DEISM is the truth-ARGUE WITH ME IF YOU CAN

[YOLOisonlyprinciple]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism......

REFUTE my ideology cos i personally think it is the truth to everything; although i am not sure whether it is correct; which is another question ie, qn 2:

1. So first deism- you could read it thru the above wiki link and get back to me.....
why do i think it is true; 2 reasons:-
a.)Atheism is absurd- Universe cannot possibly evolve out of nothing!!!!
there was definitely a time before the big bang; even if we can study more into our universe's past we might reach a point before the big bang; but my question is what before that?----so what is it an endless loop????........:
((elephant:...http://www.intpforum.com/images/smilies/icon_elefant.gif.....))
lolz
EVEN if it were an endless loop - u prove it that is because of the inherent nature of nothingness to constantly create and expand(absurd, but possible); i still ask you the question why should it be like that????.............who created the LAW of physics(read universe) to be like that..................
So yeah all super intelligent people who think of atheism leave it.....even stephen hawkins ....wtf..some of his reasonings for atheism were BS to me......
(-yeah i dont have any respect for them; and yeah my idea cud be flawed see im a finance guy not a science stream guy....thats y im posting this in first instance..DUHHH)
So yeah atheism is absurd..... dont take me religious cos of this...im agnst all religion......(this guy is crazy......)

b.)Absolutely do not believe any actions of God in our practical life....or any stories of God comin to earth lolz......

REASON: cos the universe is incredibly COMPLICATED!!!!!....God just wont pop out of nowhere and help you......!!!!!.........it will make the universe unstable......universe is a continuous flow of things.....NO SUPERFICIAL thing cna just come and change things, even an atom slightly out of place might destroy the world..........and please dont think that out of trillions of living creatures God will come to help you..............yeah its a good motivational tool otherwise......

(I personally believe religion was created and is being used for reasons other than reaching God; every one of the founders of those religions and higher ranking priests surely know this and have an exterior motive.........)


-----yeah this is different from agnoticism cos i am sure God exists; but he wont do anything cos it will throw the universe out of balance...........

-----Actually some times i just feel we are just a play/movie/experiment in Gods eyes lolz..cos he cannot change the world once it is initiated; he just creates an universe with different starting ingredients each time!!!!!!!!...and this universe was the successful experiment to be alive so loong.........



2.) Now my second question--pretty weird..... HAVE YOU EVER THAUGHT OF COMMITTING SUICIDE FOR SAKE OF DYING!!!!.....i mean your life is all pleasant...alls well......good future.....but thaught---the only way to check my philosophy is to die and see everything from that angle!!!!!-AS in EXPERIENCE the after life???????.......lolz

I used to think a lot about this when i was younger(lolz i was more brilliant philosophically then; ie before college and high school brain washed me)


But now i believe YOLO is the truth for living happily and i tend to wait for death and am less eager than before......:/......one of the benefits of YOLO is that i am happy WITH anythin that FUCKIN happens to me.....I suceed or fail or have an accident or even if one of my friends die.....yeah i am not happy at that point and take all steps to prevent all hardships like any rational person..........but once a hardship is irrevertable......i tend to become happy that i faced it............i am really crazy aint i????,.....gotta check a mental hospital........i really dont care about the situation i am put in.......
Since becoming a believer in YOLO i have made my life's goal to only be to seek new experiences!!!!!--i dont care whether they are good bad hard easy costly miserly-----i want every single experiece in the world to happen to me before i die-----(i obviously seek out happier experiences but i dont lament hardships although i talk to others so that i get sympathy i really dont feel anything...........).


exhausting post.................yeah and many lines in firstpoint cud be wrong cos i am not trained in science and scientific research/analysis......


So what do you think...?...:-
1. i need to go the nearest mental hospital and get a lethal injection cos i am a danger to all those around me( i forgot to mention.. that i am sure i am really the only being(living) in the world.... and all of you are just dreams of my mind...or just that you were my previous life(it does contradict YOLO a bit; but cos experiences dont carry over; it is still YOLO by my definition..and also i aint sure too!!)

