Non-existing objects

[bennyboy]

Another one of these religious Socratic goose chases I think.  Kerim, is there a point you are trying to get to?  I think you want to argue that God exists even though He cannot actually be found in the Universe.  Am I correct?

By just accepting there is a Creator, it doesn't reflect any useful information in one's life.

In my case and when I was teen (many decades ago), I felt the need to discover the real image of the Will/Power (God if you like) which forced me to exist in the time/space realm for a certain period of time and on certain places (actually on a planet we call Earth) in a huge universe.

But I also noticed that most people, I had the chance to know or live with, didn't have such a need. They are atheists or followers of a religion which they are used to or brings them services/benefits they are looking for and are not provided by other systems.

So I am just passing by and I will be around here as long I am allowed to (I am just a guest here after all).
So I have no intention to convince anyone about anything. I know in advance that every one is right the way he sees things. In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.

Why are you here?  You've made a thread, which means that you presumably have a point to make.  What's your point?

[Brian37]

By just accepting there is a Creator, it doesn't reflect any useful information in one's life.

In my case and when I was teen (many decades ago), I felt the need to discover the real image of the Will/Power (God if you like) which forced me to exist in the time/space realm for a certain period of time and on certain places (actually on a planet we call Earth) in a huge universe.

But I also noticed that most people, I had the chance to know or live with, didn't have such a need. They are atheists or followers of a religion which they are used to or brings them services/benefits they are looking for and are not provided by other systems.

So I am just passing by and I will be around here as long I am allowed to (I am just a guest here after all).
So I have no intention to convince anyone about anything. I know in advance that every one is right the way he sees things. In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.

Why are you here?  You've made a thread, which means that you presumably have a point to make.  What's your point?

His point is the same as any Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, or even si fi woo'er

"I have a claim I find is neat but wont admit I have no evidence other than I like it, and other people might agree with me".

I'll make anyone a deal, anyone of any religion or even generic "spirit/entity/" claim. If anyone of any stripe can get a patent and win a Nobel prize in "poof" theory,  be it Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Star Trek or Star Wars, .......Anyone. if you can make global news to the point nobody can dispute it, like the moon landing or computers, I will be more than happy to shut the fuck up. 

Otherwise my position is that the point of the other is that they have an opinion.

[Astonished]

Is it going a step too far to just call people like that liars?

[bennyboy]

Maybe you guys have a better ability to understand stuff. I'm literally still waiting for this person's point. I literally don't know what he/she wants to express.

[KerimF]

To become a professional designer (in electronics) I had to accept notions of non-existing objects.

The geometrical dot is a simple example. By definition, it has no dimensions. But the entire Geometry is based on it; a non-existing object.
Also in geometry, I didn’t mind accepting unreachable objects as well, as the intersection of two parallels at infinity.
And, although the square root of the algebraic number (-1) doesn’t exit, it was given a name/symbol as (i) or (j) in order to use it and simply the solution of many existing real problems.
 
But on the other hand, millions of people on earth live normally without the need to learn, for example, Math and accept (work with) its various definitions of non-existing and unreachable objects.
 
So, obviously, if someone didn’t feel the need to know anything about the Will/Power behind his existence, it is better for him not to think about it in the first place; as all pre-programmed living things do. In fact, the instructions of the Will/Power which is behind the creation of the universe are embedded, since always, in every living cell (as DNA for example). In other words, those who are born of the flesh only can know, by themselves, how to serve the world as they are supposed to do.
 
...

Before I go on, I wish I can hear some serious negative comments because such replies help me update my personal set of knowledge, most of the time. Thank you in advance.
 
Kerim

Sounds like:

1) you are convinced there is a God whose intention and power account for the universe we inhabit;

2) you believe it is possible to live ones life without studying or even hearing of this God;

3) you think the situation for knowing God and knowing geometry are comparable.


Okay, my order is life as I find it with a side of geometrical 'objects' but no gods, thank you.  What's yours?

Thank you for your interesting notes.
 
Yes, if someone did never feel the need to search for which end purpose he was forced to exist in this life, why should he bother himself by even just believing there is a Will/Power behind his own existence? After all, the instructions about how to play his role in this life are already embedded in his living cells (forming his human living flesh). So he has no choice but following them (though they are very complex in order to give him the feeling he has a free will). He does it with or without his knowledge.  
 
On the other hand, what is the difference in your opinion if I say my computer is made (through many processes) by a certain company and my being is made (also through many processes that needed millions of years) by a certain Will/Power?
 
About Geometry, I meant if someone is not interested in learning Math seriously, the reason won't be because Math has abstract notions but because he doesn't see in it a useful knowledge for his life.
 
