|
Post by . on Jan 31, 2021 2:37:33 GMT
Peace Immanuel,
I recently talked to someone who told me something which made me have questions to which I have no answer,
Because I consider that you are a person capable with logic, I have to ask you for you opinion, for the logic presented by the person.
He answered me this reply:
- Your morality, and belief in a higher power who does not share the same ideals like this world of ours is naive. If you were in a circumstance where you have to choose to kill other in order to save/prolong your own existence, any sane person would do it, because without your own existence, nothing exist for you, not even the world/people you are caring to save/spare would exist. If you are gone, than there would be "no-one" to be conscious of their existence, and you have only your own point of view, whenever/wherever you are. Think about it, you only ever have your point of view, if you dont exist anymore, at least from your point of view, and you have only your point of view.
If in the mentioned circumstance, you choose not to kill another person in order to save yourself, then you are either under the delusion of moral/religious indoctrination or just not intelligent enough to understand the implications.
And the miscalculation/delusion that your understanding of reality is based on is an assumption, even-though what you can observe, the nature, the world, shows you that it is all about survival, it is beyond good or evil, things want to survive, because if they dont they cease to exist is that simple, and, the rules of reality are that things are dependent on each to survive.
Your assumption which your entire worldview is based on is that you just "assume" that the "higher-power" has no needs and therefore does not need to do anything in order to survive. And thus, based on this assumption which is not based on any fact, you then assume in this case than it means our world is a contradiction, and that you have to actually put your own interest aside, and should serve the "greater-good" (whatever you people even mean by this, I bet you dont even understand yourself) and for you it this means you would choose to not kill the other even if it means that your own survival depends on it.
Arent it clear? It is all about survival, name me one thing which exist unconditionally? On what is your conviction that it is only on earth that things work on the basis of "domination, consumption, survival" is based upon? Because right now, the only logical explanation I give to you is that your conviction that reality "outside" of earth does not operate on "domination, consumption, survival" is based on the emotional reaction that you have inside of you, because if you would not think otherwise, it is too painful for you to admit that our world is just a reflection of the reality/world(s) "greater" than the one we in. And logically you have to admit, isnt that more probable, that the world that your sense do not register, is a reflection/continuation of the nature of the world that we abide in?
|
|
|
Post by Immanuel on Jan 31, 2021 15:24:23 GMT
Debating with people who have made up their mind to aggressively argue against logic is tiring. I have already gone through in other posts why it is illogical to assume the universe exists without at least a background intelligence guiding existence, because it does simply not add up. Even earlier to you I put forth sound arguments which you can use.
When you put forth the arguments for why there must be a supernatural force in the universe no argument works against it because it is a dead-end in arguments, you kind of corner them, this is because that is the ultimate end of the chain of logic from A to Z. The argument which is impossible to counter is: "How can nothingness know how to give shape to a whole universe?" It is impossible to get past that rhetorical question without nonsensical conjecture!
If that absolutely is the ultimately logical answer, then every other scenario stated by this person must have a different answer to why. I will see if I have the energy to compile an answer, for I have absolutely no responsibility to convince misguided people who live their lives believing in the deception against all logic.
|
|
|
Post by Immanuel on Jan 31, 2021 16:31:19 GMT
You forgot to enter your original input to which the person replied meaning it makes it harder for me to understand what he replies to as I have to use logic to derive what the original question was based on available indirect data given by the replier. Your assumption which your entire worldview is based on is that you just "assume" that the "higher-power" has no needs and therefore does not need to do anything in order to survive. And thus, based on this assumption which is not based on any fact, you then assume in this case than it means our world is a contradiction, and that you have to actually put your own interest aside, and should serve the "greater-good" (whatever you people even mean by this, I bet you dont even understand yourself) and for you it this means you would choose to not kill the other even if it means that your own survival depends on it. The claim in this statement is really not thought through at all because logic speaks against that it is not based on fact because 'the Supernatural' MUST exist without any need since it was in existence on no preconditions so it is safe to say that it can also sustain itself without any needs. The logic is that something which is infinite must also be truly infinite, the same unconditional existence must also exist unconditionally, if you understand what I mean. The logic behind it is that simple. And the existence of 'the Supernatural' is proven through logic as I have mentioned before, it simply is impossible to reject the notion of existence of a supernatural phenomenon without deceiving oneself. As you understand, it is a chain of logic i.e. because A is true then B must be true as well in the case of the above logic. It is that way logic works, imagine a young child always asking "why" and an adult answers "because" to every follow-up question the child has on the same subject, when you reach A you have reached the top of the chain and the child cannot get any more "because" because infinity has no condition behind it and hence you cannot analyze it further down as logic depends on condition. The person presumes you serve a "God" which is something I do not. Do you? You need to counter a person like this intelligently in order to overcome the flaws in their logic and false presumptions. If you do not consider yourself to "serve a god" the person does not have as many intelligent arguments against you. I mean, I do not serve Elahem but I