Science and religion

@Aedes,

Aedes wrote:

1. I am alive
2. I am trying to show that "living" is not a purpose of life[
3. My purposes are not metaphysically tied to any absolute purpose. I have intentions behind deliberate actions, and the consequences I hope for are the purposes that I apply

Consider if you will that your life is the end of a series of events all most all of which took place when human hold on life was far more tenuous than today. Do you have one bit of need to honor those who made this life possible for you with some devotion to the idea of life and life itself. If you consider life as purpose, or will, -you will not be at cross natures with nature. You could tap into a tremendous flow of life energy just by knowing what it is about. And, I am not talking some metapysical or religious claptrap here.

If you think of life at some perilous crossroads, like so many salmon swiming up stream, and along comes Aedes the salmon, saying my purpose instead of the purpose, well then, at that point, there is one at least in every crowd that just don't get it, and so ends up et by a bear. You need to tune into reality, and get a hold of your past, and find out what team you are playing for, and find out whose life runs in your veins. Every man lives for his ancestors who cannot live except through him. To give life to your own people you have to give life to some one else's people. In the very act of love and survival you have compromised yourself and become the father of humanity. Our purpose is to serve life even at the price of self.

Quote:

4. Consciousness allows us to think of purpose. Without consciousness there is no purpose. I am interacting with you consciously and self-consciously, and I have purposes (for letters to appear on the screen that correspond to my thoughts, and for them to appear on your screen for you to become aware of my thoughts, etc). But my sinoatrial node, which tells my heart how fast to beat, is not working with the purpose of doing that because it's involuntary -- it's just firing because of a self-regulating biological mechanism.

I sometimes forget that some people aren't used to casually and non-judgementally chatting about sex, ****, piss, pus, phlegm, drugs, and rashes. I promise to make it PG-13 for you next time.

How could you leave out old condoms and kotexes? Don't worry about offending me as I have offended myself. If I want offense all I have to do pry up the scab of memory and peek inside. I do hope you consider that approaching something like sexuality as a scientist sort of tortures the meaning of the act. Its your act. Live it like you like.

1 Reply

@Scattered,

Aedes

"1. I am alive"
I had to ask, I've had some try to go there, no offence.

"Consciousness allows us to think of purpose. Without consciousness there is no purpose."

Or could it be consciousness is required for the awareness of purpose, or knowledge or Truth. In other words purpose, knowledge, reason, or Truth exists, or is, whether there be consciousness or not in men.

I mean as far we can tell, a rock doesn't have to be aware of, or conscious of squat to be a rock. Why are men required to be conscious? And what for, if there be no purpose, or no, absolute purpose?

1 Reply

@dpmartin,

Quote:

I mean as far we can tell, a rock doesn't have to be aware of, or conscious of squat to be a rock. Why are men required to be conscious? And what for, if there be no purpose, or no, absolute purpose?

As far as we can tell, a rock doesn't have conciousness. It's not that men are required to have conciousness - some do not. The thing is, most do. Having conciousness is something general to our species. Like walking upright. Having lungs.
Does there need to be another "purpose", apart from the fact that conciousness improves man's chance of survival? The survival value of conciousness is not indicative of some "purpose"; having conciousness increases man's chance of survival, thus having conciousness thrives among men.

0 Replies

@Fido,

Fido wrote:

Consider if you will that your life is the end of a series of events all most all of which took place when human hold on life was far more tenuous than today. Do you have one bit of need to honor those who made this life possible for you with some devotion to the idea of life and life itself. If you consider life as purpose, or will, -you will not be at cross natures with nature. You could tap into a tremendous flow of life energy just by knowing what it is about. And, I am not talking some metapysical or religious claptrap here.

If you think of life at some perilous crossroads, like so many salmon swiming up stream, and along comes Aedes the salmon, saying my purpose instead of the purpose, well then, at that point, there is one at least in every crowd that just don't get it, and so ends up et by a bear. You need to tune into reality, and get a hold of your past, and find out what team you are playing for, and find out whose life runs in your veins. Every man lives for his ancestors who cannot live except through him. To give life to your own people you have to give life to some one else's people. In the very act of love and survival you have compromised yourself and become the father of humanity. Our purpose is to serve life even at the price of self.

You can express it as poetically and wistfully as you want, but you're still nowhere near convincing me that purpose is anything other than self-defined and self-conscious. If I live for my ancestors (as I feel I do in some way), then it's my self-conscious infusion of that into my own conception of life's meaning. If I throw myself in front of a bus to save a child, it's my own prioritization and empathy that initiates the act. As for OUR purpose? Well, ask 6 billion people what the absolute purpose of life is, and you'll get 6 billion answers, so why should I accept yours?

Quote:

I do hope you consider that approaching something like sexuality as a scientist sort of tortures the meaning of the act. Its your act. Live it like you like.

