Freethought & Rationalism Archive

DRFseven · 06-19-2002, 09:52 AM

Helen, since you must have missed my last post to you, I'll repost it in hopes of a response:

Quote:

No, that's the problem. They think they have categorized the person as not believing in the kind of thing they (the questioners) are asking about. In truth, since only those who are asking the question are privy to that description, the individuals who respond with a yes or no are responding in the dark, so to speak.

There is a big difference in asking about "God" and asking about ice-cream w/nuts. I know all about what ice-cream is and someone can point to ice-cream and ask me if I want it. If I say "yes", we are both talking about the same thing. You never answered the question about the complicated math formula riddled with mystery symbols; if you had no idea what the formula said, would you say you judged it to be true or false? I don't believe you would. I mean, some people might, for convenience sake, answer that they thought it was false, but they'd have no basis. I think you'd answer truthfully that you had no way to give an answer; that you could not address the question.

I think there's an assumption we are all brought up with that "God" means something; the term is bandied about more than the name, Santa Claus, and since every five-year-old is taught to use the term as if he/she understands it, we all grow up assuming it is a meaninful term. I contend it is not.

I further contend that some peoples' recognition of the problems involved in trying to think about aspects of the "God" concept that are contradictory are an important factor in an eventual conclusion of agnosticism or atheism. And even further, I contend that we inadvertently add validation to the idea that "God" is a coherent concept by "glossing over" the incoherence to simply reply "no" when asked if we believe in "God." If theists were required to provide a coherent definition, most couldn't do it; they'd describe a square circle or the universe, which already goes by the name, "the universe."

Jayhawker Soule · 06-19-2002, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
I appreciate your humour, but I'm afraid you're not going deep enough. 3rd request (and to answer your question "viz. God"): ...

I truly wish you would go away.

WJ · 06-19-2002, 10:34 AM

Mmmm, wish or pray? I pray that God speaks to Koy...

Walrus

HelenM · 06-19-2002, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DRFseven:
Helen, since you must have missed my last post to you, I'll repost it in hopes of a response:

Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt

; yes, I did miss it

I need to read it carefully but for now, how about I say that I understand your point that sometimes 'yes' or 'no' isn't sufficient. Even if one is not a politician

I think we can agree on that.

We may not agree, perhaps, on whether 'yes' or 'no' is [ever] sufficient if asked "Do you believe in God?"

My answers to questions have become rather context-sensitive, fwiw. Meaning, if people won't listen beyond the first word of my answer, I may as well answer 'yes' or 'no' even though I don't feel either one is very accurate and I'd much rather be able to say that and explain why. After all, if they aren't listening, they aren't listening...

love
Helen

edited to add p.s. yes, I think part of this may be that you feel a 'yes' or 'no' is too much of a concession to peoples' unwillingness to be educated as to why 'yes' or 'no' does not suffice...do you think that might be part of it?

Perhaps I have resigned myself a little more in certain areas than you. Or maybe not. I'm not sure. I'm not sure about much, quite honestly...

[ June 19, 2002: Message edited by: HelenSL ]

Koyaanisqatsi · 06-19-2002, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
Koy,

I appreciate your humour, but I'm afraid you're not going deep enough.

You're so cute when you think you're important.

Quote:

MORE: 3rd request (and to answer your question "viz. God"):

Third request, what do you mean by "viz. God?" The phrase "viz. God" has no meaning.

Quote:

ME: "verification, falsification and repetition" would be tools of the scientific method employed where applicable; aka, when required or necessary."

YOU: When is it 'necessary, applicable or required' to use the "scientific method" to prove or disprove the existence of God?

Whenever "people" like you declare like braying jackasses in the wind, "I know god exists," obviously.

Your turn.

DRFseven · 06-19-2002, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Helen: edited to add p.s. yes, I think part of this may be that you feel a 'yes' or 'no' is too much of a concession to peoples' unwillingness to be educated as to why 'yes' or 'no' does not suffice...do you think that might be part of it?