rather seek to join their community by becoming a worthy equal, but this level of discussion this person is hardly ready for if they do not even acknowledge there is a supernatural existence. If they cannot acknowledge point A, the top of the chain of logic, as mentioned in the earlier paragraph, the whole discussion is futile and born to fail. Furthermore the person speaks about "putting your own interest aside" but who is not interested in becoming better as a person? The question is how? Even then you will quickly discover what your fallacies as an individual are caused by i.e. your bodily instincts. Because I do not have the original question about choosing to kill or not for survival it is difficult to fully answer this by the logic you requested. Arent it clear? It is all about survival, name me one thing which exist unconditionally? Very easy! The universe exists unconditionally. There are physical laws that just happen to exist. Because right now, the only logical explanation I give to you is that your conviction that reality "outside" of earth does not operate on "domination, consumption, survival" is based on the emotional reaction that you have inside of you, because if you would not think otherwise, it is too painful for you to admit that our world is just a reflection of the reality/world(s) "greater" than the one we in. And logically you have to admit, isnt that more probable, that the world that your sense do not register, is a reflection/continuation of the nature of the world that we abide in? The logic of his/hers is based on speculation i.e. most probably to simply attempt to refute your belief system on the basis of lacking proper logic as they enter incorrect variables based on disbelief in the chain A to Z mentioned earlier. The person is right that 'the Supernatural' has absolutely no issues with morality in creating a dominating and consumptive environment and it is this fact which causes the grand majority of atheists to reject the existence of 'the Supernatural' in the first place. 'The Supernatural' does actually break the guidelines taught to humans about not "carrying false testimony' when the world itself carries false testimony. In that 'the Supernatural' breaks at least 3 of the parameters of the Mosaic law by the design itself by; dominating, abusing and carrying false testimony against each and every human on Earth. Does that in itself refute the existence of 'the Supernatural'? No it does not, and logic proves beyond refutability that 'the Supernatural' exists anyway. We wrote to each other earlier in other threads that it is mankind who themselves created morality and what is right and wrong. When it comes to humans we obviously are automatically driven towards instinctive behavior and we can ask ourselves if this is good or bad for us. For someone identifying themselves with the world they live in, obviously there might not be anything wrong with it, but their logic is still flawed as per the chain A to Z. Anyone who recognizes that mind and body are two completely different entities and begin to understand that the mind can grow plus understand that the instinct diminishes its development, they will obviously seek to combat the instinct, that is simply sound logic. That 'the Supernatural' is infinite, unconditional, also is connected to the fact that the mind is unconditionally existent as well because there is no physical matter which sustains it, but that is a discussion to deep to take with a person like this. The development of your mind is as unconditional, although it needs to take shape in the void, as 'the Supernatural'. Just observe the fact that the universe unconditionally simply expanded to where it is today, the same way your mind can grow in a virtual sizing to any extent (the size of the universe is just an illusion, to anyone beyond the boundaries of that system place E is the same as place X even though there are billions of lightyears between them). I hope you understand a bit more about infinity, a concept which is difficult for humans to comprehend. Do not think that the person who replied to you "wins" against you by any measurement of logic. These deluded people sound confident in their flawed logic because they seriously believe in it, but that does not make them right. However, I would not waste energy on a person who seriously is just argumentative without even considering to listen for a second and do not give in an inch about their stance because their belief is reinforced like with titanium metal. If you seek to argue with people like this you need to find a way to undermine their belief system and it requires quite some wittiness and you need a sharp tongue. Generally it is futile to try.
|
|
|
Post by . on Feb 1, 2021 4:23:49 GMT
Hello Immanuel, sorry, I see that it would made more sense if I put my own input first before I received the reply.
I was talking to the particular person, who himself deems to be a "fan" of logic.
At the beginning of our discussion we were in agreement about the fact that it is logical that there is an Intelligence behind our "world". However, where we started to differ in our reasoning is that He reasons that if we look at our world, and how it operates, He does not find it convincing that the "Higher-world/power" does not operate by way our world does.
His logical proof/argument: He said that even if at very beginning of chain-of-creation(s) there is one "uncased/unconditional" factor, there can still be a great number of beings/worlds/existences in between/across this chain. Thus, it would be guesswork to expect that the ones we call Elohim, who are creator(s) of our world and are next step "above" us in the chain of existence, that they are the "uncased/unconditional" origin. They might be in-between of the chain. Therefore they can be also operating based on need and survival, like we do in our world.
Therefore, He asked me to back up by logical reasoning how do I come into conclusion that the "higher-power" has our best interests? I answered, because there are good things in this world.
To this He answered: if someone feeds and takes care of a goat, the goat might be "thinking" that its Shepard takes care of it, but it misses one piece of information that all the "good" that it receives from its owner, is for it to get fat and well, so he could slaughter and consume it.
Likewise, He adds that it is logical that whatever "Higher-power" that created us, might have done it solely in their own interests.
And this is where I was in a situation where I couldn't come up with reasoning that I could present on the table, a logical-chain of thought to show that it is logical to assume/expect the higher power to have our best interest.
