|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
More on "God"
#1639571 - 06/17/03 12:13 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I found the following quote here.
I think Freeman Dyson has it right when he says: "God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension."
Though vague, I am still curious what S&P thinks of this.
Is he implying that God is merely a concept?
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
ViBrAnT
WaRpInG &sPiRaLiNg
Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 286
Last seen: 21 years, 2 months
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1639580 - 06/17/03 12:16 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
How bout this: " God is an extension of my everyday consciousness, i must simply find a way to get closer to him/me, i feel it in my heart that this place of fulfillment really exsists, thats what keeps me going on this sometimes seemingly blind day to day journey "
-------------------- " liken this life illusory, for your sand castle will one day be adrift amongst the wind "
|
tak_old
Endo Smoke
Registered: 05/31/02
Posts: 609
Loc: State of confusion
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: ViBrAnT]
#1639615 - 06/17/03 12:31 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Both of those quotes make my penis tingle.
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 21 days
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1639651 - 06/17/03 12:46 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Is he implying that God is merely a concept?
Only if "mind" is merely a concept too.
But he seems to be implying that the line between God-mind and human-mind depends on the level of our comprehension. That sort of makes sense, I think.
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Rhizoid]
#1639698 - 06/17/03 01:05 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Well, I think it's an assumption that can be filed under "Unsubstantiated New Age Hooey".
It's weird how dogmatic math-geeks and physicists can be in regards to Singularity, String Theory, and related deterministic concepts. Funny, too, how "believers" damn reason and logic except when it comes to E9 Symmetry, Stephen Hawking & Co., or other math-obsessed scientists. For the record, there is still no proof for any of those charlatans' (who earn lots of $$$ doing "research") Grand Unified Theories etc.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
GazzBut
Refraction
Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 8 months, 28 days
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1639812 - 06/17/03 01:54 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Do you think all those guys should stop doing their "research"?
-------------------- Always Smi2le
|
Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 4 months
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1639838 - 06/17/03 02:12 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Moron God?
-------------------- Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me. In addition: SHPONGLE
|
bluesky
mushroom cowboy
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 561
Last seen: 21 years, 3 months
|
|
I believe that god exists because I believe that my mind exists. What I call god is the positive spectrum of cosciousness, not just human consciousness but all consciousness. This consciousness that we have is as undescribable as the concept of god, yet we know it exists because we are able to loose it. The movie "Altered States" involves this theory in it's plot, it's a really good movie to reflect on. God and Mind are One.
-------------------- You're my blue sky, you're my sunny day, Lord you know it makes me high when you turn your love my way. Turn your love my waaaaaay, Yea. -Richard (Dickey) Betts
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 21 days
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1639933 - 06/17/03 02:57 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
It's weird how dogmatic math-geeks and physicists can be in regards to Singularity, String Theory, and related deterministic concepts.
Where did you get the impression that string theory and theories about singularities are deterministic? String theory is just as probabilistic as conventional quantum mechanics, and singularities in gravitation theories allow solutions that can't be completely determined by past events. They are deterministic in the sense that everything can be determined if all boundary conditions are specified, but the problem is that not all boundary conditions are nice enough to stay in the remote past where people expect them to be.
|
DailyPot
Trip'n Time
Registered: 11/17/02
Posts: 2,207
Loc: Florida
Last seen: 18 years, 7 months
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1640139 - 06/17/03 04:20 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I think Freeman Dyson has it right when he says: "God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension."
Is he implying that God is merely a concept?
No, I believe he is saying God is beond concept so we cannot possibly understand him.
|
johnnyfive
Burning withCircles!
Registered: 07/02/02
Posts: 886
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 20 years, 4 months
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: DailyPot]
#1640794 - 06/17/03 09:13 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
possibly understand him.
Him, na no him, or her, more like it.
Sclorch would be correct that its a concept, or mind set.
-------------------- And the gameshow host rings the buzzer (brrnnntt) oh and now you get a face full of face!
|
nubious
1up on the rest
Registered: 10/20/02
Posts: 534
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 days, 13 hours
|
|
(my two cents)
Generally, god is a way for people to explain the unexplainable. I'm sure you're all aware of this. It's a concept brought to the masses by people wanting to control and instill fear in people without having to threaten them for themselves. In Medevil (sp?) times the church used god as a way to control people - to keep them in line. It's widely known that the roman catholic church has beeen corrupt from the get go, yet people justify the religon by insisting it enspires people to do what's right. Well fuck - you don't need a religon to do that - if you can't decide what's right, then you need a moral workover. Nothing more, nothing less - you shouldn't NEED a figurehead in the sky to fear and pray to when you want something to go your way.
Maybe I'm just jaded from being forced to go to catholic school, or maybe I speak the truth - I'll leave that for you to decide, but no matter how you feel about what I've said, I think we can all agree that those fucking street preachers screaming on the corner of downtown yelling that "YOU'RE GOING TO HELL IF YOU DON'T RENOUNCE YOUR FAITH" are nothing but simple minded individuals that need something more that the every day bohummery the life they've made for themselves here on this fucked up rock we call Earth.
