Question about meaning and perception of reality from a theist.

[genkaus]

People do assign purpose and significance to things all the time. If that purpose ofr meaning is purely a figment of that consciousness then it is illusory. it is not real beyond being a made up belief. Any belief that purpose is real necessitates that consciousness is real. If consciousness is real, it must exist apart from our ideas of it. The only forces science believes exist apart from its observation of and ideas about are universal constants. If consciousness is a universal constant it could correctly be called "God".

Being a product of consciousness does not make something automatically illusory.

Also, consciousness is not unobservable and it is definitely not a universal constant. My consciousness is separate from yours and it is temporal but they are bot still very real.

If I say the meaning to life is X and you say the meaning to life is Y we both can't be right unless 1. : there actually is a real meaning to life and 2: that meaning contains the elements X and Y. If there is no real meaning but only the meaning we personally ascribe it it is illusory. To state otherwise would be to state that reality is dictated by beliefs. Even if there was only one sentient being in the entire universe who believed that Z was the meaning to life, that would not make Z real outside of that consciousness, it would just be the only illusory belief about reality held. In order for any meaning to be real consciousness must exist as a primary function of the universe, the universe must be bound by consciousness, not the other way around. That could be called "God".

If I say that the purpose of a knife is cutting tomatoes and you say that it is stabbing people, does that mean that knife has no real purpose or does it mean that the purpose is determined by one who holds it?
Would that make the actions done by that knife any less real?

Something having different meanings in different contexts does not make all meanings illusory.

Correct. Kinda. There Must be something real, but that thing need not be CALLED God. In order for something to be real, it must exist apart from our ideas and feelings about it. Again, the only things science believe exist apart from its observation of or ideas about them are universal forces and constants. Those forces created everything in the universe and without them nothing would or could exist. Science does not believe the sun exists because it observes it, it believes it exists because it believes in the laws of physics the fact that we observe it does not verify it's existence anymore than the fact that science doesnt observe trillions of other stars in the universe means science believes they do not exist. If there is a real sentience to the universe, it operates as a force on everything in the universe, it can not be found in a particular locality within the universe.

On the contrary, science does believe that sun exists because we can observe it. Science believes that sun exists independently of our observation, but to hold the belief that something exists, either it or its effects must be observed.

You have to let go of the idea that anything that is a product of consciousness is not real. Every concept in existence, every language, every scientific law and every artistic creation is a product of someone's consciousness. These things are not universal constants and they are very much real.

that may be, and that is all well and good, but reality is not dictated by your beliefs anymore than it is dictated by mine. If that is how you feel know that your meaning exists only in your mind. It is not real. once you dies any meaning you ascribed to yourself is gone. Your belief in personal meaning is no more rational than my belief that God exists in that case.

The meaning of anything only ever exists in someone's mind. The words I'm writing here are simply arrangement of letters. On a more basic level, the are simply binary arrangement semiconductors in the computer. It is the concept of language that gives them any meaning. The person who came up with the concept is long dead, but the meaning remains because the concept remains.

Similarly, while I assign purpose to my own life, I'm not the only one to whom my life is significant. I have a lot of people to whom my life is meaningful and that meaning will not cease to exist once I do.

this is where you go off the rails. If you determine that your life has meaning you hold a belief, there is no way around it. If you determine that your life does not have meaning you still hold a belief, there is no way around it. If you are not sure whether or not your life has meaning you still hold a belief that life possibly could have meaning, there is no way around it.

I believe "My life has no meaning until I give it one and once I do, it does". This is not a belief about whether my life already has a meaning, is it?

Beliefs do not dicate reality, beliefs are not absolute facts which you simply have to accept. Beliefs can be wholly true, or not true at all, or somewhere in between.

Your belief in god is dictating the reality of your arguments. Your beliefs dictate your very real actions, which dictate the effect you have on reality.

If I assign meaning to something, that does not make the meaning real outside of my belief, it simply means I hold a belief, which may be true or false.

So, you equate "not real outside consciousness" with not "real"?

Answer this: If "god" has a meaning for your life, then that meaning is also held within god's consciousness. Why would that be any more real than the meaning I hold within my consciousness?

There is a big difference between believing life actually has meaning and letting someone ascribe that meaniong for you. You can't ascribe that meaning to yourself. No one else can ascribe it for you. The meaning can not be "ascribed", because the meaning is real. There is actually a meaning to life. it is always the same and the same for everyone. You can't know what it is; you can try to understand it, you can question it, you can form beliefs about it, but your beliefs are not necessarily true or false.

You are completely wrong here. I told you before that you should try to understand the philosophical underpinnings of your own arguments.

Meaning is a conceptual property. It is dependent on consciousness. That is true for the meaning of everything including life. The words I write here are simply arrangement of letters unless there is a consciousness to give it or appreciate its meaning.

Patently false. "God" is the axiom we must accept. Validity of reality must not be assumed. All of reality is perceived through consciousness. In order to accept reality as valid we must accept that consciousness is real. If consciousness is real it must exist apart from our beliefs about it. Therefor it muswt be a universal constant. Consciousness as a universal constant can correctly be called "God".

The bolded part is the failure of your argument. If something exists outside our consciousness or apart from our beliefs does not mean that it must be a universal constant.

Secondly, you must understand what one means by an axiom. Here, you first state that "god" is an axiom and then proceed to try and proveit. An axiom is unprovable and undeniable by its very nature. In order to be true it wouldn't require conditions such as "to accept reality as valid" and "if consciousness is real".

Thirdly, the statement "to accept reality as valid" is redundant. Valid means it is true or false. True means it corresponds to to reality. What your are trying to say here is "In order for reality to be real - ". Reality being real is not based on any conditions. It is real by its definition.