Unless you consider typing on this forum to be a sexual act, which speaking for myself I do not, then you might not be so quick to blur analysis and discussion with "tortured meaning". But again, in my capacity as a physician, I have to be able to talk to patients about things that are ordinarily very private and taboo in a way that makes them feel comfortable talking about the subject. In this forum, sex was a perfectly appropriate example of something we as humans do that involves everything from physiology and behavior to ideas of teleology and biological determinism, all the way up to issues of relationships and morality. So it was a great subject to bring up, and it's a shame that in your discomfort with the subject that you had to act like a child with your quasi ad hominem sarcasm at me. And as for my personal sex life, my personal act, my personal meaning, it's great and it's none of your goddamn business so leave me alone.

0 Replies

@Scattered,

Didymos Thomas

Do you mean stay warm, dry, eat, in reasonable safety to procreate? That's all that is necessary for survival. Animals do that without that which man has, there's not point for the rest of what man does in that perspective. Why would God give man the consciousness that man has when what other specie's have is sufficient for their survival?

1 Reply

@dpmartin,

dpmartin wrote:

Didymos Thomas

Do you mean stay warm, dry, eat, in reasonable safety to procreate? That's all that is necessary for survival. Animals do that without that which man has, there's not point for the rest of what man does in that perspective. Why would God give man the consciousness that man has when what other specie's have is sufficient for their survival?

In your myth is it not man that took consciousness from God without permission? No one, not even in the Bible has ever offered to give it back. Job, the best of the bunch wanted to dispute with God. Take it like a man Job. It is reality. It does not have to make sense. It does have to be dealt with.

1 Reply

@Fido,

Quote:

Do you mean stay warm, dry, eat, in reasonable safety to procreate? That's all that is necessary for survival. Animals do that without that which man has, there's not point for the rest of what man does in that perspective. Why would God give man the consciousness that man has when what other specie's have is sufficient for their survival?
Thanks

I think the answer to the first question might be the very value of survival. Humans are capable of finding ever more efficient ways of doing those things, and they also have the capability to exceed their needs. Conciousness provides this, and gives man at least a chance to avoid some of the pitfalls of these skills.

As for God; I have no clue. How could we speculate as to God's motivation?

1 Reply

@Scattered,

This may be a tangent, but I think much if not ALL of philosophy, including the question of things like MEANING and PURPOSE and how universal they are, come down to the collision between us as self-conscious people versus us as things. In various ways, I think humans (even the most scientifically Mr. Spock-esque hyperrational of us) are troubled by the idea that we're things. We're unique things, but then again water is unique from lava and trees are unique from mushrooms.

So the question becomes whether purpose and meaning lie objectively within us whether we're aware or not, or is purpose something that our self-consciousness injects.

0 Replies

@Scattered,

Aedes

Of corse, to me, it seems evident that man is designed to know a true purpose, or meaning. The effect on our society of relying on science to know it all, in this area, I believe is hurting us grievously. My contention is, this society, or western culture is giving what is God's to Caesar.

0 Replies

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

I think the answer to the first question might be the very value of survival. Humans are capable of finding ever more efficient ways of doing those things, and they also have the capability to exceed their needs. Conciousness provides this, and gives man at least a chance to avoid some of the pitfalls of these skills.

As for God; I have no clue. How could we speculate as to God's motivation?

If you have ever owned an ant farm God's motivation should be obvious: Cheap entertainment. Diggit big guy! This is the last act of my passion play, and I hope you find it fashionable. Da en.

0 Replies

@Scattered,

Fido
"is it not man that took consciousness from God without permission?"

No; God gave man consciousness so that man may know God. But what man does with what God gives man. Man can only blame himself for.

2 Replies

@dpmartin,

Quote:

If you have ever owned an ant farm God's motivation should be obvious: Cheap entertainment. Diggit big guy! This is the last act of my passion play, and I hope you find it fashionable. Da en.

Only if I make the mistake of confusing God with man.

Quote:

No; God gave man consciousness so that man may know God.

How do you know God's motivation to give man conciousness?

1 Reply

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas wrote:

Only if I make the mistake of confusing God with man.

Why shouldn't you make the same mistake as everyone else? Are you too good to be wrong?

Quote:

How do you know God's motivation to give man conciousness?

Faith is a fair substitute for knowledge. Either it works or it don't. If life as a test does not kill you, then it confirms you in your faith. And even though it does not point to any ultimate truth, it points many away from uncertainty -which most people sense with fear, as well they should because know one knows what will kill them.

0 Replies

@Scattered,

Didymos Thomas

"How do you know God's motivation to give man conciousness?"

If you have consciousness, then He gave it to you. And surly we are not suppose to follow after lies, or rely on lies. Or at least it would be ill advised. Therefore there is a need for the knowledge of the Truth. But as one in the knowledge of Jesus the Christ as my Lord and Savior, to me it is apparent the man is made by the Living God, to know the Living God.

1 Reply

@dpmartin,

Quote:

If you have consciousness, then He gave it to you.

We might say this, but obviously there is more to it. The problem of what conciousness is, for example, is not solved by saying 'without God we have no conciousness'.

Quote:

And surly we are not suppose to follow after lies, or rely on lies. Or at least it would be ill advised. Therefore there is a need for the knowledge of the Truth.

All fine, but this still does not solve the problem of how you determine God's motivation for doing something, ie, give man conciousness.
For us to know God seems insufficient, as we have capabilities that push us away from God, ie sin. Therefore, just because we have something, doesn't mean we have it to know God.

