God's explanation for this shit

It's time

on fundamental matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind and ethics.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#201  Postby jamest » Nov 13, 2018 12:29 am

The idea, for those even bothering to listen, is that only God exists but has the capacity to impose upon itself the awareness/consciousness/belief of being a finite individual amidst a fragmented existence. This is achieved via the imposition of 'sets' of ordered/orchestrated sensations upon awareness/consciousness coupled with the forgetfulness of truth (about One's true identity) such that the awareness/consciousness is then free to interpret/perceive itself as a particular finite entity amidst a particular fragmented 'universe' of finite entities.

What supports this fact as much as any amount of philosophising, is that we see this scenario played-out most nights of our life, when - whilst asleep (to who we believe we are) - we become lost to all sorts of bizarre scenarios imposed upon our consciousness via orchestrated sensations. We call these scenarios dreams and nightmares, but what they prove beyond any shadow of doubt is that 'consciousness' is prone to both forgetfulness of identity AND at a whim believe that any ordered imposition of sensations are to be accepted as the basis of One's reality.

Thus, I don't even need to do philosophy to show you that consciousness is prone to forget 'self' and build it afresh from any new set of orchestrated sensations. This is something which you can confirm for yourselves almost every morning of your lives. Hence, to suggest that 'human individuals' are a belief about a particular set of imposed orchestrated sensations is hardly a stretch. The only difference between day and night is that day always brings the same dream. However, it has to, otherwise a consistent theory of self held universally wrt other reports of the same 'dream' would be impossible. Thus, it is the nature of consciousness to forget truth and forge identity, though the latter would be impossible without consistency.

It takes time to forge complicated sets of beliefs about oneself, to the extent that a short dream would be meaningless unless fueled by preconceived (constructed earlier) ideas about one's environment and oneself. Hence, in our dreams, no matter how weird, the weirdness is readily interpretable wrt some former knowledge about 'the world' and our emotions towards it. I mean, you cannot have a meaningful dream when you know neither yourself nor have any understanding of the world you are experiencing. So, the bottom-line is that consistency of a particular dream (our world) is paramount in the process of finding ANY meaning, even meaning within the weird shit that happens to us whilst asleep at night.


What's being suggested here is a purpose for it all, which is a means to construct EVOLVING ideas about oneself via both consistent and inconsistent experiences imposed upon consciousness/awareness.
Indeed, it is proposed here that the Theory of Evolution is in error, because what Darwin failed to see was that although 'bodies' can and do transform, it is driven by need/hope/emotion - MIND/HEART.

This is a NEW theory which nobody here has ever heard before, but one day in perhaps a few hundred decades or years it will usurp Darwin's ideas. Essentially, that idea boils-down to the fact that The Mind (via experience) drives transformations in the body and future generations thereof. Not the reverse, as Darwin has it.

For the record, when that day comes, in accordance with his philosophy, jamest insists that nobody constructs a religion around him nor constructs a statue of him to be placed in Trafalgar Square. Further, he demands that his detractors here (and their ancestors) be free from reprisals for their negative attitude towards him. It should be said, whilst he still has strings, that james seeks no rewards nor vengeance for himself.

There shall be more profound offerings forthcoming, strings permitting.
Il messaggero non e importante.
Ora non e importante.
Il resultato futuro e importante.
Quindi, persisto.
jamest
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 18044
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: God's explanation for this shit

#202  Postby SafeAsMilk » Nov 13, 2018 2:51 am

:clap:
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 13573
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#203  Postby zulumoose » Nov 13, 2018 3:23 am

Now why did it take 11 pages of garbage, before the first coherent attempt to deliver what the OP promised?
The mind as an evolution influencer, seems worthy of consideration, I don't even imagine there would be a way to debunk it.
Of course it's true in at least one sense, sexual reproduction involves mate selection, which involves the mind seeking desirable characteristics that certainly have an influence on future generations.
User avatar
zulumoose
 
Posts: 3573

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#204  Postby laklak » Nov 13, 2018 3:25 am

At least when we get older. When I were lad "mind" had little to do with it. Probably would have shagged a snake if somebody held it's head.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19823
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#205  Postby Macdoc » Nov 13, 2018 4:12 am

Image :coffee:
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 16138
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#206  Postby OlivierK » Nov 13, 2018 5:15 am

Well, I'm not sure that was worth the wait, but it was around about my level of expectation.

