My answers, as promised...
Nov. 23rd, 2005 02:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ayoub1. If you suspected you were deluded, how could you find out for sure?
If I thought I was deluded, then I'd ask people questions that I feel absolutely sure of the answers for, and see whether they concur.
2. Are humans the product of a skilled or unskilled designer?
Unskilled, we're the product of what survived, not necessarily what's best.
3. Would an omnipotent being need to think in the way that people understand it? Or is thinking unnecessary for a timeless indestructible being whose preferences are the same as reality
If God knows everything that is, was, and will be, then what would He ponder? The only thing people think about is unknowns, but there are no unknowns for God, except, maybe, what it feels like to die. God doesn't think like us, because if He did, then the only remaining thing for him would be suicide.
4. Why would God be so unclear about which book or books he authored?
To give us the illusion of free will? The Islamic answer is that the Koran was the only one written by Him, the others are collected stories and accounts of events written by man (Anybody want to debate this?)
5. Is consciousness anything more than a continual process of imagining, acting, observing the impact of an action, and imagining again with new information?
That's a fancy way of saying conciousness is learning from your actions, and I can agree with that, from a certain point of view.
6. The dictionary defines "faith" as belief without evidence. It defines "stupidity" as unreasoned thinking. Is belief without evidence a form of unreasoned thinking?
Faith is stupidity, it is unreasoned, but then, everybody does some stupid things...
7. Can the impact of your actions rippling into the future be considered an immortal soul?
No, because a single organism made up of multiple cells rarely has those cells destroying each other out of pride, fear, or jealousy. The human race would need to be one race for the rippling of actions to be seen as anything but chaos.
8. Could atheists and believers accept the same definition of God?
There can be a definition of God that can be universally accepted, providing it doesn't allude to any of the religions.
9. If God's so smart, why do we fart?
If we were intelligently designed, we would utilise everything with 100% efficiency, so we would not fart. But are our weaknesses designed as a test?
If I thought I was deluded, then I'd ask people questions that I feel absolutely sure of the answers for, and see whether they concur.
2. Are humans the product of a skilled or unskilled designer?
Unskilled, we're the product of what survived, not necessarily what's best.
3. Would an omnipotent being need to think in the way that people understand it? Or is thinking unnecessary for a timeless indestructible being whose preferences are the same as reality
If God knows everything that is, was, and will be, then what would He ponder? The only thing people think about is unknowns, but there are no unknowns for God, except, maybe, what it feels like to die. God doesn't think like us, because if He did, then the only remaining thing for him would be suicide.
4. Why would God be so unclear about which book or books he authored?
To give us the illusion of free will? The Islamic answer is that the Koran was the only one written by Him, the others are collected stories and accounts of events written by man (Anybody want to debate this?)
5. Is consciousness anything more than a continual process of imagining, acting, observing the impact of an action, and imagining again with new information?
That's a fancy way of saying conciousness is learning from your actions, and I can agree with that, from a certain point of view.
6. The dictionary defines "faith" as belief without evidence. It defines "stupidity" as unreasoned thinking. Is belief without evidence a form of unreasoned thinking?
Faith is stupidity, it is unreasoned, but then, everybody does some stupid things...
7. Can the impact of your actions rippling into the future be considered an immortal soul?
No, because a single organism made up of multiple cells rarely has those cells destroying each other out of pride, fear, or jealousy. The human race would need to be one race for the rippling of actions to be seen as anything but chaos.
8. Could atheists and believers accept the same definition of God?
There can be a definition of God that can be universally accepted, providing it doesn't allude to any of the religions.
9. If God's so smart, why do we fart?
If we were intelligently designed, we would utilise everything with 100% efficiency, so we would not fart. But are our weaknesses designed as a test?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-23 03:14 pm (UTC)2. A skilled designer would take more pride... we're more like a garden, the basis was laid, and we're the things that evolved into dominance.