So, we may say that typical atheists and the formal theists have no real interest in knowing more than what their human living fleshes may need. To express this satisfaction, a typical atheist says: 'God doesn't exist'... no matter what the word 'god' may refer to. And a formal theist glorifies, when necessary, the god and some Elite (as Pharaohs, Prophets or Messengers for example) who are approved by the authority that organizes the community he belongs to.
 

---

[edit]

By the way, as I mentioned earlier, all living things are not supposed to search the end purpose of their existence which is simply to serve the continuity of the world; the way that each species is supposed to do (the word 'serve' here may be about building and destroying as well).

[edit]

bold mine

What do you have that supports this conclusion? I think that many would differ with you. One differing position would be that a living things purpose of existence would be to survive and multiply not caring if it serves.

Thank you for supporting my conclusion. Indeed, the main duty of a living thing is to survive as long as possible and multiply in order to ensure the continuity of life in the world.

---

The first thing you need to learn is what the word "object" means.

He's not alone. Theists worldwide get sold something they find neat, then swallow elaborate apology to attempt to justify a cosmic sky wizard.

Having said that, scientific method can also detect the unseen. It is why while we cannot see directly into a black hole, we have a very decent foundation telling us what goes on to a great degree inside the black hole. But we also see the effects of what a black hole does to the objects we can see.

Same principle with detecting particles like the Higgs Boson. You cannot see it with the naked eye. But, build a giant collider, smash two atoms together, and just like two cars slamming head on at high speed, you can create things that detect the smaller bits that fly off.

His problem to me seems he is confusing abstract language as being part of the object language describes. 

He's trying to mix woo with science and scientific method doesn't support woo by any label.

On these days, it is not surprising that science, politics and religions have many faithful followers (believers actually) who don't mind accepting anything they may hear of if claimed being said/approved by certain scientists, top politicians/leaders or prophets.

I am afraid it would be off topic here to give real examples that I personally lived mainly what concern the 'believers' of science. In brief, mainly on these days, billions of people around the world who are rather busy to gain their daily bread could be fooled easily in the name of Science, Politics and/or Religion (thanks to the advanced technologies by which men, professional ones of course, can create any audio/video scenes that men may imagine and let them reach almost every house on Earth).

But, we like it or not, this is how the world is made since always (though its various tools evolve with time) and no one can change it; at best, one can live in it for a certain period of time.

[KerimF]

Please don't make us guess what your "Will/Power" means. Your original post alluded to a supreme power or deity. Please clarify what you believe in. Or are you taking refuge in ambiguity?

But please tell me first, do you trust or not 'your' personal observations and logical reasoning (to analyse them) more than of anyone else?
 
It happens, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who can 'fully' trust his abilities to discover his 'deep' nature and the world 'as it is' (far from the great speeches and famous stories).
So when I talk to a person I know in advance he will compare what I may say with what his trusted sources used saying on these days. In other words, one of the main differences of a formal theist and a typical atheist is actually the name/kind of the sources/references that should be trusted for knowing the truth(s).
 

---

Apologies in advance if I'm wrong, but it smells like socks in here.

Boru

This reminds me the reaction of some of my classmates who used hating math anytime our math teacher started a new topic.
So I guess you have your good reasons not to have a pleasant time in here...

---

Please don't make us guess what your "Will/Power" means. Your original post alluded to a supreme power or deity. Please clarify what you believe in. Or are you taking refuge in ambiguity?

I asked and was ignored. What makes you think you're better than ME???

You asked what? And for which reason I may ignore you.
I try my best to reply everyone, but I am not superman.

By the way, my internet connection is not as good as yours. I can't be online anytime I like. The connection could also be lost at any minute and for an undetermined period of time.

---

Please don't make us guess what your "Will/Power" means. Your original post alluded to a supreme power or deity. Please clarify what you believe in. Or are you taking refuge in ambiguity?

Ambiguity is how every religion survives. It is why even within the same label on any religion all of them have sub sects that cannot agree as to it's interpretation or how to follow.

---

No Kerm, I am not presuming anything about you personally.

You may have missed the post where I said I have been at this since 01. Your mistake was assuming this was our first rodeo. 

A used car lot can have lots of different models of vehicles but they are all still vehicles. 

How about you try debating not just atheists, but Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists, and do that almost every single day for 16 years. See, you debate enough and diverse labels for that period and you see the same patterns. It all boils down to "I got it right". Yep, everyone thinks they got it right. 

Point is you came in here thinking you had something unique, but it is not.

Would you please re-read your first and last sentences above  "No Kerim, I am not... " and "... thinking... "?

I came in here, as I said in a previous post (addressed to another member), to find out if there is a person around here "who can 'fully' trust his abilities to discover his deep nature and the world as it is (far from the great speeches and famous stories)".

Am I doing something wrong or bad?