I'm in a rush to go off and do some real-life stuff, but one thing that leapt out was the idea that the theory of evolution is a theory about organisms adapting and mutating during their lifetimes, as opposed to a theory concerning the effect of individual mutations present from birth on populations.

Other than that, there's a false dichotomy buried not far below the surface in the "only" explanation for dreams, and OneGod seems to need to run a truth mill to sustain the philosophy.
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 8932
Age: 53
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#207  Postby Macdoc » Nov 13, 2018 5:21 am

He's never understood the Bayesian brain and the role of dreams :roll:
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 16138
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: God's explanation for this shit

#208  Postby Spinozasgalt » Nov 13, 2018 5:22 am

I'm a little confused about (among other things) the order of explanation. If human identity is formed through sustained experience, and our pre- or non-human self "imposes" the set of sensations on us that constitute that experience, then how did we secure the initial identity claim that we're God? Not through experience? We've just been given reason to doubt identities insofar as they're constructed by experience, haven't we?
When the straight and narrow gets a little too straight, roll up the joint.
Or don't. Just follow your arrow wherever it points.

Kacey Musgraves
User avatar
Spinozasgalt
RS Donator
 
Name: Jennifer
Posts: 18308
Age: 32
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#209  Postby laklak » Nov 13, 2018 3:28 pm

OlivierK wrote:...the idea that the theory of evolution is a theory about organisms adapting and mutating during their lifetimes


And that is why no dog never had no kitten and my momma weren't no monkey. Not sure if it handles crocoducks, though.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19823
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#210  Postby BWE » Nov 13, 2018 5:19 pm

oh it handles crocoducks. Like a quarterback handles a football.
User avatar
BWE
 
Posts: 2437

Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#211  Postby laklak » Nov 13, 2018 7:16 pm

I've already reproduced and am unlikely to do so again, can I still mutate?
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19823
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#212  Postby jamest » Nov 13, 2018 11:55 pm

Spinozasgalt wrote:I'm a little confused about (among other things) the order of explanation. If human identity is formed through sustained experience, and our pre- or non-human self "imposes" the set of sensations on us that constitute that experience, then how did we secure the initial identity claim that we're God? Not through experience? We've just been given reason to doubt identities insofar as they're constructed by experience, haven't we?

Identity construction, even that of being human, has been an evolving issue. We've just reached a point in the last few thousand years where a small minority of intelligent people have begun to question those shadows on the cave wall. Just like scientists have the capacity to enable their idea of 'the world' to evolve, some of us also had/have the capacity to enable our idea of identity to evolve. That starts with a realisation that experience is something which happens within oneself, not externally to that self. That realisation in itself suffices as a source of ontological/metaphysical doubt wrt the idea that the self IS in fact that which is reported by the cave wall, so to speak. For a minority of us, such as myself, the conclusion to such contemplations is that the self is God.

I'm not sure that I understood your question, so feel free to redirect me if this is the case.
Il messaggero non e importante.
Ora non e importante.
Il resultato futuro e importante.
Quindi, persisto.
jamest
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 18044
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#213  Postby jamest » Nov 14, 2018 12:12 am

OlivierK wrote:Well, I'm not sure that was worth the wait, but it was around about my level of expectation.

I'm in a rush to go off and do some real-life stuff, but one thing that leapt out was the idea that the theory of evolution is a theory about organisms adapting and mutating during their lifetimes, as opposed to a theory concerning the effect of individual mutations present from birth on populations.

Somatic mutations are a verifiable scientific fact, but that wasn't necessarily implied from my post as a requirement for my proposal to be true. I mean, hereditary mutations work too within the idea that the mind can affect future physical changes in the long-term.

Other than that, there's a false dichotomy buried not far below the surface in the "only" explanation for dreams, and OneGod seems to need to run a truth mill to sustain the philosophy.

