joedad

Sure is. Makes more sense to understand g-o-d as a verb, such as in explaining WJ's behavior.

joe

Kamchatka

Where to begin?

Philosoft said,"I wouldn't even suppose a newborn is fully conscious, much less endowed with god-belief."

Would you suppose any of us are fully conscious? I would not. Humanity is in the process of developing consciousness. God-belief is part of that process. No god-belief is also part of that process.

Philosoft said, "Calling instinctual behavior 'god-belief' is bizarre."

Come on, Philosoft. Doesn't it make it much easier to understand why humans have created and maintain gods?

As Free12Thinker so clearly pointed out, in the same post where he concluded that I believe that "god is the creator of all things and the purveyor of all things", he and his wife are exactly that for their child.

The only difference is that they are benevolent gods. Now I understand why Free12thinker has no god-belief. He is god to his child.

God-belief is a characteristic of undeveloped consciousness.

Philosoft said, "Be careful which friend's noses you pick."

How very thoughtful, reasoned and adult of you.

Kamchatka

Koyaanisqatsi,

Most of what you say does not warrant response.

Last I checked words were just ideas (thoughts) being expressed. If you and your no god-belief buddies felt kicked enough to attempt kicking back, I am honored.

Unfortunately, I cannot offer you the same honor, for your words have no effective "kick".

You respond to my example of the Soviet Union's indoctrination of generations of youth to atheism by accusing me of garnering my information from 1950's propaganda files.

Further, you compare my example to asking the mongul hordes.

Actually, my example comes from over 100 interviews of Russians in Russia. It also comes from discussions with my English classes in Russia. It also comes from my Russian wife and her Russian family.

I am sorry, Koyaanisqatsi, propaganda did have something to do with it- atheist propaganda.

Philosoft

So, your definition of 'consciousness' is something that doesn't even exist yet? Your precognition skills are remarkable. Have you been using the dark side again?

<strong> No, what makes sense is all the stuff I learned as a psych undergrad - namely, that the brain has an innate tendency to invent answers for mysteries.

<strong> Except his kid's parents actually exist.

<strong> I think F12T has a pretty good understanding of human reproduction and development. To claim that he sees himself as some sort of transcendent life-giver is silly. Perhaps you might ask him what he feels?

<strong> Are you prophesizing the end of god-belief with the full maturity of consciousness?

<strong> Thanks, but it's actually none of those things. More like disrespectful, raunchy and puerile. Lighten up.

Kamchatka

Philosoft,

You said, "So, your definition of 'consciousness' is something that doesn't even exist yet? Your precognition skills are remarkable. Have you been using the dark side again?"

No, what I said was I do not feel that evidence suggests that humanity as a whole has completed the process of becoming fully conscious. Maybe you and your fellow atheists have completed that process. I don't think that you have offered evidence of full consciousness, but that doesn't mean you have not accomplished it.

As for the dark side, I did enjoy episode two.

You said, "No, what makes sense is all the stuff I learned as a psych undergad- namely, that the brain has an innate tendency to invent answers for mysteries."

And one of those innate tendencies is to invent gods to answer those mysteries.

You said, "Except his kid's parents actually exist."

And, therefore, gods exist.

You said, "I think F12T has a pretty good understanding of human reproduction and developement. To claim that he sees himself as some sort of transcendant life-giver is silly. Perhaps you might ask him what he feels?"

Check his previous post for yourself.
Free12thinker said, "I am the purveyor of all things for her now, but that will change. I am her light . . ."

Sounds like a god to me, at least from his child's point of view.

You said, "Are you prophesizing the end of god-belief with the full maturity of consciousness?"

I'm not prophesizing anything. I am stating what the evidence suggests to me at this point in my developing consciousness.

Kamchatka

Free12thinker,

You said, "Apparently, you are gods person. He created you right? You live by gods every word, right? You note him as your god, and you note god as the creator of all things and the purveyor of all things.
"Am I missing something here?"
"I am the purveyor of all things for her now, but that will change. I am her light in a daddy sort of way."

So, I am the windmill to your Don Quixote. I never suggested any of those things. Are you missing something here? I think your evidence suggests the answers to your questions.

It is heartwarming that you are at least a benevolent goddy to your child.

Kamchatka

SteveD,

I agree- another god created by man.

Philosoft

In other words, you are defining 'consciousness' as something that has not yet been observed on this planet. Perhaps you have another objective standard of 'consciousness' to which you are comparing humans?

<strong> Agreed. Yoda rules.

<strong> This might be true, but it does not mean infants worship their parents as we worship gods.

<strong> I don't know why you would even bother defining 'god' in such a general way.

<strong> In other words, he sees himself as her provider or protector. A far cry from transcendent creator.

<strong> I find it difficult, nay impossible to believe a child worships his parent as a creator.

<strong> Introspection alone isn't going to get you far.

Kamchatka

Samhain,

You said, "Isn't that the point? For them it is, without them it's just worthless words written by dumbasses put in a book."

You repeatedly refer to the creators of religions adhered to by hundreds of millions of people as dumbasses.

Then you warn me with, "Watch out for those hasty over-generalizations, they may come back to bite you in the ass."

I would assume that warning is from extensive experience.

Would you care to provide evidence that Muhammed, Moses, Bhudda etcetera were dumbasses?

At the very least they were all brilliant politicians. Muhammed was also a brilliant military strategist.

But, maybe you are right and they were just dumbasses and you and your competence of logic have all the answers.

You said, "When perceiving things from a human perspective, what exists in reality which is not subject and which does not fall under accurate scrutiny from science and logic? Can you name something besides common perceptions of god(s)?"

I disagree that gods have not been scrutinized by science and logic. In fact, I think there is evidence that science and logic were developed to scrutinize gods and existence.

But, to answer your questions, how about love, hate, sense of humor, revenge, jealousy, homosexuality, law . . .

We are in a constant process of becoming more conscious. There are many theories that are only perceptions.

I disagree that the human perceptions of the theories of god are ridiculous. They have served as theories on which science and logic have been built throughout recorded human history.

Is it time for god theory to disappear with the gods themselves? Maybe, maybe not. I think there will be much more ugliness before that happens, if it ever does.

You said, "Once again, they do not exist outside the minds of those who would wish to believe in them."

Except for in those minds who would wish not to believe in them.

You said, "If all is based upon human perceptions, and logic is a human invention, then how can god(s) be possible?"

As human inventions.

Samhain

Kamchatka:

Ok, I'm growing extremely tired of your posts. As I'm sure that others will agree, you haven't offered anything to back up your assertions and therefore, they are still worthless in my eyes. Do you expect us to believe what you say because you say it? Most of what you have said doesn't seem logical, let alone true to reality, but no matter.

Also, I may or may not agree with the idea that humans have reached the point of "full consciousness" but once again, I ask you, do you have anything to logically back this up besides "I just say so"?

As you can see, most of us disagree with what you're saying, so your following posts may want to take into consideration a little thing called proof. Maybe I'm just a stuffy old science guy, but it seems that proof or evidence is usually one of the more important things that one would use to try and prove a point, yes??