[KerimF]

By just accepting there is a Creator, it doesn't reflect any useful information in one's life.

In my case and when I was teen (many decades ago), I felt the need to discover the real image of the Will/Power (God if you like) which forced me to exist in the time/space realm for a certain period of time and on certain places (actually on a planet we call Earth) in a huge universe.

But I also noticed that most people, I had the chance to know or live with, didn't have such a need. They are atheists or followers of a religion which they are used to or brings them services/benefits they are looking for and are not provided by other systems.

So I am just passing by and I will be around here as long I am allowed to (I am just a guest here after all).
So I have no intention to convince anyone about anything. I know in advance that every one is right the way he sees things. In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.

None of this post is evidence for anything and yet another mere act where you pontificate.

 In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.

No, plenty of both theists and atheists can think they are right but admit they don't know absolutely for certain. That is possible too.

But that is not the point in any case.

WHEN you have something credible, WHEN you have something testable and falsifiable, and WHEN you can turn all that over to someone else who can repeat it and come to the same conclusions REPEATEDLY, that is when you have evidence. 

You are dodging again. Your post was not evidence it was mere commentary.

---

Here is how determining evidence works.

1. Collect data on prior established method of data collection.

2. Form hypothesis based on that data.

3. Plug that data into established formula with control groups.

4. Repeat the tests over and over to establish a decent sample rate.

5. Write down your conclusions explaining your data collection and methodology and formula.

6. Hand your findings over for independent peer review to people in the same field.

 If the vast majority who independently review it come to the same conclusions, then you are onto something. If they don't then you go back and find where the errors are and fix them, or even scrap it if you are that way off.


Nothing in your OP Kerm is doing that. It is simply making naked assertions and trying to sound sciencey.

You are free to believe whatever you like as being the right path for you in order to know/discover the truth; I mean the truths that you are looking for.

First, by following your method, I should not take advantage of whatever I may discover in my life (to have a better life without harming others) till it is approved or blessed by certain people who are stronger than me and, therefore, privileged to do so legitimately while having all necessary means to control my actions. I mean; in this case I should stop producing my new electronic controllers I used designing for my local customers till they are approved by some privileged Elite of Science (the counterparts of god's representatives in Religions or the People's representatives in Politics).

Second, I agree with you that the scientific method you mentioned above is indeed one of the best ways that helps those (calling themselves theists or atheists) who have to serve the world while they are alive (guided by the instructions, not necessarily the same in all of them, that are embedded in their living cells).

---

[edit]

So I have no intention to convince anyone about anything. I know in advance that every one is right the way he sees things. In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.

A mature sane person is one that holds their belief until such time that evidence indicates that the belief may be flawed. Then the mature sane person reassess his belief in light of the evidence and can continue to hold the belief, alter the belief or eliminate the belief.

Do you mean you, as a mature sane person, can accept evidence from sources other than the ones you used trusting lately?
And, among these other sources, could you trust your personal observations and your logical reasoning more than of your trusted sources?

In reality, billions of people prefer to follow some others as good sheep do, so that they can be on the safe side (with the hope they will not be chosen among the sheep that should be slaughtered under one pretext or another).

---

I asked and was ignored. What makes you think you're better than ME???

---

I am afraid that you have no time to read attentively all what I write on this thread.

I try discovering things (in any field that could be related to my nature) with the hope to have a better life.
In reality, knowing how to have a better life is a relative matter because it depends on one's nature in the first place. I mean what is good for someone may or may not be so to others. But rare persons, even on these days, can perceive clearly this 'Relativity' because it is much easier for them to believe in the 'Absolute'.   

Anyway, it is not a crime if someone thinks that all humans should have the same nature (structure) of his. But, in this case, this person has no choice but seeing anyone who doesn't have his same main priorities in life as having illusions at best.

Should I repeat that, along history, the various religions then politics were created by men for the same main purpose?
So talking about ruling gods (religions) or human Elite (politics) sounds much like the same to me.

By the way, do you think a free independent person could exist in this world?
If you don't, you, unlike I, are used to be a follower of a certain ruling system (obviously not a religious one since you are not a formal theist).

I do have time, but how much of an naked assertion apology does one have to read before you know it is still ultimately a naked assertion?

Got a peer reviewed journal, formula? No, then all you have is a personal like. So do Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists, get in line take a number.

Oh, did you really meet even one Muslim, Jew, Hindus, Buddhist or formal Christian who thinks he has the right to believe things other than what his supposed holy sources present as true?

If you did, I wish you can give me more details about this so that I can add it to my personal observations. Thank you in advance.

[KerimF]

You are right.
It happens I am not good in any language. English is my 3rd language after French and Arabic.

But I also met people who even worship certain words and sentences known as being inspired by their god.