If you find a logical fault with my reasoning pertaining to dreams, then spell it out. Taking a quick dump and then fucking-off to do your 'real life stuff' is around my level of expectation of you too, so you're not doing yourself any favours with this kind of empty retort to a post which took rather longer for me to construct than your quick shit.
Il messaggero non e importante.
Ora non e importante.
Il resultato futuro e importante.
Quindi, persisto.
jamest
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 18044
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#214  Postby jamest » Nov 14, 2018 12:15 am

Macdoc wrote:Image :coffee:

Make your point, don't doodle.
Il messaggero non e importante.
Ora non e importante.
Il resultato futuro e importante.
Quindi, persisto.
jamest
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 18044
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#215  Postby Thommo » Nov 14, 2018 1:00 am

jamest wrote:If you find a logical fault with my reasoning pertaining to dreams, then spell it out.


It's a faulty analogy. You say that because you can (and it's debatable) build a new "self" in a dream when you have restricted access to your memories and normal mental faculties that means you can assume the existence of a god who has built a new self by intentionally restricting access to its own memories and normal mental faculties.

If you inferred that because you can build a new "self" in a dream, then god (if it exists) can build a new "self" that would be ok. Unfortunately it highlights clearly the distinction between what the philosophy states about the nature of reality and why we should or should not believe what the philosophy states about reality.

We have no reason to think such an entity exists, nor reason to think it has partitioned its consciousness.

I would add that there's a sort of implication that reifying "self" is a standard thing to do, and that you assume we all do it. I don't think this holds in general.

-----

On a broader note, and along the line Spozzy takes above, I think there are more general concerns about the internal implications and consistency of the idea as well. For example, we are told that our identities are formed within our "personal" partition from an intentionally restricted set of mental faculties and memories, and that these are recreated moment by moment by "orchestration" (via qualia) from outside the partition. This means that we are fatalistically bound by the will of the external portion of the "one", identification of our situation provides neither means of escape, nor new information, nor reason to modify our behaviour towards (what we surmise to be) other partitions of the "one" - if John's sensations are ochestrated by the "one" to lead him to behave badly towards James, then saying to him that he should not because he and James are both parts of the same "one" carries no motivational force - he can behave badly with the full knowledge that the conductor of the orchestrations who does not have the same self-imposed restrictions on its faculties has directed him to do so.

There is also the point I made to Lucidflight that the orchestration in one partition of the perception of another partition does not require another partition. Or put more plainly the fact I perceive you, and am myself an aspect of "the one god" does not entail that I should think you are, my partition's perceptions of you could be a p-zombie, dream, figment, delusion or not exist at all.

Another point is the fundamental difference between the mind of the dreamer, in the analogy, which exists in a substrate (an idealist substrate - the mind of god - on your view, and say, a physical substrate in a physicalist view, to give just a couple of quick examples) and the mind of god which is the substrate and apparently "just is". Since the two minds differ in such fundamental respect it weakens the ability to say that what is true of the one is likely to be true of the other.

All of these factors that fail to be predicted or explained by the account require ad hoc extension of the theory, "god wills it so", which is a serious violation of parsimony.
Last edited by Thommo on Nov 14, 2018 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26631

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: God's explanation for this shit

#216  Postby Spinozasgalt » Nov 14, 2018 1:25 am

jamest wrote:
Spinozasgalt wrote:I'm a little confused about (among other things) the order of explanation. If human identity is formed through sustained experience, and our pre- or non-human self "imposes" the set of sensations on us that constitute that experience, then how did we secure the initial identity claim that we're God? Not through experience? We've just been given reason to doubt identities insofar as they're constructed by experience, haven't we?

Identity construction, even that of being human, has been an evolving issue. We've just reached a point in the last few thousand years where a small minority of intelligent people have begun to question those shadows on the cave wall. Just like scientists have the capacity to enable their idea of 'the world' to evolve, some of us also had/have the capacity to enable our idea of identity to evolve. That starts with a realisation that experience is something which happens within oneself, not externally to that self. That realisation in itself suffices as a source of ontological/metaphysical doubt wrt the idea that the self IS in fact that which is reported by the cave wall, so to speak. For a minority of us, such as myself, the conclusion to such contemplations is that the self is God.

I'm not sure that I understood your question, so feel free to redirect me if this is the case.

The two underlined sections are what I'd draw your attention to. As much as I enjoy Plato's cave imagery (I'm an Iris Murdoch devotee :) ), I'll put my reply roughly so as not to get bogged down in detail.

