is it possible to find God by reason?

True, we have no way of knowing about the details of god, if he exists. I was just trying to offer up a minimal definition, but I realize that that was even too descriptive.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

the idea of GODS mind comes in when we examine the symmetry of the cosmos...
it all does seem to follow clear patterns.... patterns which suggest planning..

even if it was nothing more than a mathmatical progression or wave aspect to the applied energy.. it still suggest planning.. before application.

-MT

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OK...

So if I'm not mistaken, you don't have an opinion either way in whether or not God exists, and you don't need any belief...

I still think that there is faith, in that you believe your friends "most likely" would help in your time of need. I hope that they would too...but if you don't want to call it faith, that's your call.

Peace.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

lalala

 

*************
M*W: If god could be understood by reason, surely the majority of reasonable people would understand what god is, was, or should be. Unfortunately, during the course of human civilization, the idea of god still cannot be reasoned, but there is one very good reason why. God doesn't exist.

 

lala

 

If God could be defined, then He would not be God. We only know of God what He has revealed to us.

 

This "faith", though, is based on years of observations - years of evidence - of my friend's actions, their personality etc.

So it is very different to the blind faith that religion requires regarding God, where there is no evidence.

 

and what is that?

 

reality.

but quite clearly with rose tinted glasses on, you need to get a clearer pair.

and quite clearly it seems you are.

 

definition part 1 - creator of the cosmic order and disorder.

parts 2-1002 will be forthcoming... eventually.

P.S. I don't want to get hassled by someone saying there is no creator therefore my definition is not valid. My definition is still valid but someone can say that God as defined by me doesn't exist - they can say that, that is all.

 

Or because god is above/outside our meager abilities to reason. That is just as good an explanation.

 

but why?
how is a sky daddy more sensible, that just infantile.

 

but i've already told you what "god" is.

 

I would not say it is more sensible. Depending on the type of god you posit, it might be much less sensible, indeed. And I think most ideas of god have been just that.

The point is, it is quite easy to see how their could be something god-like beyond our power to grasp. Given that, I don't see the merit of an out-of-hand rejection of the possibility of god. I certainly do not believe in god, but believe god is a possibility, and I hope, somewhat faintly, that there is one. Let's say I have just a sliver of hope.

 

No source of energy is needed. Energy is eternal; it can neither be created nor destroyed. If then the energy existent in the Universe is God, what need for an alternative label? God simply is the Universe.

Does god then exist in a different reality/universe? If so, wouldn't that mean that there is no god in our reality/universe? What argument or evidence would indicate that the origin of our Universe is a sentient being?

If God is indefinable then we're not talking about anything, "God" is just a symbol referencing nothing at all.

What do you mean by "cosmic order and disorder"?

How then can one found a logical argument for God?

~Raithere

 

God could exist in a different reality/universe and could occasionally interact with ours. Certainly he could tweak various physical events in a way that is nondetectable by us in principle. For example, we know that the precise moment at which, say, a radioactive decay event will occur cannot be predicted exactly - only probabilities can be assigned. Perhaps the reason why a particular quantum event occured at 0.65283 seconds as opposed to some other time was because God willed it to occur at that time. As long as he follows the overall statistical distribution, he can be actively involved in the world without being detected - andany one little quantum event can have large repurcussions - the particular mutations that occured at any point during the chain of evolutionary history may not have been happenstance, for example. (That is just a speculation, I certainly do not believe in such a thing).

I can also come at this from a different angle. I can give you an example of a simple way in which there is a higher level of reality that contains at least one sentient being that would wield significant power over us and could not be detected unless he wanted us to detect him. This being would not likely possess the traits normally assigned to the Christian God, though - but he would still be quite god-like, according to some of our definitions. However he would likely be quite finite, limited in power, and perhaps even evil. Are you interested in seeing this example?

That might be the case. But I can certainly also imagine things that are so far beyond our comprehension that we don't even have language to discuss it - and that doesn't mean that those things cannot possibly be real.

Well, I do not believe that there are any logical arguments that can demonstrate God. Not one. I do think there are various "plausibility" arguments that can cause one to say "ah yes, that scenario is possible, but we cannot confirm or disconfirm it." What you should then do about such scenarios is a personal choice. Rejecting such claims out-of-hand is preferred by some, and that is fine as a personal choice, but it is not necessarily going to get you any closer to the truth.

 

Why say "he"? Have you now not just defined god as being a male? Does that not then contradict your own statement that god can not be defined?

 

I mean the universe we know about. A lot of it looks like disorder.

 

An interesting speculation. The problem I find is that if God's influence is undistinguishable from "natural" events, God's existence is irrelevant.
Epistemologically, this stance is agnostic so the answer to the topic would be, "No".

Sure.

As Tiassa's take on Anslem; That exists which is greater than can be imagined. I have no issue with this except there is no utility to the assertion. Once again the term "God" is rendered meaningless.

I find that god arguments tend to fall into one of two categories, either god is limited and is therefore not god or god is unlimited and thus irrelevant.

I tend towards pragmatism in such scenarios. Yes, my brain may be in a jar, but the assumption has no effect upon my experience. Thus the pragmatic assumption is that my experience is more or less congruent with reality. The alternative prohibits the foundation of any epistemological position... it's self-refuting.

~Raithere