NationStates Jolt Archive

My Thoughts:

What is God? A question that has plagued mankind for its entire existence. Many feel they have found Him, and know Him. This is just the opinion of someone who doesn’t know, and in someway, is proud of that he doesn’t know. Please read and take from it what you will.

Modern Science points us away from God. The tried and tested method of proof before belief rules God out. However as many would say there is some proof of a God, Jesus walked the earth, the Torah tells God’s truth to man, etcetera. If God is all powerful, all knowing and everywhere, surely your proof gives no indication that he doesn’t exist. This is true. However I say: I do not know. He may be pulling the wool over my eyes day after day and I would never know. BUT MUST YOU NOT SAY THE SAME? You cannot know God is how he is portrayed in what ever religious book you may follow. Whatever proof he has given you is nothing. Whatever truth he has told you must be doubted. Is not this existence cited as a test? What greater test is there, but testing what you will believe, what you will follow blindly? You cannot be certain, and all you have learned or thought you learnt is naught.

So the question is, what should you do? There are many guidelines for life set down throughout the world, but how do you know what to follow? Here is where I become slightly critical of organised religion. It calls you to follow its rules, to obey as the pathway to truth/enlightenment/heaven or whatever you are called to believe. I simply call to everyone reading this to STOP! THINK! What am I being asked to do? Why should I do it, what moral or other justification is there for doing it? Am I doing it just because I am being told it is correct? Am I judging it superior to another suggestion simply because a certain person says it? What I am asking everyone reading this to do is to live your life for yourself. To help the unfortunate because it is right, not because God tells you to. To not scorn those who do not conform, no matter what ‘God’ says. Only one thing is certain: “I think therefore I am.” Everything else should be judged with care.

Take from this rant what you will; I am not even sure if I know what I mean when I write it. But please, look beyond the words to the spirit of what I am trying to say and think upon it. Thanks guys (and gals of course).

Only one thing is certain: “I think therefore I am.” Everything else should be judged with care.

Actually, some philosophers have argued that even that isn't true. Thought can exist, but that doesn't prove that there is a thinker or something. Nietzsche and Hume argued for the idea.

Thought can exist, but that doesn't prove that there is a thinker or something. Nietzsche and Hume argued for the idea.

Or less obliquely, Bertrand Russell.

<snippity doo dah>
What I am asking everyone reading this to do is to live your life for yourself.
<snippity aye>

And a damn fine suggestion that is too!

Actually, some philosophers have argued that even that isn't true. Thought can exist, but that doesn't prove that there is a thinker or something. Nietzsche and Hume argued for the idea.


And some argue that the incessant thinking of the mind is not who we are but is really the ego , which is only something that we co-created with society and nothing more. That we are really the observer.

Actually, some philosophers have argued that even that isn't true. Thought can exist, but that doesn't prove that there is a thinker or something. Nietzsche and Hume argued for the idea.

"I" have often "thought" about the validity of the "I think therefore I am" argument. To me, almost as matter of sematics, the conclusion ("I exsist") is actually embedded in the premise "I think"; basically the argument is circular. This arises from my belief that "I" is a verb- it denotes exsistance; it actually requires exsistance. Thus the argument, at least in my view, can be written as an empty truism: "I <one who exsists> thinks therefore I exsist". Or rewritten as "I exsist" (note how this actually eliminates any argument). This leads, in a rather roundabout way, to your point (or that of Hume and Nietzche) that Thought in itself does not entail the exsistance of a thinker but on the exsistance of though.

Disclaimer; i am unsure if "I think" actually captures the subtly of 'cognito'

I simply call to everyone reading this to STOP! THINK! What am I being asked to do? Why should I do it, what moral or other justification is there for doing it? Am I doing it just because I am being told it is correct?
Well well well. Seems to me, from the tone of your post, that you believe that the only reason the religious believe in God is because they simply don't know any better. Poor, poor mislead religious saps. Yeah, I know. Like, how unlikely is it that any of us believe simply because that's what feels right, deep down inside? How ridiculous. Everybody knows that the supernaturalist freaks don't have wills of their own, and will simply be lead as sheep to the slaughter.

It's not like that, dude.