3. Inventing something isn't experiencing. Can a being that will never die know the fear of death?
4. In the islamic faith it isn't an assumption :)
5. There are many people out there who are aware, but I wouldn't call them conscious
6. Can you talk to God, and does He answer? Can you introduce me to Him?
7. The human race is too focused on its differences, and self destruction to be one race.
8. But if you know God exists, you must have a definition of Him.
9. The digestive system is impressive, but not 100% efficient. A supreme intelligence would be able to design something that is 100% efficient.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-23 03:31 pm (UTC)Possibly, although it is possible for the majority to be wrong. Also, if you were deluded, how could you be sure what you were hearing was what you thought you were hearing?
2. A skilled designer would take more pride... we're more like a garden, the basis was laid, and we're the things that evolved into dominance.
Are we dominant? Or are we just arrogant? And speaking as a gardener, I resent the implication that a gardener is less skilled than a designer. ;)
3. Inventing something isn't experiencing. Can a being that will never die know the fear of death?
I don't know the fear of death, I never have. Fear of death is optional. A being that is omnipotent would also have to be omniscient, by definition, knowing everything.
4. In the islamic faith it isn't an assumption :)
Yes, I understand that, but by the same token, the fundamentalist Christians will tell you He wrote the Bible. As far as I am concerned, both are sacred texts, but neither should ever be allowed to come between us and God.
5. There are many people out there who are aware, but I wouldn't call them conscious
Conscious means aware. I know a lot of conscious people who have dedicated their lives to the avoidance of learning.
6. Can you talk to God, and does He answer? Can you introduce me to Him?
Yes and yes. Are you saying He doesn't talk to you? Of course, I can't force you to listen, but anybody can talk to God and anyone who does will get an answer.
7. The human race is too focused on its differences, and self destruction to be one race.
The natural state of the human race is unity and unconditional love. Anything else is a brief, fear-induced aberration.
8. But if you know God exists, you must have a definition of Him.
Why? I know He exists because I have met Him. I have no need to define Him and no words adequate to do so.
9. The digestive system is impressive, but not 100% efficient. A supreme intelligence would be able to design something that is 100% efficient.
Able to, but not compelled to. You assume that your concept of perfection is the same as God's. The same mistake as Christian fundamentalists make, "If God does not do and think as I would, He is not really God." The probability is that God's understanding is superior to our own.
Consider breathing. It may seem inefficient that we release carbon dioxide as a waste product, until you understand that it is a gas other lifeforms need. Life is complex and we do not see all angles or all connections.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-23 03:39 pm (UTC)The problem I have with omniescence, is that death can only be known from experience, not guessed at.
How would you define awareness?
The natural state of the human race is to compete, but I'm a cynic...
Can you introduce me to Him? I'd like to meet Him.
Breathing is inefficient, because we take in more than we use. But if all life was 100% efficient, we wouldn't need such a complex food chain...
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-23 04:12 pm (UTC)But why assume design is superior to cultivation?
The problem I have with omniescence, is that death can only be known from experience, not guessed at.
In your opinion, which is a guess. Omniscience is knowing, not guessing, anyway.
How would you define awareness?
Consciousness. Experiencing existence.
The natural state of the human race is to compete, but I'm a cynic...
I used to be, but it proved to be unsustainable in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Can you introduce me to Him? I'd like to meet Him.
I find it strange that you have a religion yet haven't met God. I couldn't do that. Blind faith just wouldn't be possible for me. I greatly admire your ability to cope with it. You don't need me to introduce you, just talk to Him. He'll answer.
Breathing is inefficient, because we take in more than we use. But if all life was 100% efficient, we wouldn't need such a complex food chain...
Why? Who says we are the reason for the food chain? Your ideas are all humanocentric. Mine believe that the whole point is relationship with our brothers and sisters of all species. The food cycle is part of that. You think like a designer, I like a gardener, neither of us like a deity.