Can You Make Me See Red?

Let me get into the vibrations = hearing thing just a bit.

Vibrations = hearing for EVERYONE. Sound waves hit the eardrum, are transmitted to the cochlea, and then become electrical impulses that travel to the brain.

There is no way to turn that down to zero. The finer vibrations (higher/ softer sounds) may become lost in some problem in the ear (ear drum, bones, cochlea) and not make it to the brain -- but there will always be some vibrations that make it through.

aktorist,

But my point is, my experience with God is truth. It is a truth that I cannot make you experience. I can't make you experience red, sight, or sound.

And we're back to oy vey. ;-)

There are ways to know that something is true without personally experiencing it -- as in with ultraviolet.

sozobe,

Exactly, but that explanation of what sound is does not make someone hear that sound.

oy vey ;-)

Your experience is faith-based, for you have no evidence. There is evidence for sound without an ear. Yet, there is none for God.

'zactly, Intrepid. :-D

Good question.

Its also a question that serves to answer Intrepid's point, when he wrote, just above it:


They have no concept of it the same as others have, but they do have a concept of it, of course.

Of course deaf persons can say, yes, sound exists - its what they cant hear themselves, and have been shown, in the doctor's charts and x-rays and what all else is produced to analyse and diagnose their deafness and how it works and affects processes in their ears, brains differently than they take place in those of hearing people.

I have no experience of Kamchatka (thats in the Russian Far East, very cold), but I've seen maps, I've seen photos, I've seen temperature charts (as I said, very cold) -- so I do have a concept of it -- and I know that it exists (and is very cold).

Because it exists, there are ways for even those of us who havent personally experienced it, to find out what it is. Thats where the difference between Kamchatka, or the colour red, and MA's experience of God is.

Those of us who havent experienced MA's experience of God can not find out what it is, because there are none such ways in which her God manifests itself in verifiable reality. Thats where her God is not comparable to sound, or to the colour red, the existence of which can be verified even by those who do not themselves experience it the typical way - either through evidence of their existence through other media, or through hypothetical intermediary instruments like Farmerman's that can make, for example, a blind person hear a colour.

Sound exists, in short, and even those who can not hear it themselves can find that out. God, however ...

Oh God, I wrote all that, and he sums it up in one sentence

Perhaps, for purposes of your thesis, you should have made it a specific sound as you did with the colour = red.

I see what you are trying to say in it's simplicity. It is being taken to a much different level. Perhaps because you have hit on something that people cannot answer in the same way that you cannot answer why you belief in God. I think you have made your point. I know that others will not agree with me on that.

aktorist,

There you go with the flippin evidence again! Throw that evidence out! The evidence is useless to these three individuals.

C'mon, it's simple. I know you can tone the thinking down just a bit.

I didn't see InfraBlue's question (this has been a fast-moving one), I agree it's good and gets to the crux of things.

And, here's where we hit the wall.

littlek,

I should have said truth for me. Sorry about that.

sozobe,

I missed infrablue's statement? Going back to look.

No, it isn't. Evidence is evidence. One does not need to experience sound for sound to exist to them.

Evidence is required. Otherwise, it would be faith.
And which one is better?
Evidence, of course, for faith never advanced human knowledge. You can't just believe what you want to. It doesn't make things true. Evidence makes us get close to the truth.

And yet again, you have no evidence that it's not just your brain.

truth should be the same from any angle.

It is curious that most everybody has picked up on the sound thing. Not much regarding the sight or colour. Either proof that the original point was missed, or people picked the one that could most easily be refuted.

Infrablue Wrote:



Nope. In the case of Charlotte, Sandy, and David, these things do not exist to them because they have not experienced them. They may know of them, but they have not experienced them.

<banging head against the desk>

I already picked the covert one. And that was just obvious.

The thing that is tacitly implied is what I am picking up.

The difference between a chair and God is that I can continue to check if that is true. If there is a chair, then I can touch it whenever I want. But for God?

Not to mention that God makes no manifestations in the progress. That's not evidence, and makes it true for nobody.