Take from this rant what you will; I am not even sure if I know what I mean when I write it.
Soooo.....you can't even tell us what you mean by all of it? Oookay....then why write it? It seems to me that a person can't take any more out of any given rant than what was put into it, let alone what the writer can take out of it.

Incorrect. I am simply asking you (if you do not already), to thing about what you are doing and beliving. The multitude of holy wars that have scared our history show that you must think about what you do. Many do not (but you may, I do not know.)

Incorrect. I am simply asking you (if you do not already), to thing about what you are doing and beliving.

"To believe is to know you believe, and to know you believe is not to believe."
(Jean-Paul Sartre / 1905-1980)

Some people think that faith and science are mutually exclusive.

I've read in various places (I apologize for my lack of sources, but this is a rather sweeping generalization) that there's some decent evidence that a dude named Jesus was a preacher around 2000 years ago. As to believing whether or not he was God - that's up to the individual.

Simonist']Well well well. Seems to me, from the tone of your post, that you believe that the only reason the religious believe in God is because they simply don't know any better. Poor, poor mislead religious saps. Yeah, I know. Like, how unlikely is it that any of us believe simply because that's what feels right, deep down inside? How ridiculous. Everybody knows that the supernaturalist freaks don't have wills of their own, and will simply be lead as sheep to the slaughter.

It's not like that, dude.

Thats not what he is saying.
He is asking every religious person not to follow dogma blindly.
Persecuting gay people, as if God felt one way or the other on the issue.
Issues like these that take a negative stance on anything, while claiming to be an open-minded religion of peace.

Hes saying, that if enough people of faith, took an honest look at themselves, and the religion they hold so highly, they may just find too many questions are unanswerable by religion,becuase of such paradoxes.

My question to you, however, might be why you think all atheists believe all theists are stupid, or have sheep-like mentalities?
I may believe you irrevocably, unmistakenly incorrect about God, life, and everything else, but that does not mean I think you are not intelligent.

You took offense, and verbally retaliated, against a post that was not meant to be aggressive.

What are you afraid of?

Simonist']Well well well. Seems to me, from the tone of your post, that you believe that the only reason the religious believe in God is because they simply don't know any better. Poor, poor mislead religious saps. Yeah, I know. Like, how unlikely is it that any of us believe simply because that's what feels right, deep down inside? How ridiculous. Everybody knows that the supernaturalist freaks don't have wills of their own, and will simply be lead as sheep to the slaughter.

It's not like that, dude.

Thats not what he is saying.
He is asking every religious person not to follow dogma blindly.
Persecuting gay people, as if God felt one way or the other on the issue.
Issues like these that take a negative stance on anything, while claiming to be an open-minded religion of peace.

Hes saying, that if enough people of faith, took an honest look at themselves, and the religion they hold so highly, they may just find too many questions are unanswerable by religion,becuase of such paradoxes.

My question to you, however, might be why you think all atheists believe all theists are stupid, or have sheep-like mentalities?
I may believe you irrevocably, unmistakenly incorrect about God, life, and everything else, but that does not mean I think you are not intelligent.

You took offense, and verbally retaliated, against a post that was not meant to be aggressive.

What are you afraid of?

Perhaps you should try thinking less and being happier in yourself. Thinking is bad....

If you have a problem with free thought, stop thinking. Problem solved. Next!

Perhaps you should try thinking less and being happier in yourself. Thinking is bad....

You're joking right?
If you're a Buddhist, I appologize. If you're not... you're joking right?

Think for yourself. Don't be a sheep.

Totally agree.

Now, about your spelling of "etcetera." I believe it should be "et cetera," id est it was a typo, however, I am so anal, I must use an ex tempore arguement pulled, by all means, out of my ***.

Think for yourself. Don't be a sheep.

Totally agree.

Now, about your spelling of "etcetera." I believe it should be "et cetera," id est it was a typo, however, I am so anal, I must use an ex tempore arguement pulled, by all means, out of my ***.
For a man who is so anal retentive, you do enjoy a good molestation of the fine art of English grammar, do you not?

Ps. It is spelt "argument"

For a man who is so anal retentive, you do enjoy a good molestation of the fine art of English grammar, do you not?
Does that make me a hyberbole?

PS: i lernt fonetics n skool :p

Wow. I am pleasantly surprised by the responces I have got. I expected a lot more arguement, possibly in capitals. Thank you for proving me wrong.