2. i am truly enlightened and should quit preparing for my actuarial science (yeah it is called science but only has math so i am not contradicting that i am a finance guy) and chartered accountancy exams; and start a religion(although i totally oppose religions; but i might start one where i am the god and you are my slaves-that will be a nice experience indeed!!!!)


if u really think 2 is true!!!---you could join my cult--myemail id @ (lokeshthedeist@gmail.com
facebook- n lokesh chettiar from chennai, india......try facebook i might respond to gmail cos thats not my official id in gmail)
current members - 1 and counting!!!!
but remember as my follower you are just as material to me as the chair i am sitting on and i might sacrifice you any time................(yeah every religion and cult leader is on the same lines but i openly profess it lolzszz)






YEAH SO please post comments my rationality or utter lack of it!!!!

 

[SpaceYeti]

Firstly; Organize your thoughts better.

a.)Atheism is absurd

Atheism is merely the rejection of a god claim (usually) due to lack of supporting evidence.

Universe cannot possibly evolve out of nothing!!!!

True, but irrelevant.

there was definitely a time before the big bang

False. The BB began at the very first moment of time, which means causation is impossible. Time is necessary for a series of events to occur, and time began at the BB. Which means before the BB wasn't simply an ambiguous "nothing", it means it didn't happen. There's no such thing as "before the Big Bang".

who created the LAW of physics

Your question assumes a creator in the way it's asked. Why does whatever event was at the very beginning of time have to be an intelligent entity instead of something else?

HAVE YOU EVER THAUGHT OF COMMITTING SUICIDE FOR SAKE OF DYING!!!!

Yes, but the odds of simply ceasing to be are so great that it's not worth doing out of curiosity, especially considering I have to support my family, yet.

But now i believe YOLO is the truth for living happily

I believe I agree with the general intent of the whole "YOLO" thing, but I'm becoming an old man, and see so many people shouting it before doing something stupid that I consider it far and wide nothing more than a (irrational) youthful justification for doing something stupid. Sometimes you have to take a risk, sure, but that doesn't mean you have to ignore caution entirely. Temperance, yo.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

I think my brain just got aborted.

 

[joal0503]

So what do you think...?...:-
1. i need to go the nearest mental hospital and get a lethal injection cos i am a danger to all those around me( i forgot to mention.. that i am sure i am really the only being(living) in the world.... and all of you are just dreams of my mind...or just that you were my previous life(it does contradict YOLO a bit; but cos experiences dont carry over; it is still YOLO by my definition..and also i aint sure too!!)

2. i am truly enlightened and should quit preparing for my actuarial science (yeah it is called science but only has math so i am not contradicting that i am a finance guy) and chartered accountancy exams; and start a religion(although i totally oppose religions; but i might start one where i am the god and you are my slaves-that will be a nice experience indeed!!!!)

i choose option 3
...

3. YOLO BITCHES!!!!!!

 

[redbaron]

I'm afraid I simply can't when your post is formatted (I use the term 'formatted' loosely) in such an atrocious manner.

I think it's about time the fuhrer admin of INTPf implemented a 'one smiley per post' rule. Better yet. One smiley per user, per week.

 

[SpaceYeti]

^ Seconded.

 

[The Gopher]

I haven't read it but it seems to be more a parody of something than an actual serious argument.

 

[YOLOisonlyprinciple]

^^^^lolz i am a teen....if i dont use any smileys wont i cease to exist as one......
omg i dint expect so many replies in a few replies.....i m really humbled by your interest in helpin me out............(....really had to add one smiley there....)


1. @Space Yeti
a. )-Atheism is merely the rejection of a god claim (usually) due to lack of supporting evidence. isnt it just like not accepting the obvious, the fact that there must have been a creator that if nothing can create everything the world will fall into an infinite loop and hence is not possible; which leads to the conclusion that there must have been a creator (albeit who doesnt give eyesight to blind and stuff).....actually when i start thinking more into my ideology i feel the only reason everyone confesses about themselves being atheist is the fear that that they may be labelled as irrational/unscientific/incompetent which is at the core of our need to exist as INTPs....

second, mr space yeti; i have already read once of stephen hawkins telling exactly what you said that BB was the start of time; but i dont get it ; i cant accept someone arbitarily telling me time didnt exist before BB that is 13 billion years ago...my mind doesnt accept; ok if time dint exist before that then why did time have to exist after BB....???......everything prefers to stay at rest, so there must have been a spark which started out everything to move about in the universe.....

all im saying that the entity which caused the initial spark exists; and that is how i define God.



so as such i am not convinced by anything you have said (thank you for responding) in changing my belief; which i have laid as concrete till i die when i will know the truth(hopefully)



---what i am really requesting here is:-
1. specific points in my thinking which are wrong
2. specific points in my thinking which might be wrong but i cant comprehend right now cos of my lacking in intellectual/scientific/philosophical skills; and suggest me a way to refine it to understand things better...



PS- many of the things ive told might be plain BS; please understand that today was the first time i heard the word IFTP and started reading articles on it and stuff after being redirected from an online personality test; and many of my theories might be irrational

-besides the point;
also i want to know whether the IFTPs are the smartest of the lot; cos ive got an iq 140 summthn and i feel most of the posts are highly intellectually enriching than what ive read before and most of you seem more intelligent than me

 

[YOLOisonlyprinciple]

also although i might be wasting your time asking questions off the topic......im pretty hyper now knowing so many people who are pretty much like me.......i had one more question

1.
-i personally feel zero motivation when i do work which i am not eager/needs a lesser skillset than mine; for example i just completely hate when i have to answer the phone put papers in a file when i dont have any juniors to do it for me

-i understand that this is true for everyone; but i am like extremely affected by this; i start hating the office and the job and everyone who told me to do that menial task. i start getting lots and lots of negative emotions in that workplace where my intellect isnt valued/used.

- i am totally ready to slog off hours and hours night and day without sleeping if it something innovative or intellectually enriching/solving/knowing somthing new and giving advice

----is this the same for all INTPs or just i am too lazy or proud....???

2. is it necessary that INTPs be continuously intellectually challenged and valued in order to lead a satisfactory life??...... i think that is the reason i have started changing my career from auditing to actuarial science/IB how important do you rate a stimulating workplace in an INTPs work results and satisfaction?


thank you for your patience.......
you guys are really awesome i dont think INTP s are socially inapt....that quicklness with which you have responded shows lot of concern for fellows of like minds......

 

[GodOfOrder]

I too declare myself a deist, but I do not think of a conscious god who abandoned his creation, but rather a god who is physical law, and thus is a pervasive order, and that everything in the universe acts by itself within the confines of this order. Thus from the perspective of humanity, evidence of gods interference can not be seen, but the existence of god can certainly be postulated by virtue of philosophical reasoning, indeed by necessity.

 

[Kuu]

Man, you in finance? That explains things...


Well, it's been a short life, but you did live it to the fullest.

YOLO!

Spoiler

Captain Hammer saves the day again

 

[Fukyo]

I never bothered opening this thread ... thanks Captain...

 

[Duxwing]

^^^^lolz i am a teen....if i dont use any smileys wont i cease to exist as one......
omg i dint expect so many replies in a few replies.....i m really humbled by your interest in helpin me out............(....really had to add one smiley there....)

I too am a "teen," sixteen years old to be precise, but I have, since the first day that I ever posted on a forum (around 11 years of age) never posted in such an emotional, disorganized, and immature manner as you have in your deism thesis. Therefore, provided that I am not an exception to the rule, your age is not an excuse for your over-use of smilies, exclamation marks, and "ALL-CAPS" text. Post in a coherent manner next time.