Quote:

Why shouldn't you make the same mistake as everyone else? Are you too good to be wrong?

No, I'm wrong all of the time. Maybe even now. Maybe in everything I've ever said. Are you seriously asking me why I should avoid mistakes in reasoning?

Quote:

Faith is a fair substitute for knowledge.

How so? How can you have faith in something you have no knowledge of?
To have faith without knowledge is to have no faith, it's to have an arbitrary belief.

0 Replies

@dpmartin,

dpmartin wrote:

God gave man consciousness so that man may know God. But what man does with what God gives man. Man can only blame himself for.

Yeah, an arrangement that allows for God to create everything in the world including human consciousness, and yet somehow not be responsible himself for allowing his world to have sin, evil, faithlessness, or inconsistencies that make his inspired word seem like a magical story rather than reality. Almost makes one want to become a Kabbalist.

0 Replies

@Scattered,

Consciousness has been given so that we may know God. But did He not give man the power to choose ether to follow God's Word for the love of God, or man's own ways for the love of himself for himself. When it's for you it's your way and your choice, however when it's for God it's His Way and His choice.
Besides, since when does the Almighty, the Creator answer to man the created? What fool think himself wiser than God? What fool is there that thinks that God would have to apologize to man for letting man be and seek evil when man could choose Life, Truth? Especially when man could always call on the Lord. If every man soot to be like Jesus in sincerity what kind of world would it be? Therefore who is it that chooses not to? And who's fault is that?

1 Reply

@dpmartin,

Quote:

When it's for you it's your way and your choice, however when it's for God it's His Way and His choice.

Then God did not create man. God created some parts of man, and man created the rest. Does Genesis distinguish what aspects of man were created by God and what aspects man can create for himself?

If God abdicates control over man's decisions, and any decision is made by man alone, then does that mean that God's reach and his power are not infinite? Because if there is any power that God relinquishes, then his power is not absolute.

Quote:

Besides, since when does the Almighty, the Creator answer to man the created?

He doesn't. And that is the world's best justification for atheism.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

dpmartin -

Quote:

Consciousness has been given so that we may know God. But did He not give man the power to choose ether to follow God's Word for the love of God, or man's own ways for the love of himself for himself. When it's for you it's your way and your choice, however when it's for God it's His Way and His choice.

You restate your assertion, but do not give any support. If you do not want to defend this particular assumption about God's motivation, or even the notion that we can know his determination (that he might have one at all), that's fine. But, if you were going to, I'd like to read what you have to say.

Quote:

Besides, since when does the Almighty, the Creator answer to man the created?

No one has even suggested that he does. What has occured is that you have made a number of assertions which seem to be incoherent. If the understanding of God is incoherent, how could the understanding of God be true? To say "God is incoherent" doesn't solve the problem; it begs the question 'why?'. If God can be incoherent, what else can be incoherent?

Quote:

What fool is there that thinks that God would have to apologize to man for letting man be and seek evil when man could choose Life, Truth?

The problem is that what is called evil seems to be very much a part of life.
I don't see this to be a problem, personally, as that evil seems to come from ignorance, which certainly isn't God.

Quote:

If every man soot to be like Jesus in sincerity what kind of world would it be? Therefore who is it that chooses not to? And who's fault is that?

If everyone sought to be like Jesus, the world would be a better place. And, yeah, man acts freely, so it's his responsibility...

But this is exactly the problem. If God is all powerful, and all knowing, then God is more responsible than anyone else. This makes sense, it is his creation, right? But if God is most responsible, preeminantly responsible, then he must also be responsible for evil. If God is Good, him giving rise to evil, being responsible for evil, having some relation other than being opposed to evil, what have you, creates a problem: How can God, being so perfect and good, be responsible for evil, and still rightly be called perfect and good?

You argue God is not responsible for evil, men are for choosing evil. This doctrine seems entirely opposed to the notion that God is allpowerful, allknowing, and perfectly good.

Aedes -

Quote:

Yeah, an arrangement that allows for God to create everything in the world including human consciousness, and yet somehow not be responsible himself for allowing his world to have sin, evil, faithlessness, or inconsistencies that make his inspired word seem like a magical story rather than reality. Almost makes one want to become a Kabbalist.

I do not see much trouble with the situation. Just because an argument, and it's conclusions, strike you as odd, does not mean they are misguided.

Quote:

He doesn't. And that is the world's best justification for atheism.

If that's the best, then I don't know any justifications for atheism. Only if God and man are somehow at odds could such a thing give atheism any support. Though, I will admit, if God and man are opposed, that may be all atheism needs.

1 Reply

@Scattered,

Greeetings, I am new to this forum and this is my first post.

Scattered, may I ask what you feeel or consider 'your' purpose on earth is? Is there not a link between your purpose and Gods's purpose?

Scattered wrote:

I don't expect so, but is anyone aware of any reasoning, logic or science about God or God's purpose? Actually, is there anything in religion (preferably Christianity) about God's purpose or purpose for humans?
Not too complicated please. I am a simple guy.

0 Replies

Science and religion

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know