The 'SOUL'. What is it?

@Frank Apisa,

Oh yes, that mystic experiences exist, don't they?

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Yes but indeed there is a distinction between saying I don't believe in Gods and saying there are no Gods, the first doesn't need proof the second since it is affirmative, does !

Frank's assertion, however, is about the two statements:

I don't believe in Gods.

and,

I believe there are no Gods.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

No, they are not wrong, merely, you're using a limited definition of the statements.

That's like limiting the definition of the word "atheist" to mean only weak atheists.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Oh yes, that mystic experiences exist, don't they?

Stop painting; stop digging, Olivier. You will be much better off.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Yes but indeed there is a distinction between saying I don't believe in Gods and saying there are no Gods, the first doesn't need proof the second since it is affirmative, does !

Frank's assertion, however, is about the two statements:

I don't believe in Gods.

and,

I believe there are no Gods.

"I don't believe gods exist" is simply a comment about what someone does not believe.

"I believe there are no gods" is an affirmative assertion about what the speaker DOES "believe."

In the case of "I believe there are no gods"...the person is actually saying, "My blind guess is that there are no gods"...but does not have the guts to call the blind guess a blind guess. The disguise of "believe" does not make it less a blind guess.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

No, they are not wrong, merely, you're using a limited definition of the statements.

Anyone saying the two statements mean the same thing...IS WRONG. The statements say exactly what they say.

Quote:

That's like limiting the definition of the word "atheist" to mean only weak atheists.

If you want to think that to make yourself feel better about being wrong and not having the integrity to simply acknowledge that you are wrong...

...go for it.

If I laugh at you for doing so...I hope you understand.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

You are ignoring my argument but that doesn't make it go away. Mystical experiences exist, we all know that.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

You are ignoring my argument but that doesn't make it go away. Mystical experiences exist, we all know that.

Earth calling Olivier...Earth calling Olivier.

Exactly what kind of "mystical experience" can cause the comment "I believe there are no gods" to be anything but a blind guess???????????????????????

Does some god come along and mystically tell you that there are no gods.

C'mon...keep up your part of this thing so I do not come across as beating the crap out of an amateur.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

You are not the arbiter of definitions.

Get help for your megalomania.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Good. Now if mystical experiences exist and can therefore ground belief in gods in experience, it follows that the lack of mystical experience also happens. There are people who would never warm up to the best gospel choir, never cared for a sermon, never felt or saw or herd gods anywhere in church or temples or the world. Such a lack of experience is itself an experience. Do we still agree?

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

You are not the arbiter of definitions.

Get help for your megalomania.

The comment "I believe there are no gods" is a blind guess...put forth using 'I believe' for whatever reasons the speaker deems worthy.

That seems to bother you, Blue.

You ought really try to come to grips with why it does.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Good. Now if mystical experiences exist and can therefore ground belief in gods in experience, it follows that the lack of mystical experience also happens. There are people who would never warm up to the best gospel choir, never cared for a sermon, never felt or saw or herd gods anywhere in church or temples or the world. Such a lack of experience is itself an experience. Do we still agree?

No, obviously we do not. Your contention is absurd.

You essentially are saying that anyone who does not encounter a "mystical experience" is somehow showing that an assertion "I believe there are no gods"...is not a blind guess.

Like I said earlier...keep up your part of this thing so I do not come across as beating the crap out of an amateur.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

So, what is not a blind guess for you then? You are playing with a coin with an eagle in both sides.

The observation of "mystical experience" applies the same to "there are and there are no gods". Lets say, "I believe there are mystical experiences" and "I believe there are not mystical experiences", and so forth.

About "There are gods" and "There are no gods".

Police investigation clarifies the point.

When a crime is committed and you say "I wasn't there at the moment of the crime", police won't ask you to prove it.

What police will ask you is, "if you weren't there, then where were you?"

You say, "I was in the park with my friends".

Then, police will ask you to prove it. Police will ask you for witness, etc.

Why? Because you might have used a hidden path evading witnesses and cameras, so, there is no way to prove that you weren't there at the moment of the crime.

But, surely, what can be proved is "where were you at the time of the crime".

So, your position of "blind guess" is a fallacy when implemented in science and criminology.

What branch of knowledge, according to you, will validate such "blind guesses" for everything in general?

2 Replies

@carloslebaron,

carloslebaron wrote:

So, what is not a blind guess for you then? You are playing with a coin with an eagle in both sides.

