Akshay --
The reason I responded to your 1/20 post is that one so logical and articulate in his analysis of other matters could toss off the existence of God as an irrelevant issue. It seems to me that there is no single belief in the annals of philosophy that is more paramount to man's understanding of meaning and purpose in existence. Your assertion that "We only have to define God and then find out if such an entity exists," is ludicrous for several reasons. First of all, a definition is a statement designed to express the meaning of a word or term in common usage. To define something that is unknown and not experienced, let alone believed in, is a fabrication out of whole cloth. One might as well define the tooth fairy or the Easter bunny. So the logical process of definition begins with naming what we know or experience, then narrowing down that name to express its essence or nature. Since, unless we've had a mystical experience, we don't know God as an entity, and are therefore unable to define it. But the fact that God is not accessible to man does not mean that God doesn't exist. You now say: > [I]t is very obvious that there is a highest power > governing this universe, who is to the universe what a > dreamer is to the dream. I believe that atheists only > nominally abandon. You see, that's my point. How is this obvious? Do atheists acknowledge the existence of that which they cannot see? Do they accept the existence of a divinity as a logical principle? Some may, but I don't think the majority do, or they wouldn't call themselves atheists. I don't think the MOQists here understand DQ as "a power governing the universe". In fact, I don't define God as a either a governing power or an existent. What "exists" is what appears to conscious experience in time and space, what has "universal reality". My idea of a primary source does not have such a description. [Akshay]: > I do not deny that they seem ludicrous, however, if you > really attempt to ponder over the question, "does God exist?", > at some point you have to define the word "God". I agree. And that's of critical importance to any philosophy. > Whether such an entity exists or not does not truly make a > difference to us (coupled with the agnostic opinion), unless > of course it is an entity that answers all our wishes provided > we pray to him enough. If we cannot be certain that such an entity exists, how certain can we be that it doesn't make a difference to us? Do you refute the fact that what you've defined as "obvious" -- "a highest power governing this universe" -- has some consequence for man? On what basis do you say that it doesn't make a difference to us? Wouldn't it be more reasonable to conclude that your believe in a primary source that creates and supports the universe makes you "different" from someone who does not share your belief? > You could add many more layers of power and end up > with an uninteresting hierarchy, what difference would it > make about the question of existence of a higher power? > This is what I meant by my first statement. Frankly, I think Mr. Pirsig has done precisely what you describe. His philosophy adds layers of patterns to an arbitrarily-defined four-level hierarchy that makes the existence of a higher power uninteresting and inconsequential. It offers no cosmic role for human beings, suggests no entelechy or purpose for individual consciousness, and even relegates morality to an evolving universe rather than to man himself. Someone here quoted the philosopher-historian Joseph Margolis as musing that if "...we use "exist" and "existence" of things which offer brute resistance, while keeping 'the real' or 'reality' for numbers, and such entities which lack corporeal substance, we may escape many a philosophical headache." If God is a primary reality, like the number '1' or '0', it does not exist; it simply IS. As one who believes in Essence as the primary source, I suggest that this concept is worth looking into. Thanks for clarifying your points, Akshay. I hope I've clarified my criticisms, as well. Regards, Ham Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
