Mystic, part of me actually sympathizes with you, because I feel like you are wrestling nightmarishly with something you will never be able to pin down. It seems like it is eating you up inside. Don't let these thoughts keep you up at night! Just live life as it appears in front of you.

First, the moon and people are not analogous. It's like when people compare metabolism to the engine of a car. Sounds like a neat comparison, but humans are in fact, NOT cars. It's an oversimplified and inaccurate analogy.

Second, I feel like you don't understand use of the word "value" when it comes to objective versus subjective. You can measure the size of the moon, and you can measure how tall I am. Those are objective values. My family subjectively values me because they love me and would be upset if I died. I subjectively value the moon because I think it's pretty, and helps me to see when I am driving at night. Understand?

(January 13, 2016 at 12:48 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Mystic, part of me actually sympathizes with you, because I feel like you are wrestling nightmarishly with something you will never be able to pin down.  It seems like it is eating you up inside.  Don't let these thoughts keep you up at night!  Just live life as it appears in front of you.  

First, the moon and people are not analogous.  It's like when people compare metabolism to the engine of a car.  Sounds like a neat comparison, but humans are in fact, NOT cars.  It's an oversimplified and inaccurate analogy.  

Second, I feel like you don't understand use of the word "value" when it comes to objective versus subjective.  You can measure the size of the moon, and you can measure how tall I am. Those are objective values.  My family subjectively values me because they love me and would be upset if I died.   I subjectively value the moon because I think it's pretty, and helps me to see when I am driving at night.  Understand?

Your family valuing you is a measurement of their biological/psychological connection to you.  While it doesn't have the convenient units of measurement, like you'd find in measuring the moon, it can actually be measured, otherwise, you wouldn't be able to compare things you value.  

The 'subjectiveness' is just what we call the scope.  Your value (a measurement) only applies to you're brain in the moment.  But really, that's just common sense for all measurements.  If we measure the moon, our measurement only applies to the moon at the time we measure it.  The circumference of the moon is unrelated to the circumference of an orange.  But for some reason, we don't consider that subjective.  

I think the problem is we hold our brains/selves in some magical esteem, like we're not just a pile of matter behaving according to the laws of physics like everything else.

I think I understand what you mean; that the value of anything is alway subjective, it's just that some units of measurement are more precise than others? But if three people all measure the moon with the same tool, the same way, in the same units, at the same time, they would all get the same objective, numeric value. On the other hand, I could say - I love the moon, it is so majestic, I can't wait for it to rise every night. I can't fall asleep until I see it in the sky. And you could say - eh, I don't really care much about the moon, I never even notice it's there. That's subjective, as in we assign a different degree of value to it.

(January 13, 2016 at 1:56 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: I think I understand what you mean; that the value of anything is alway subjective, it's just that some units of measurement are more precise than others?  But if three people all measure the moon with the same tool, the same way, in the same units, at the same time, they would all get the same objective, numeric value.  On the other hand, I could say - I love the moon, it is so majestic, I can't wait for it to rise every night.  I can't fall asleep until I see it in the sky.  And you could say - eh, I don't really care much about the moon, I never even notice it's there.   That's subjective, as in we assign a different degree of value to it.  

The trick, I think, is that you view your love of the moon as measuring the moon.  But really, you're measuring your own brain.  Whereas, I'd be measuring my brain.  That's why both of our statements can be fact.  According to your brain functions, you do love the moon.  According to mine, I ignore the moon.  

A good example might be distance from the moon.  You measure your distance from the moon, and it's 238,000 miles.  I measure my distance from the moon, and it's 239,000 miles.  And like 'value' the scope exists only for me in that moment.  As the next moment I fall down a mountain, and now I'm 238,899 miles from the moon.

It's really not that important. But I think by only dealing with things as facts, rather than objective/subjective/objectively subjective, etc... it might make the conversation less convoluted.

(January 13, 2016 at 11:34 am)bennyboy Wrote:  If God is in everything, then how can you establish a non-infinite value?

God the absolute is not in anything as nothing can grasp the whole of God let alone contain him, God is in all things without being merged into them neither is he separate from them.

God's value in creation has different hues as well as different number in God's eyes, he sees what is higher to what is lower. He sees it because he is the ultimate one by it's measured by. The standard. We only perceive relative to a standard borrowed from him but on much smaller scale.

Cool story.  

When I tell you that it is the manner of inference, and not the words you use or the propositions you choose to leverage, that cause you to fall into irrationality.... do you understand what I've said?

(January 13, 2016 at 6:23 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(January 13, 2016 at 11:34 am)bennyboy Wrote:  If God is in everything, then how can you establish a non-infinite value?

God the absolute is not in anything as nothing can grasp the whole of God let alone contain him, God is in all things without being merged into them neither is he separate from them.

God's value in creation has different hues as well as different number in God's eyes, he sees what is higher to what is lower. He sees it because he is the ultimate one by it's measured by. The standard. We only perceive relative to a standard borrowed from him but on much smaller scale.

How does God measure the objective value of his own standard for objective value?

(January 13, 2016 at 11:03 am)wallym Wrote:  I don't see a need to believe anything has true value.  

When we do a good action, for example, a courageous one, does it can inherited or does it's value just matter how much we appreciate the act or others appreciate? Or does it actually increase the objective value of who we are? You will notice, you believe people's good actions inherit part of them. When you do a good act, you are in a state. That state is not lost but is inherited to the value/scale/measurement of your soul.

This is one of the evidences of it. Surely one who perceives our true value and makes us inherit the actions exists.

We appreciate actions because we believe in the value of the state of the person was in, not merely out of utility. We appreciate the love, the generosity or the courage of the person for example in the state. We don't simply assign value to it, but we believe there is a value to it, and we praise it, and then we acknowledge that person has inherited that action. This is our nature. We all act like this even if we don't acknowledge it outwardly. This is how we act. It's like we all acknowledge the spiritual world, it's system, and it's Lord but are playing pretend I don't see nothing all because it's not detected by the five senses, but is perception within our souls.

(January 13, 2016 at 6:29 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote:

(January 13, 2016 at 6:23 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: God the absolute is not in anything as nothing can grasp the whole of God let alone contain him, God is in all things without being merged into them neither is he separate from them.

God's value in creation has different hues as well as different number in God's eyes, he sees what is higher to what is lower. He sees it because he is the ultimate one by it's measured by. The standard. We only perceive relative to a standard borrowed from him but on much smaller scale.

How does God measure the objective value of his own standard for objective value?

This is a good question, God himself is knowledge, he witnesses himself as sheer perfection, absolute life such that there cannot exist a god other then Him. His existence is absolute. Had this absolute value not existed, then no value would exist, because all of it must have a basis, and the only basis is absolute knowledge/perception for it to be true.

Had God been limited or one of many, then this would be impossible.

When we witness God's Oneness, it is borrowed from his own witnessing of himself and his witnessing of all things.

:: sigh:: mystic, if you can't get past this absurd notion that atheists are simply "denying God," then you will never be able to have a sincere discussion with any atheist here.