can conceive
of the possibility that observers were present right from the start, but I
disbelieve that there WAS a beginning because that involves time which is
already a state of human belief.
K
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
