I was baptized at 5 and confirmed at 7 and one of my first memories of trying to rationalize and make sense of the whole god thing, was considering the possibility that we are the "fallen angels".

However, I was never able to grasp the concept of the 'battered child syndrome' and realized that there then must be no god. As i grew fond of science and math, I was able to make more sense of the world under those conditions.

Now, today, I am much more proficient in math and science and have realized that no theory can overcome the infinite regression problem, therefore, time cannot be real.

My new world outlook is that all religions are partially right.

"What's that you say?"

We are gods. In effect, the "fallen angels".

"Huh?"

Think about this now, you are a god that can do or imagine ANYTHING. How boring is that?

Our reality as we know it now was a creation of our minds to enjoy life/existence in an entertaining way. We blocked our awareness of the fact that we are gods (else, what is the point?) and effectively became 'human'.

Some of you are thinking that you would never put yourself in the position that you are in willingly but, you have to remember that, as gods, you can do anything and probably already have. This existence is just another challenge to your repertoire of experiences.

I am still evaluating my new world outlook and just thought I would present this to the forum in the hopes of discussion rather than flames.

Any takers?

(November 16, 2014 at 12:24 pm)IATIA Wrote: Any takers?

Any evidence?

As much as any theistic or atheistic theory.

Does "show me evidence" really count as an atheistic theory?

Maybe I should have used secular or scientific etc.. I was trying to be brief.

I don't think this counts as philosophy, since it's not rooted in any logical thought, or any attempt to understand the facts of existence. "Infinite regression therefore time is not real" fails horribly to the fact that almost all people use watches. What more does "real" mean to you than that it's part of all common human experience?

You could say that IN A SENSE we are LIKE gods, because we have the capacity to use ideas to mold our experience of reality. But to say that we are actually divine beings with a history of doing "anything" is more likely a product of LSD and mushrooms than a sincere attempt to connect with reality.

As for flames-- I recommend you put your woo posts in the woo section, or support your ideas with logical arguments or evidence. You don't get to wear a "flame me" t-shirt, and beseech people not to flame you.

(November 16, 2014 at 12:45 pm)IATIA Wrote: Maybe I should have used secular or scientific etc.. I was trying to be brief.

Always a mistake. Accuracy is more important than brevity.

(November 16, 2014 at 12:59 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I don't think this counts as philosophy, since it's not rooted in any logical thought, or any attempt to understand the facts of existence.

Of course it does.

Either we have no free will and are simply a product of biochemical reactions, which makes this all moot or we have free will that must fall outside these reactions.

If we have free will, where does it come from. What physiological process could possibly invoke free will?

---

(November 16, 2014 at 1:06 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(November 16, 2014 at 12:45 pm)IATIA Wrote: Maybe I should have used secular or scientific etc.. I was trying to be brief.

Always a mistake. Accuracy is more important than brevity.

And I stand corrected.

(November 16, 2014 at 1:08 pm)IATIA Wrote:

(November 16, 2014 at 12:59 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I don't think this counts as philosophy, since it's not rooted in any logical thought, or any attempt to understand the facts of existence.

Of course it does.

Either we have no free will and are simply a product of biochemical reactions, which makes this all moot or we have free will that must fall outside these reactions.

Ah, so you're one of those types, who thinks that free will is either magic or non-existent. You're making a fallacy of composition; just because the brain is material and chemical interactions does not mean it cannot produce a process like free will. Material things are not just restricted to what they are composed of, else we'd never have machinery or electrical engineering.

Quote:If we have free will, where does it come from. What physiological process could possibly invoke free will?

Say we don't know what physiological process could produce free will. We also don't know what magical process could produce it. It's an unknown, so the level of evidence is the same for both. What justification do you have for discarding physiological processes entirely, given the actual facts of the situation?

(November 16, 2014 at 1:20 pm)Esquilax Wrote: What justification do you have for discarding physiological processes entirely, given the actual facts of the situation?

For free will to be a product of physiology, there must be a chemical reaction to initiate the thought or desire. What initiated this reaction?

Either we run into the infinite regression paradox or free will is not generated by physiological functions.

Just because one thinks it is real, does not make it so.

---

(November 16, 2014 at 1:20 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Material things are not just restricted to what they are composed of, else we'd never have machinery or electrical engineering.

hock:

A car cannot fly. It is restricted to it's design. Your laptop cannot get up and dance, it is restricted to it's design. Etc..