Are you joking?

[Little Rik]

It seems that a lot of people in these forums are over optimistic.
They seem to know so many things about God existence or God non existence without first having done the hard work and without having established the foundations in which these beliefs are based.
Nothing wrong with being optimistic provide you got something to stand on.
Unfortunately this optimism is based on almost nothing and therefore it is obvious that nothing much will come out.
People still ask what is the difference between the brain and the mind without even mentioning the I.
How is possible to investigate about a possible cosmic mind (God) if we haven't got a clue about how our brain, mind and I works?
Are you joking?
And what about religions which people talk about?
Does anybody know how they born and what is the difference between religion and spirituality?
Did Shiva, Krisna, Buddha, and Jesus were teaching spirituality or religions?
How do you understand whether God exist or not?
Let us not talk about philosophy given that none was able to explain what is the meaning.
Let us instead talk about something more simple and grow from there.
So let us start...........with the above questions.

[Something completely different]

How is possible to investigate about a possible cosmic mind (God) if we haven't got a clue about how our brain, mind and I works?
Are you joking?

You could have simply left away all the dirbble and posted this phrase only. Because all your dribble is builts arround this phrase.

Nobody "investigates" the possibility of god. Scientists observe our surroundings and make conclusions about those. Rather than simply saying "god did it" when confronted with something unknown, science observes and then reaches conclusions out of those observations.

This is what I partialy base my disbelief on and something you have without any doubt read on this forum once before. So why post this nonsence?

[Captain Colostomy]

WTF are you on?

Edit-Why do you not want to speak of philosophy...you dropped this dog vomit in a philosophy sub forum?

[Psykhronic]

Optimistic is not how I'd describe people on this forum.

[Little Rik]

How is possible to investigate about a possible cosmic mind (God) if we haven't got a clue about how our brain, mind and I works?
Are you joking?

You could have simply left away all the dirbble and posted this phrase only. Because all your dribble is builts arround this phrase.

Nobody "investigates" the possibility of god. Scientists observe our surroundings and make conclusions about those. Rather than simply saying "god did it" when confronted with something unknown, science observes and then reaches conclusions out of those observations.

This is what I partialy base my disbelief on and something you have without any doubt read on this forum once before. So why post this nonsence?

Nonsence (ehm, nonsense).
Ok, let us see who talk nonsense.
More or less you say that science will work out whether God exist or not.
Unfortunately you are convinced that your science (physically science ) can understand what is not physical.
ARE YOU JOKING?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It seems that a lot of people in these forums are over optimistic.

Nice judgment call.

They seem to know so many things about God existence or God non existence without first having done the hard work and without having established the foundations in which these beliefs are based.

You're confusing two different points of view. Theists make positive claims to knowledge regarding the existence of gods. Atheists make no such claims regarding the non-existence of gods. The foundation of atheism is that there is neither evidence nor compelling arguments for the existence of gods. The foundation of theism is fear.

Nothing wrong with being optimistic provide you got something to stand on.

I'm not sure you fully grasp the meaning of the word 'optimistic'.

Unfortunately this optimism is based on almost nothing and therefore it is obvious that nothing much will come out.

Again, you're looking at this arsy-versy. Atheism is a negative position - it isn't up to atheists to 'prove' anything. It is as if Joe insists he has gnomes living at the bottom of his garden, and if Jim can't prove these gnomes don't exist, then they MUST exist. Until theists come up with either evidence or a compelling argument, atheism wins by default without doing anything.

People still ask what is the difference between the brain and the mind without even mentioning the I.

If by 'the I', you mean the awareness of self, you're dead wrong. This issue is part and parcel of the mind/brain debate.

How is possible to investigate about a possible cosmic mind (God) if we haven't got a clue about how our brain, mind and I works?

Don't limit yourself: It isn't possible to investigate God even WITH knowledge of the mind, brain, and awareness of self.

Are you joking?

You'll know when I'm joking, since I'll start off with the one about the three-balled Chinese rabbi and the wrestler's daughter.

And what about religions which people talk about?
Does anybody know how they born and what is the difference between religion and spirituality?

Religions are born out of fear, and the difference between religion and spirituality is mainly a tax-exemption.

Did Shiva, Krisna, Buddha, and Jesus were teaching spirituality or religions?

Accepting for the moment that these myth figures taught anything at all, I'd have to say they were teaching religion.

How do you understand whether God exist or not?

This the gnomes-in-the-garden problem again. I understand that gods do not exist because there is no reason for them to exist and no compelling evidence for them.

Let us not talk about philosophy given that none was able to explain what is the meaning.

I agree that philosophy isn't going to solve the gods issue, but so what? It happens to be a grand way to pass the time when it's too rainy to go out and there's nothing good on the tell.

Let us instead talk about something more simple and grow from there.

I suppose we could start with you - you seem fairly simple.

Boru

[downbeatplumb]

Nonsence (ehm, nonsense).
Ok, let us see who talk nonsense.
More or less you say that science will work out whether God exist or not.
Unfortunately you are convinced that your science (physically science ) can understand what is not physical.
ARE YOU JOKING?

Science can evaluate anything that exists.
Knowledge, for example, is not a physical thing but we can test that with exams.
So if something is supposed to have an effect we can test that effect and then see if there are other possible explanations.

I bolded the last bit because it is what theists tend to avoid, prefering to say go did it then walking away from the problem.

[Little Rik]

Science can evaluate anything that exists. Knowledge, for example, is not a physical thing but we can test that with exams. So if something is supposed to have an effect we can test that effect and then see if there are other possible explanations. I bolded the last bit because it is what theists tend to avoid, prefering to say go did it then walking away from the problem

When you say SCIENCE it is obvious to me that you intend PHYSICAL science and therefore i do not agree as PHYSICAL science is called PHYSICAL just because is confined inside this physical arena or universe and therefore is not able to exit his limits.
If instead we say intuitional science then i do agree that it is able to evaluate things outside this physical arena.
Knowledge exist both in the physical and non physical dimension so the one within the physical dimension can be within the grasp of this dimension and the one non physical can not.

[Psykhronic]

What is a non-physical dimension?

If your god is outside of science, I'm guessing it is outside of space and time if it exists - which means it would be a waste of time to pursue as of right now.

[Something completely different]

Nonsence (ehm, nonsense).
Ok, let us see who talk nonsense.
More or less you say that science will work out whether God exist or not.

No(nsence).

Science has the goal of figuring out why and how things work. And not wether god exists or not.

Unfortunately you are convinced that your science (physically science ) can understand what is not physical.

There is no proof of anything "non physical" to exist.

Which is where everything ends.

Because when rambling about "non physical" nonsence, you build your entire verbal construction on something of which there is no proof that it even exists.

Hence your essential not saying anything let alone making a point.