Maybe; I've never thought of it in exactly that way, but I can see that it might be part of the dynamic; your perception may be dead on. In actuality, I sometimes just say no and other times explain why there is no honest way for me to address that question. I guess it depends upon the situation (my mood, what I know of the person asking, etc.). I'm not trying to say I think we should never respond to the "do you believe in God" question; I'm saying that there is no reason to act as if it's silly to say that "God" has no coherent meaning (unless it is specified), because it doesn't. Of course individual concepts of "God" have meaning in the lives of people, but the word, itself, sort of means everything, and, therefore, nothing.

HelenM · 06-19-2002, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by DRFseven:

Maybe; I've never thought of it in exactly that way, but I can see that it might be part of the dynamic; your perception may be dead on.

Thanks

In actuality, I sometimes just say no and other times explain why there is no honest way for me to address that question. I guess it depends upon the situation (my mood, what I know of the person asking, etc.).

I think I was saying that the same is true for me. It very much depends on my mood, who I'm talking to, where I am, how much time we have, etc

I'm not trying to say I think we should never respond to the "do you believe in God" question; I'm saying that there is no reason to act as if it's silly to say that "God" has no coherent meaning (unless it is specified), because it doesn't. Of course individual concepts of "God" have meaning in the lives of people, but the word, itself, sort of means everything, and, therefore, nothing.

I am willing to say that some of my reaction is due to the poster on CA rather than just the concepts he presents.

I'd have to think about it more before being sure of how much I agree with and disagree with. I like where you are going with "individual concepts of God have meaning in the lives of some people". The poster on CA doesn't seem good at separating "what has meaning to you" and "what has meaning to me" which is unfortunate because to me, that's where respect begins - where we can accept that we really might see the world differently and that doesn't mean we need to beat each other over the head until one of us gives in and says "ok, ok - you're right and I'm totally deluded!" I don't think we have that mandate, to try to push people into seeing things 'our way'. I don't think we can even when we want to. We can share information but they decide what to do with it. I can try to guess what the world looks like through your eyes but I can never be sure whether I'm right because I'm not you.

love
Helen

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-19-2002, 10:34 AM	#93
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	Mmmm, wish or pray? I pray that God speaks to Koy... Walrus

06-19-2002, 06:37 PM	#97
HelenM Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Ill Posts: 6,577	Originally posted by DRFseven: Maybe; I've never thought of it in exactly that way, but I can see that it might be part of the dynamic; your perception may be dead on. Thanks In actuality, I sometimes just say no and other times explain why there is no honest way for me to address that question. I guess it depends upon the situation (my mood, what I know of the person asking, etc.). I think I was saying that the same is true for me. It very much depends on my mood, who I'm talking to, where I am, how much time we have, etc I'm not trying to say I think we should never respond to the "do you believe in God" question; I'm saying that there is no reason to act as if it's silly to say that "God" has no coherent meaning (unless it is specified), because it doesn't. Of course individual concepts of "God" have meaning in the lives of people, but the word, itself, sort of means everything, and, therefore, nothing. I am willing to say that some of my reaction is due to the poster on CA rather than just the concepts he presents. I'd have to think about it more before being sure of how much I agree with and disagree with. I like where you are going with "individual concepts of God have meaning in the lives of some people". The poster on CA doesn't seem good at separating "what has meaning to you" and "what has meaning to me" which is unfortunate because to me, that's where respect begins - where we can accept that we really might see the world differently and that doesn't mean we need to beat each other over the head until one of us gives in and says "ok, ok - you're right and I'm totally deluded!" I don't think we have that mandate, to try to push people into seeing things 'our way'. I don't think we can even when we want to. We can share information but they decide what to do with it. I can try to guess what the world looks like through your eyes but I can never be sure whether I'm right because I'm not you. love Helen

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.