His argument was, how for example, in nature the stronger exploit and make use of the weaker for their own benefit. that it is logical to expect expect it to be the same in the existence "above" ours, that the higher power has us only for their own benefit and we and our interests are not considered.
For example, he says a person who has truth on their side, can be literally subdued by other person only because the other person is stronger. Therefore, he concludes that strength is literally THE factor that at the end of day decides.
|
|
|
Post by Immanuel on Feb 1, 2021 8:25:22 GMT
That assumption is a very common human fallacy. It is the same one which causes people to worship "God". They think that because they would want gratification for being almighty if they were in that place, this means the god wishes the same. They treat the god just as a king on Earth but even more highly.
Now this person argues that just because the Earth and its creator created the world this way it automatically proves this is the way they are, but this does not prove anything and he is himself just into conjecture.
I have more logic to delve into the question of why the elevated beings are not reflections of this world and show you that with increased spiritual growth you gain no satisfaction from someone's misfortune and suffering. That is also the logic against his reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by . on Feb 1, 2021 9:00:33 GMT
He does not argue that our Creator require our worship or anything of this sorts. He also agrees that the the power above us most probably is not emotionally immature to do evil for the sake of "evilness" or feel powerful or something similar.
He reasons that The Creator is just indifferent to our suffering because we exist for purposes that serve the interests of the Creator, therefore our interests are not considered, and this is because we are not "important" and powerful enough to change status quo.
However, in my opinion I am still vary of jumping into "conclusions", I know that on earth we are still making analysis based on the information we have, there might be very-very good reasons for why things in reality are exactly as they are.
However, the final question is this: are these "very-very good reasons" for why we exist in the first place, are these reasons in favour of the Creator or of us? What if the reasons for why we exist, include both the interests of Creator and ours? What if there is a conflict of interests?
Therefore, it seems, there is a lack of knowledge in our case, however if we stay humble and curious knowledge can come more. Everything in the universe has a reason, even the smallest of molecules, the universe is surely is following a "plan".
|
|
|
Post by Immanuel on Feb 1, 2021 9:38:29 GMT
The "creator requires worship" was just an example of similitude, kind of the same flawed logic pattern. I already understood that he may not believe that. He reasons that The Creator is just indifferent to our suffering because we exist for purposes that serve the interests of the Creator, therefore our interests are not considered, and this is because we are not "important" and powerful enough to change status quo. His logic is not utterly unsound for that statement, there is no denying they let us suffer at least on occasion even if we make progress, but he does by no means know himself if they are "indifferent" towards it and that is speculation. It is like 'the Supernatural' follows the saying: "Without pain there is no gain". However, our suffering is actually "collateral damage" and an unfortunate side-effect of their methods which I am sure there is a strong argument for through logic, and in general it is possible to evade a lot of the suffering by the use of your innate intelligence. It is true that we are under their dominion and we therefore have to serve their interests which is to evolve us under these mysterious conditions. Best is to attempt to change perspective and look at it from the side of Elahem even if you can just vaguely infer it as you have no true vantage point from their perspective. If our inborn spirit cannot grow unless it is exposed to adversity against its natural origin, it is giving you more understanding for the Elahem methods and it may calm your mind. On the other hand, there is nothing else to have as an interest, except illusions, than personal development, so as sterile as it sounds we exist for only one purpose which is to evolve. It means that when we "serve their interests" we do what is logical, and if we have any other own interests those are imagined and vain interests. He is wrong that we are not important because we are important and that runs into the logical fallacy of why to create an enormous universe if you create nothing important, that if something is an incredibly vain effort. You see yourself that logic dictates that Elahem did indeed create something because it is important hence giving us importance, in general at least, and hence humans mean something to Elahem. If we then reason that they did create it in order to have us suffering, logic would dictate that they do it for pleasure and would you imagine an all-powerful supernatural being as primitive as to sit there an enjoy suffering while chewing on popcorn watching it like a movie? No, obviously the suffering has a purpose other than a strange form of entertainment and it means we have importance in it all. However, in my opinion I am still vary of jumping into "conclusions", I know that on earth we are still making analysis based on the information we have, there might be very-very good reasons for why things in reality are exactly as they are. Logic can explain a lot unto which there is no direct information. That is the power of logic. However, the final question is this: are these "very-very good reasons" for why we exist in the first place, are these reasons in favour of the Creator or of us? What if the reasons for why we exist, include both the interests of Creator and ours? What if there is a conflict of interests? The evolution of ours is indeed in the interest of both the creator and us, because we are in the creator and the creator is in us, much alike what Jesus once said. The truth is much similar to the 'theism' called 'pantheism'. The reason why they do not "let in" a Lesser Being is because imagine if you brought in impurity into perfection. The statement of Jesus must be seen in the proper light however and our mind is ourselves but technically we could say we are in the creator and the creator in us. Your body is the creator, as weird as it sounds, and you can command it whenever it functions properly and you are let to do it, your mind is also part of the Elahem community but only to a share depending on the mental development of yours, meaning you can have a slight affection on the timeline so to say.
|
|