In order to undermine contemporary human identity claims, your thesis holds that experience is imposed and thus unreliable at least insofar as it contributes to identity formation. However, you have an identity claim in your own thesis: that we are really God. My wonder is, how did you get this claim and how can you secure it through reasoning? If it's drawn from any kind of analysis of experience, then how does it avoid the unreliability problem that afflicts human identity claims that similarly rely on said experience?
When the straight and narrow gets a little too straight, roll up the joint.
Or don't. Just follow your arrow wherever it points.

Kacey Musgraves
User avatar
Spinozasgalt
RS Donator
 
Name: Jennifer
Posts: 18308
Age: 32
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#217  Postby jamest » Nov 14, 2018 1:59 am

Thommo wrote:
jamest wrote:If you find a logical fault with my reasoning pertaining to dreams, then spell it out.


It's a faulty analogy. You say that because you can (and it's debatable) build a new "self" in a dream when you have restricted access to your memories and normal mental faculties that means you can assume the existence of a god who has built a new self by intentionally restricting access to its own memories and normal mental faculties.

I don't have much time now because it's late and I've got to be up early, so I'm only going to respond to this bit for now...

I did not present my thoughts here about dreams as an argument for God's existence. Rather, as explicitly stated within the post, I used my thoughts about dreams to support the notion that the 'conscious self' can and does forget itself when presented with various scenarios via 'experience'. That's self-evident for almost every 'conscious individual' to review, almost every morning of their lives. Thus, my notion that consciousness is deprived of the memory of its true identity as a means to forge one within experience, is not far-fetched at all. Indeed, the evidence (notwithstanding the reasoning) speaks volumes to support this fact.

I haven't attempted to make an argument for God's existence within this thread, though - given the title of the thread - you shouldn't expect one. Rather, I'm here to make sense of God wrt "this shit", such that you can all ascertain why the very notion of the God of my philosophy does actually suffice as an explanation for that smell.

Good night.
Il messaggero non e importante.
Ora non e importante.
Il resultato futuro e importante.
Quindi, persisto.
jamest
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 18044
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#218  Postby SafeAsMilk » Nov 14, 2018 3:20 am

jamest wrote:I used my thoughts about dreams to support the notion that

Somethin' wrong here...
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 13573
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#219  Postby OlivierK » Nov 14, 2018 6:59 am

jamest wrote:The only difference between day and night is that day always brings the same dream. However, it has to, otherwise a consistent theory of self held universally wrt other reports of the same 'dream' would be impossible.

Indeed not only does day always bring the same "dream", but everything in that dream behaves in a way that's consistent with the laws of physics and chemistry. Everyone wakes up in the same "place" and can observe others' periods of sleep in a way that's consistent with the experience of those people. People whose water sources are contaminated experience symptoms of that contamination (e.g. giardia, heavy metal poisoning) even if they're not aware of the contamination, and consistently with the reported experience of others who drank that water.

What you seem to be saying is that such consistency with a materialist model is necessary for something as fundamental as a sense of self. Hardly surprising, then, that most people, forced to live as if materialism is true even if you're right, adopt the approach of accepting physicalism as something for which they have a superabundance of consilient evidence, and dismissing idealism as mind-bogglingly unparsimonious. To tip the scales, the evidence for any form of idealism would need to be weighty indeed. But the evidence and arguments in its favour are always flimsy and ad hoc, and your latest effort is no different from any other that claims that human experience is created by God in such a way that exactly mirrors a God-free existence. Unverifiability, as usual, is baked into the philosophy, which explains why you can't sell it.

Like all religions, since experience is (again, even if you're right) identical to God-free experience, you just gotta have faith. For some, that's a comfortable blanket. For others, it's ridiculous, and unsustainable (or unstartable).
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 8932
Age: 53
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: God's explanation for this shit

#220  Postby laklak » Nov 14, 2018 2:28 pm

:this:

If it looks like materialism, walks like materialism, and bounces you off that wall you're trying to walk through like materialism, then it's close enough for horseshoes, hand grenades, or government work.

If someone could show any benefit from idealism then I'd consider it. Actual, tangible, material benefit, that is, not a slice of Pious in the Skyus, even with special sauce.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19823
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest