Log in

View Full Version : Letting go of our Blankets (a fate worse then death?)


Obbe
2008-08-06, 15:36
I often post about how my state of existence is one of total uncertainty. For instance, I never know when I might die, if this moment is my last. We all appear to take comfort and refuge from total uncertainty in pretend certainty ... our beliefs.

The comforts I'm talking about, however, aren't the details of our individual beliefs (I'm gonna live with jesus forever! ... or ... I'm gonna fuck me some virgins! ... or ... I'm not gonna go to hell, because there is no such place!). Nothing so acute. The comfort I am talking about here is the comfort we derive from feeling correct. That we cracked this nut, we untangled this knot ... that we are anything but uncertain, whatever our personal answers are.

Lots of people on this board have mentioned the importance of remembering death is all around us, and that doing so is what makes life sacred. But are we really letting go and giving into the uncertainty of death if we already pretend to understand what death will involve?

So I have made this thread to ask you all a question. What would you do if you became absolutely certain that the opposite of your beliefs is absolutely true?

Theists ... what would you do is atheism was proven correct?

Atheists ... what would you do if a certain brand of theism was proven to be correct?

-ScreamingElectron-
2008-08-06, 16:21
I am unsure of what I would do. I'd probably get busy repentin'!

But I don't make my calls on what if's. I like what is.

Obbe
2008-08-06, 16:26
I like what is.

And what is?

The point of this thread is to let go of your pretend certainty. Really question yourself: what if you're wrong?

KikoSanchez
2008-08-06, 21:48
It completely depends on what god it was that actually existed. Regardless, I'd be astonished at how such a powerful being could create such a flawed world.

TheMessiahComplex
2008-08-06, 22:15
If, say, the christian god was proven correct I suppose I'd start living like most of the christians I know.
Which means I'd live the exact same way I do now but go to church on easter and christmas and call it even.

-ScreamingElectron-
2008-08-06, 23:01
And what is?

The point of this thread is to let go of your pretend certainty. Really question yourself: what if you're wrong?

I like what I am certain of :P

Uncertainty is too scary :D /childish voice

Besides, I haven't finnished the book you suggested yet >: )

AngryFemme
2008-08-07, 02:00
As a dyed-in-the-wool skeptic, uncertainty comes natural to me. I do believe there's a huge difference between arrogant overconfidence and plain conviction, though. Is there not some level of certainty we have to establish in our own minds in order to secure a general perspective about things? While I've taken the liberty of doubting everything, at least once - there has to be a point where you've analyzed the information brought before you and formed some type of judgment call. I can't fathom just meandering through life with some wishy-washy "we can't ever know, so I won't ever decide" halfassery going on. I'll find a firm stance that jives with everything I've learned and experienced, and I won't fail to abandon it when something even more plausible comes along to replace it.

So I have made this thread to ask you all a question. What would you do if you became absolutely certain that the opposite of your beliefs is absolutely true?

Pretty much what TheMessiahComplex said. I don't see my personality or lifestyle going through any radical changes.

Atheists ... what would you do if a certain brand of theism was proven to be correct?

I suppose I'd eat a great deal of crow, in here especially. While I'm sure my parents and my theist friends in the 'real wouldn't rub it in too hard, I can imagine that some folks on this board would have a fucking field day. Some very old threads would get bumped and some very antiquated debates would have a brand new bent! While my frail ego would surely have to withstand a right proper humility-knocking in this forum (Hold me, Rust?), I'd try my damnedest to keep my sense of humor. :D

One thing I am pretty sure of - I'd be backtracking like a woman possessed, trying to discover why it was that I somehow missed out, after all that exhausting exploration, on connecting with my *spirit*. After the public flogging I'd take from a few of my favorite antagonists, I'd probably take the time to try to communicate to the God Figure my utter displeasure in how he created all this. I don't think the line of questioning would ever end! If this God Figure truly loved and cared about me, they'd understand the importance I placed in being well-informed, and would grade me on a healthy curve. I'm taking it on a hunch that God would, by default, have a special place in heaven carved out for diehard, well-intentioned skeptics.

ArmsMerchant
2008-08-07, 18:21
And what is?

The point of this thread is to let go of your pretend certainty. Really question yourself: what if you're wrong?

I would respond that we CANNOT be wrong, because we create our own reality.

At the Highest Level, there is no right or wrong, only oneness.

Speedel
2008-08-08, 05:42
when christianity is proved correct i too will use the value of 3 for pi and fail my engineering course.

however the advances in boats would be amazing, a wooden boat that can hold that many animals, and STILL FLOAT!!!

and other religions are variations on a theme

Graemy
2008-08-08, 13:42
I guess then I would be wrong. That's about it.

villageillness
2008-08-08, 21:26
Atheists ... what would you do if a certain brand of theism was proven to be correct?

In this life whilst still living?..if so, how would you even measure it being correct?...If it was correct it would of already been proven by now, and if not..then all the evidence would be in favor of a certain religion. I personally will not be like.."oh well, now i understand".because i wouldn't...because that particular religion has a lot of explaining to do..and right now it's not looking good for the major religions.

If by some chance there just happens to be a God, when he stops fucking around with books, then we'll negotiate.

BrokeProphet
2008-08-09, 02:06
If I am wrong....and God is PROVEN to exist....I will not deny the evidence.

I think most atheists are atheists due to the complete and utter lack of any evidence of a God existing.

Theists on the other hand.........dont require evidence concerning God.........why would this change, if evidence proved God false?

Vanhalla
2008-08-09, 03:37
I think most atheists are atheists due to the complete and utter lack of any evidence of a God existing.


What if Existence and God are One and the Same?

If Existence was proven to be false, would Non-Existence then be God?

BrokeProphet
2008-08-09, 22:10
What if Existence and God are One and the Same?

If Existence was proven to be false, would Non-Existence then be God?

P1: God = Existence

P2: Existence proven false.

C: God is false.

No non-existence would not be god, b/c god has already been proven false. I dont see how you can infer the question or claim that non-existence would be God, from the syllogism you created.

Vanhalla
2008-08-09, 23:13
P1: God = Existence

P2: Existence proven false.

C: God is false.

No non-existence would not be god, b/c god has already been proven false. I dont see how you can infer the question or claim that non-existence would be God, from the syllogism you created.

If you think 'God' is existence, and existence is proven to be false, then would existence really be 'God'?
Yes.
But God would be non-existence

God = Truth

It doesn't matter what someone thinks 'God' is
That doesn't magically make it God.
Just more motion added to everything else

Graemy
2008-08-09, 23:22
If you think 'God' is existence, and existence is proven to be false, then would existence really be 'God'?
Yes.
But God would be non-existence

You said if god was existence. That means God = existence. So if existence is proven false, then so is god. You are running on the assumption that there must be a god.

Vanhalla
2008-08-09, 23:24
You said if god was existence. That means God = existence. So if existence is proven false, then so is god. You are running on the assumption that there must be a god.

I am running on the assumption that there must be a Truth.

honkymahfah
2008-08-09, 23:47
I am running on the assumption that there must be a Truth.

http://members.aol.com/okkep/truth.gif

i hate circular reasoning non scientific bullshit.

Graemy
2008-08-10, 01:12
I am running on the assumption that there must be a Truth.

Ever think that the truth could be there is no god?

Or since you believe that God = Truth, then my point still stands, you just change the word.

BrokeProphet
2008-08-10, 01:48
If you think 'God' is existence, and existence is proven to be false, then would existence really be 'God'?
Yes.
But God would be non-existence

NO, God would be false.

You created a syllogism in which the only logical conclusion is that God is false.

P1: God = Existence
P2: Existence proven false.
C: God is false.

Please show me how the conclusion is in error, or kindly admit you cannot.

Vanhalla
2008-08-10, 04:15
NO, God would be false.

You created a syllogism in which the only logical conclusion is that God is false.

P1: God = Existence
P2: Existence proven false.
C: God is false.

Please show me how the conclusion is in error, or kindly admit you cannot.
'God' is not God
God is God

Vanhalla
2008-08-10, 04:22
Ever think that the truth could be there is no god?

Or since you believe that God = Truth, then my point still stands, you just change the word.

If 'God' is not truth, or reality, or information. Then 'God' would be false and should be replaced by a new assumption based on what you know to be truth.
But this new assumption is not God, it is just another 'God'.

Graemy
2008-08-10, 14:21
If 'God' is not truth, or reality, or information. Then 'God' would be false and should be replaced by a new assumption based on what you know to be truth.
But this new assumption is not God, it is just another 'God'.

That argument doesn't stand against mine. If truth is that there is no god, then there is no god. You know the truth so you still have the truth, but there is no god if the truth states so. Your statement further proves that you are running on the assumption that there has to be a god. Saying that you are running on the assumption that there has to be a truth is the same thing, you just believe that truth is god and you assume that this has to be.

The part were you said that you must replace the false god with a new one verifies my claim.

Vanhalla
2008-08-10, 21:30
God transcends Being.
Thus anything you learn from the Omnipotent Lord in the world of name and form is God, yet still it is not the entire truth.

Graemy
2008-08-10, 21:39
Although I think your use of language can be somewhat poetic at times, that refutes nothing of what I have said. I can understand you are trying to spread an idea, but trying to put a letter through a closed door isn't the proper way. You have to wait until the door is open, or play by the door's rules and slip it in through the mail slot.

Vanhalla
2008-08-11, 00:33
Ever think that the truth could be there is no god?

Or since you believe that God = Truth, then my point still stands, you just change the word.

I consider God as the Absolute.
There are two levels, or two truths.
The basic truth can be relatively defined
But from the Ultimate Truth words fall back.

The Absolute and the Ultimate Truth would not be separate.

I'm not saying that I completely understand this Ultimate Truth, just that I believe there is, and it transcends any words or labels, they would only limit the true beauty of the Self which is only comprehended by the Self.

When the true nature of clay is known, a jar does not exist apart from the clay (Karika, IV)

It is my belief that the Real is devoid of relations, since there is no other they can possibly relate.


The opposite of what I believe to be Pure Being?
The lower truth would be the opposite, which I do believe exists, like that of a dream.

Graemy
2008-08-11, 01:42
I'm not saying your beliefs are right or wrong, but you must take them out of the picture with the argument you presented. It is like when physicists calculate the magnetic field of a wire, the magnetic field used is the magnetic field that would be measured if the current carrying wire were entirely removed from the system. This is because the wire cannot "see" it's own field(the magnetic field would increase the current, which would increase the field, ad infinitum).

If Existence = God,
And Existence is proven false,
Then God is proven false.

Don't get me wrong, your beliefs are interesting, but it is imperative that they are left at the door for this one.

Also, as a restatement of my question, it was a hypothetical. What if the truth was that there is no God? Truth here meaning an ultimate understanding.

CharChar
2008-08-11, 01:59
I am agnostic so I believe nobody really knows for sure.

So I guess the opposite of my belief would be everybody knowing whats really going on.

And if that were true I'd shit myself. :eek:

Vanhalla
2008-08-11, 04:00
I'm not saying your beliefs are right or wrong, but you must take them out of the picture with the argument you presented. It is like when physicists calculate the magnetic field of a wire, the magnetic field used is the magnetic field that would be measured if the current carrying wire were entirely removed from the system. This is because the wire cannot "see" it's own field(the magnetic field would increase the current, which would increase the field, ad infinitum).

Wow, that was a great description, and I apologize.


If Existence = God,
And Existence is proven false,
Then God is proven false.
When God is limited to the definition of existence, yes.


Also, as a restatement of my question, it was a hypothetical. What if the truth was that there is no God? Truth here meaning an ultimate understanding.If there was no transcendental Absolute?

I dunno :confused:

Graemy
2008-08-11, 04:11
Wow, that was a great description, and I apologize.

Thanks.


When God is limited to the definition of existence, yes.

It was, If God = everything and existence was proven false, then God would be everything that is not existence.


If there was no transcendental Absolute?

I dunno :confused:

It doesn't seem that anything would change really. You know? It would just be the Universe.

honkymahfah
2008-08-11, 05:47
wow this thread turned from logic into a bad christian rock song

Stop pulling these bullshit ambiguities , "god" is not god
and explain the shit you are saying. Truth is an abstract concept in it's self.

arguing over this is impossible, its beyond science or even philosophy, its just nonsensical.

---Beany---
2008-08-11, 20:09
If I found out God definitely didn't exist and we totally end at death.... well I'd probably want to kill myself. Life (my life anyways) is full of discomfort, struggle and suffering. My view of reality helps me to understand why I suffer and why to put up with lifes bullshit is completely worthwhile.

BrokeProphet
2008-08-11, 21:05
If Existence = God,
And Existence is proven false,
Then God is proven false.

Don't get me wrong, your beliefs are interesting, but it is imperative that they are left at the door for this one.

You misunderstand...these are not my beliefs. Van created the premises for a syllogism, I correctly solved it, rather than allow him to draw an inaccurate conclusion from it. (He simply cannot accept being this wrong)

Here is Van's syllogism...

P1: Existence = God
P2: Existence is proven false

Van's conclusion is that God = non-existence. This is incorrect and he is unable to show how he drew that conclusion from the premises he himself created. There is one logical and very correct conclusion to be drawn from this syllogism and that is

C: God is false

---Disclaimer---
This syllogism is hypothetical. It is an excercise in logic and does not actually disprove God in any way shape or form.

Graemy
2008-08-11, 21:17
You misunderstand...these are not my beliefs. Van created the premises for a syllogism, I correctly solved it, rather than allow him to draw an inaccurate conclusion from it. (He simply cannot accept being this wrong)

Here is Van's syllogism...

P1: Existence = God
P2: Existence is proven false

Van's conclusion is that God = non-existence. This is incorrect and he is unable to show how he drew that conclusion from the premises he himself created. There is one logical and very correct conclusion to be drawn from this syllogism and that is

C: God is false

---Disclaimer---
This syllogism is hypothetical. It is an excercise in logic and does not actually disprove God in any way shape or form.

Yea, I was addressing him. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

AngryFemme
2008-08-12, 00:32
Life (my life anyways) is full of discomfort, struggle and suffering.

But try to think of it like this, Beany - it's overcoming the discomfort, struggle and suffering that makes life worthwhile! We would never be able to learn from our past experiences that were less-than-pleasant, were it not for being educated by discomfort, struggle and episodes of suffering. I couldn't imagine being able to construct a tolerable mode of living if we didn't carry with us the valuable experience we make throughout our life.

If you never felt discomfort, struggle and suffering - you wouldn't be able to understand what it's like to eke joy out of anything!

I hope you can find something meaningful and worthwhile to look forward to in this life. Sincerely.

---Beany---
2008-08-12, 06:50
^ Thanks AngryFemme. Much apprecated.

Prometheum
2008-08-12, 17:59
If any type of theism were proven correct, I would dedicate my life to finding out how to kill a god.

No borders, no nations, no gods, no masters. Just man, just freedom.