By the way, I used focusing on ideas instead of words. A word could be interpreted in many ways (even if it is written on a so-called 'holy' book) while an idea is either understood/perceived or not.

Ideas and words, neither mean shit to science in the context of scientific method if they are not accurate and distinct. 

The world IS interpreted best by scientific method, not fake philosophy, not naked assertions, not woo. That is not advocating the end of religion or even opinions. It merely means if you want to know what evidence and knowledge are there is only one universal way to determine that.

Anything outside scientific method is a like, an opinion. Until something is repeatedly tested and falsified and repeatedly independently peer reviewed, and confirmed by that independent peer review, those claims remain as they should, as mere opinion. 

The good thing about scientific method, for the entire world, is that it is not intended to care about personal bias.

I liked your clear statement:  "there is only one universal way to determine that".
It sounds like a counterpart of what I used hearing from formal theists when they say: "There is only God's Word to determine what is good for humanity".
I mean; one hears in both expressions the notion of Absolute that all human beings should know and follow.

In my case, my life would have no meaning at all (to me of course) if I have to follow blindly any rules/methods, said of God or Men.
I personally know (using my methods ) that any rules, said of God (or alike), are simply men's rules.
I also know that I am not better than any other man and no man on earth (in the past or present time) can know what is good for me better than I do.
This is why you won't see me telling you (or anyone else) what is good/bad for you or prove you that you may be wrong about anything.

So, while I understand the various reactions of each member here and even agree they are right (relative to the nature of the member's being), I don't expect a follower (of Religion and/or Science) is pleased to meet a free independent person who, automatically, would look to him as being a non-believer of his Absolute that was presented in details by some God's and/or Science's Elite.

By the way, I encourage your way of thinking by which the world can be served better.
But it happens that serving the continuity of life in the world (in its war/peace cycles) is not among the priorities in my life; after all, millions (billions lately) in the world (and since always) are doing it very well.

---

By just accepting there is a Creator, it doesn't reflect any useful information in one's life.

In my case and when I was teen (many decades ago), I felt the need to discover the real image of the Will/Power (God if you like) which forced me to exist in the time/space realm for a certain period of time and on certain places (actually on a planet we call Earth) in a huge universe.

But I also noticed that most people, I had the chance to know or live with, didn't have such a need. They are atheists or followers of a religion which they are used to or brings them services/benefits they are looking for and are not provided by other systems.

So I am just passing by and I will be around here as long I am allowed to (I am just a guest here after all).
So I have no intention to convince anyone about anything. I know in advance that every one is right the way he sees things. In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.

Why are you here?  You've made a thread, which means that you presumably have a point to make.  What's your point?

Sorry, is it my fault that someone doesn't have enough time to read all my posts?
Or should I repeat myself anytime I am addressing a different member?

By the way, I answered twice already about the reason I joined this forum. If you are serious, you certainly can find it by yourself.

---

Why are you here?  You've made a thread, which means that you presumably have a point to make.  What's your point?

His point is the same as any Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, or even si fi woo'er

"I have a claim I find is neat but wont admit I have no evidence other than I like it, and other people might agree with me".

I'll make anyone a deal, anyone of any religion or even generic "spirit/entity/" claim. If anyone of any stripe can get a patent and win a Nobel prize in "poof" theory,  be it Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Star Trek or Star Wars, .......Anyone. if you can make global news to the point nobody can dispute it, like the moon landing or computers, I will be more than happy to shut the fuck up. 

Otherwise my position is that the point of the other is that they have an opinion.

Well said Brian...
And I personally like your opinion about the path(s) which you believe is good for you.

But while I suppose that my opinions are good for me in the first place (this is why I had to discover them personally), you tend to insist that yours have to be good for the entire human race as well. I wonder if you will get get and agree on this opinion 

---

Is it going a step too far to just call people like that liars?

Please be free to call me whatever makes you feel better or happy.
But please try not to say anything in your name, as I do. Otherwise, there are always people who will be pleased to treat you the way you do to me here.

By the way, you remind me what girls used telling me when I was much younger. They said something like: "You are a nice clever boy but you are rather boring. You are sincere always and you have no secret to hide. You also respect us rather too much. So, after we leave you, we feel we were losing our time while being with you."
They were totally right. Fortunately, there were non-sincere boys too with whom they had pleasant adventures, for a certain period of time in the least.

[KerimF]

Maybe you guys have a better ability to understand stuff.  I'm literally still waiting for this person's point.  I literally don't know what he/she wants to express.

I really wonder why you are still waiting.
If you couldn't be sure after reading all my posts here that I am a man (an old one in his 60's), how will you understand any point I may present?

I hope you can get, at least, the point of this message.

[SteelCurtain]

I propose, as a hypothesis, that Kerim is the perfect antithesis of Minimalist.