Theists, What Do You Get Out of Religion?

[Esquilax]

As it applies to the issue of intentionality, something either has it or it doesn’t. The needle of a thermostat only appears intent on reaching the set point, whereas a cheetah actually intends to nab zebras. I say the goal directed behavior of the thermostat is an illusion while the goal directed behavior of the cheetah is real – a difference of kind.

Can I ask why you constantly assume that there's a dichotomy here?

Likewise, as it applies to meaning, the idea that meaning can be found in a purely physical description of something is ludicrous.

Why do you think this? The last time I asked you something like this you tried shifting the burden of proof and demanded that I prove you wrong, but seriously, what observations led you to this conclusion? Leave aside the idea that someone disagrees with you- I don't necessarily, depending on your answer- and explain your position.

While the physical beads can represent the non-physical ideas of enumeration, no purely physical description of an abacus would ever reveal the significance of the beads. Again, we see a difference in kind between a sign and its significance.

So how did you come to the conclusion that significance can only be imbued from outside? And what is it about gods that allow them to imbue meaning? What's the actual quality that allows meaning to come into being? Because human beings are capable of imbuing meaning and purpose in other objects, as in your abacus example, so obviously they have that ability too; is there any reason they can't apply meaning and purpose to themselves? Must it be applied prior to the creation of a thing, and if so, wouldn't that mean the quality that brings meaning into existence is just... pre-existence?

That's not exactly an impressive quality, and if god doesn't have a pre-existing entity to bring him into existence, doesn't that mean god is meaningless and purposeless, just as you accuse others of being?