-------------------- No one knows the worth of innocence till he knows it is gone forever, and that money can't buy it back. Not the saint, but the sinner that repenteth, is he to whom the full length and breadth, and height and depth, of life's meaning is revealed. Good and evil loose all objective meaning and are seen as equally necessary and contrasting elements in the masterpiece that is the universe.
|
somebodyelse
In_Is_Out
Registered: 06/12/03
Posts: 296
Last seen: 21 years, 2 months
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: nubious]
#1640875 - 06/17/03 09:49 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Shouldn't we have more words for "God"? there are so many contradictory and differing ideas of its meaning...I think the consensus defintion would end up being something like "a consciousness that is more powerful than your mind" - but really, most people mean much more than that when using the word.
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 21 days
|
|
Quote:
Shouldn't we have more words for "God"? there are so many contradictory and differing ideas of its meaning...
An excellent suggestion. An old pet idea of mine is that we should say "totality" or "universe" instead of "god" when we are talking about the totality of existence. Then we can invent new words for what remains when we subtract various parts. For example, if I subtract only myself, then the remaining part is "the other". If I subtract all of humankind and all human creations, then the remaining part could be called "nature", if you're happy with such an exclusive definition of "nature". And we could go on like this.
Another more old-fashioned approach is of course to define gods as sentient beings that are much more powerful than humans. Science has shown that all of these seem to have been just imaginary creatures, but there is no apriori reason that rules out the existence of such gods somewhere in the universe. Anyway, they should have separate labels.
|
c_mathimatics
kaok
Registered: 05/23/03
Posts: 59
Last seen: 21 years, 22 days
|
The Void [Re: Rhizoid]
#1641924 - 06/18/03 09:54 AM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Nothing doesn't including Everything, but Everything must include Nothing by nature.
Does this not prove that there is a more, whole way of viewing everything that is all-incompassing?
What if we put aside all polarized thinking for these whole concepts. There is nothing you cannot break down in physical reality that doesn't have two sides.
A step further might be that bad is not good but good could contain bad, just not perceived from the greater 'whole concept' of good inclusive of the bad.
This says that God may be all good, but all good might include the bad!!!
---
Fear is the greatest tool one can use to recognize one-self. Upon achievment of recognization, no fear need be experienced anymore. Ahh - to be whole and understand both sides of the coin simultaneously.
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 21 days
|
|
Quote:
Nothing doesn't including Everything, but Everything must include Nothing by nature.
Does this not prove that there is a more, whole way of viewing everything that is all-incompassing?
I don't see how "Everything" is lacking in wholeness from this. Could you elaborate please?
|
c_mathimatics
kaok
Registered: 05/23/03
Posts: 59
Last seen: 21 years, 22 days
|
Re: The Void [Re: Rhizoid]
#1642182 - 06/18/03 11:52 AM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
That was my point. Everything is whole compaired to it's polar opposite, nothing, because it is inclusive of both sides.
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 21 days
|
|
OK, I see what you mean. However I think you can avoid the inadequacies of polar opposites by reasoning about complementary parts instead. Example: negative is the polar opposite of positive, but the complementary of positive consists of both negative and neutral.
Hmm, I realized that this is what you just implied
|
SlapnutRob
Toolhead
Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 15 years, 2 months
|
|
Sclorch, whether or not you believe in what those physicists are doing, it's still important work, with lots to learn. These guys I also believe abandoned determinism when quantum mechanics came along... the uncertainty principle, bla bla bla.
-------------------- Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.
|
infidelGOD
illusion
Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1642306 - 06/18/03 12:42 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
"God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension."
though it's incomplete, I like this definition. it suggests that God is a dynamic concept - as our comprehension expands, so does God.
Is he implying that God is merely a concept?
I think he's implying that God will always remain a concept to humans, because we can never understand it. not "merely" a concept, but so imcomprehensible that it will never truly become "real" to us.
|
SlapnutRob
Toolhead
Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 15 years, 2 months
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: nubious]
#1642310 - 06/18/03 12:43 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
nubious said: (my two cents)
Generally, god is a way for people to explain the unexplainable. I'm sure you're all aware of this. It's a concept brought to the masses by people wanting to control and instill fear in people without having to threaten them for themselves. In Medevil (sp?) times the church used god as a way to control people - to keep them in line. It's widely known that the roman catholic church has beeen corrupt from the get go, yet people justify the religon by insisting it enspires people to do what's right. Well fuck - you don't need a religon to do that - if you can't decide what's right, then you need a moral workover. Nothing more, nothing less - you shouldn't NEED a figurehead in the sky to fear and pray to when you want something to go your way.
I just now read this, and I agree with it. It's like what Karl Marx said, "Religion is the opiate of the masses." Somebody else also said something like "If there was no God it would be necessary for humans to create one." The fact that completely different religions have always risen in human civilizations shows our dependence on the idea of a higher power. People just don't want to believe there isn't one.
-------------------- Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.
|
Sole_Worthy
Stranger
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 463
Loc: over here
Last seen: 3 years, 8 days
|
Re: More on "God" [Re: Sclorch]
#1642316 - 06/18/03 12:45 PM (21 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I think it's sayin that we can not comprehend what God is in our normal mind set. wed have to go beyond that, and spose we can with psychedelics/mediation etc
innabit brothers
-------------------- get it all together get like birds of a feather
|
|