1. @Space Yeti
a. )-Atheism is merely the rejection of a god claim (usually) due to lack of supporting evidence. isnt it just like not accepting the obvious, the fact that there must have been a creator that if nothing can create everything the world will fall into an infinite loop and hence is not possible; which leads to the conclusion that there must have been a creator (albeit who doesnt give eyesight to blind and stuff).....actually when i start thinking more into my ideology i feel the only reason everyone confesses about themselves being atheist is the fear that that they may be labelled as irrational/unscientific/incompetent which is at the core of our need to exist as INTPs....

second, mr space yeti; i have already read once of stephen hawkins telling exactly what you said that BB was the start of time; but i dont get it ; i cant accept someone arbitarily telling me time didnt exist before BB that is 13 billion years ago...my mind doesnt accept; ok if time dint exist before that then why did time have to exist after BB....???......everything prefers to stay at rest, so there must have been a spark which started out everything to move about in the universe.....

all im saying that the entity which caused the initial spark exists; and that is how i define God.



so as such i am not convinced by anything you have said (thank you for responding) in changing my belief; which i have laid as concrete till i die when i will know the truth(hopefully)



---what i am really requesting here is:-
1. specific points in my thinking which are wrong
2. specific points in my thinking which might be wrong but i cant comprehend right now cos of my lacking in intellectual/scientific/philosophical skills; and suggest me a way to refine it to understand things better...



PS- many of the things ive told might be plain BS; please understand that today was the first time i heard the word IFTP and started reading articles on it and stuff after being redirected from an online personality test; and many of my theories might be irrational

-besides the point;
also i want to know whether the IFTPs are the smartest of the lot; cos ive got an iq 140 summthn and i feel most of the posts are highly intellectually enriching than what ive read before and most of you seem more intelligent than me

Don't make a nuisance of yourself, it's one of our forum rules.

-Duxwing

 

[InvisibleJim]

Yolo apparently.



I'm sure there was something nice in the OP but I experienced physical disgust trying to read it so I stopped.

 

[SpaceYeti]

"1. @Space Yeti
a. )-Atheism is merely the rejection of a god claim (usually) due to lack of supporting evidence." isnt it just like not accepting the obvious

I won't presume you're a liar and I will consider a creator to be obvious to you. However, don't be one of these jerks who, when I say it's not obvious to me, essentially (or even outright) call me a liar. It's not obvious to me. It's not even remotely obvious to me. However, obvious or not, it's not my job to prove you wrong. Anyone making a positive claim, who's trying to convince others they're correct, have the burden of proof. It's not my job to sort through your evidence and poke holes in it, it's your job to convince me that you have evidence and good reasoning.

To be straight, I do, currently, consider you wrong on this topic. I sincerely doubt you have any reasoning or evidence I have not heard before, or else you'd have opened with that. By "wrong" I do not mean to say that I think there is no god, but that I do not believe you have any good reason to suppose any such entity as a god exists. It's not the conclusion I disagree with, rather, but the reasoning (or, as I see it, the lack thereof).

the fact that there must have been a creator that if nothing can create everything the world will fall into an infinite loop and hence is not possible

Again, you're assuming the universe is a creation, thereby necessitating a "creator". Have you ever noticed that people who make this claim make comparisons like "if you find a watch in the woods, you know the watch was designed"? Well, they consider the entire universe to have been designed, so why did they single out the watch? It's as though they're saying "The watch and the forest contrast in that one was designed and one was not"... but that runs counter to their claims on the topic.

To get more to the point; The universe shows no signs of being designed. Further, a designed thing is designed for a purpose, for a function. What does the universe do? What suggests design?

actually when i start thinking more into my ideology i feel the only reason everyone confesses about themselves being atheist is the fear that that they may be labelled as irrational/unscientific/incompetent which is at the core of our need to exist as INTPs....