The observation of "mystical experience" applies the same to "there are and there are no gods". Lets say, "I believe there are mystical experiences" and "I believe there are not mystical experiences", and so forth.

About "There are gods" and "There are no gods".

Police investigation clarifies the point.

When a crime is committed and you say "I wasn't there at the moment of the crime", police won't ask you to prove it.

What police will ask you is, "if you weren't there, then where were you?"

You say, "I was in the park with my friends".

Then, police will ask you to prove it. Police will ask you for witness, etc.

Why? Because you might have used a hidden path evading witnesses and cameras, so, there is no way to prove that you weren't there at the moment of the crime.

But, surely, what can be proved is "where were you at the time of the crime".

So, your position of "blind guess" is a fallacy when implemented in science and criminology.

What branch of knowledge, according to you, will validate such "blind guesses" for everything in general?

Carlos...stop raving. You are making this sound like a playground spat.

The comment, "I believe there are no gods"...IS A BLIND GUESS...although I will acknowledge that the words "I believe" are being substituted for the words "I blindly guess."

All a person can do...if that person wants for there to be no gods...IS TO BLINDLY GUESS there are none.

There is no way to KNOW there are no gods...and there is no reasonable way to estimate there are no gods.

We do not know the reality of that dynamic (either there are gods or there are no gods)...and offering that there are NO GODS...cannot be anything but a blind guess.

0 Replies

@carloslebaron,

There seems to be a confusion here about 'blind guesses.' We all make blind guesses, but it's based on our own choice. A blind guess never remains a blind guess. It's somewhat similar to when driving on freeway, and you turn off on a ramp to look for a restroom. Once you turned off, that blind guess than became your reality. You can't keep calling it a blind guess. That's long past.

You made a decision and stuck with it. That 'guess' became your reality. It's no longer a guess. That's how most of us make our decisions. Even guesses becomes our reality.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Thanks for your clarification.

Still, at one point there is a discrimination to separate what it becomes real and what it won't.

Here is where "proof" enters to the scenario.

Frank's argument, is that, if there is a god, but we can't perceive it by any means, the existence of this god still is a reality.

But, wait, without "proof" you can't catalogue a god as a reality, even when our perception of physical reality is limited.

For this reason, in religious doctrines, the word "faith" implies believing that something exists even when it can't be seen (perceived).

I notice here that belief as faith might not disagree with "blind guess", but might disagree with physical reality.

And the following argument might flourishes, physical reality? virtual reality? dreams? thoughts?, and so forth.

In which "reality" does the soul belong to?

1 Reply

@carloslebaron,

No; the reality for humans is that once anything is believed to be true, it's no longer a "wild guess." You may be able to say that as an observer, but to the individual, their belief is their fact and reality. How do you deny people their reality? You or anyone else as an outsider can't decide for the individual what they wish to believe or not.

How does anyone go about questioning all humans about their perspective of life based on guesses? What does it matter to you whether John and Jane believes in god, and Joe and Mary doesn't believe in god? That's their choice, isn't it?

Are all your decisions based on total knowledge of everything? Have you made guesses and acted upon them - even when they turned out to be wrong? Who has the right to criticize you for the choices you have made based on guesses?

Is their life in your hands? Why is it that what you consider a wild guess isn't that important to the person making the decision for their own life? Are you that much smarter than the people who believe in god?

Everybody makes wrong guesses and acts upon them. I know, I have. What difference does it make that my choice is a wild guess? Why should that concern you or anyone else?

All of life is a wild guess; that's the reason everybody has their own subjective perception of how they lead their lives.

1 Reply

The assertion that there are no gods IS A BLIND GUESS.

Nothing wrong with blind guesses...although it is more ethical and honest to call a blind guess...a blind guess...rather than trying to give it more stature by calling it a "belief."

The fact that so many here have trouble seeing and acknowledging that is amazing...and amusing.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

And therefore, both non-belief and belief can be based on experience. QED.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

And therefore, both non-belief and belief can be based on experience. QED.

I'm still waiting for the "personal experience" that makes "There are no gods" something other than a blind guess.

But you don't ever intend to actually tackle that, because you realize you would be blown out of the water if you did. Instead, you are going to insist that some nebulous personal experience (of non-experience) carries the day.

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/crying-with-laughter.gif

Olivier...the comment, "I believe there are no gods"...IS A BLIND GUESS...from someone who does not want to tell the truth...that what he/she is actually saying is, "I blindly guess that there are no gods."

1 Reply

The 'SOUL'. What is it?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know