I hadn't said anything about it before this post, so I can't be upset about this. However, you are essentially calling me a liar, here. If the only reason I claim to be an atheist is to put on the show of being reasonable, then I'm lying about what I really think, right? If I really were an atheist, I would simply be one, for no reason other than that I lack the belief in a god, right? If I have this ulterior motive, then I'm not an atheist because the label simply fits, but for some other reason, which makes me a liar. Would you be remotely upset if I said that you don't really believe in a god, that you're making it up to fit in? I imagine you would, but even if you weren't, it's not actually relevant to the topic. Either you have a good reason to suppose a god exists, or you don't, and this is a red herring.

second, mr space yeti; i have already read once of stephen hawkins telling exactly what you said that BB was the start of time; but i dont get it

You've seemed reasonable so far, so I'll go ahead and do the long version for you;

We know time started. Time cannot have gone infinitely into the past. The reason for this is that if time extended infinitely into the past, it would never have progressed to now. Imagine being immortal. You live past our species' extinction, past the death of the Earth, past the death of our sun, for billions of years and longer. How many years would pass before you could say you've been alive "forever"? You couldn't, right? Because no matter how much time passes, you've been alive a finite amount of time, not for an infinite one. The same problem occurs when we try to go backwards in time. If there is forever more time to go back, then how could enough time have passed such that it became now? It couldn't have.

Physicists have discovered that time is actually a part of our universe, in a similar way to the three standard dimensions. They've also discovered that our universe is expanding, which means the farther back in time we go, the smaller the universe is. When the universe was as small as it could be must have been it's beginning, right? Well, even if it's not, it began at a time, right? What is time? I'm not trying to get deep, here, but we say that a plate falls and then hits the ground, right? It falls before it hits the ground, right? Well, let's say we go back to the very first moment of time. How is it possible for anything to have happened "before" the very thing which allows things to happen existed? That is, there was no "cause" for the Big Bang, because there's no such thing as time "before" the Big Bang such that any cause could have happened in the first place.

i cant accept someone arbitarily telling me time didnt exist before BB that is 13 billion years ago...my mind doesnt accept

This is called an argument from incredulity. The fact that you don't either understand it or believe it (whichever) has no baring on whether it's actually true or not. I'm not a physicist, but I do know what they say about the Big Bang, because I looked into it. I suggest you do the same. The conclusion is not arbitrary at all, but rather a result of the scientific method and investigation.

ok if time dint exist before that then why did time have to exist after BB

Firstly, who said it had to? It does, sure, but nobody said it must.

Secondly, you're still applying temporal thinking to the subject. If time didn't come to be during the BB, then the BB itself would not have happened, for it requires a framework of time in order for events to occur. Just like I could not drop my plate, my plate could not fall, and it would never reach the floor. Nothing happens outside the confines of a series of events (time).

Basically, if time started, then the BB happened. If time never started, the BB could not have.

everything prefers to stay at rest, so there must have been a spark which started out everything to move about in the universe

Everything stays at rest firstly because it exists, and, secondly, because it exists in a universe where time exists. Without the series of moments we know as "time", nothing could either stay at rest or accelerate. Nothing would happen. Nothing at all. There's not even one moment, let alone a long series of them. You're still considering the universe within the confines of time, but that's not the case. Time is an aspect of the universe itself.

all im saying that the entity which caused the initial spark exists; and that is how i define God.

Even if there were something which "started" the universe, even if I granted that something could happen "before" time existed (which is a nonsensical, self contradictory idea) such that it caused an event, why does this cause have to be an entity instead of simply a powerful event?

so as such i am not convinced by anything you have said (thank you for responding) in changing my belief; which i have laid as concrete till i die when i will know the truth(hopefully)

Odd. Concrete? Are you claiming that no matter what anyone says, you're going to believe what you believe anyway? If so, then it doesn't matter if you're correct or wrong, or if there's evidence supporting your belief or not, and this entire conversation is pointless. If you come at me with reasoning I cannot counter, I'm forced to accept it. I change my mind when it's apparent I was wrong, hence taking part in discussions.

Incidentally, you won't "know" the truth, or anything, if there's no such thing as an immortal soul. Incidentally, I'm not convinced any such thing exists.

---what i am really requesting here is:-

1. specific points in my thinking which are wrong

1. You're perceiving time prior to the very first moment of time (in your thoughts), which should obviously be a contradictory idea. The very first moment of time, regardless when it happened, requires that no events took place prior to it. Or else it wouldn't be the very first moment, but a later one.
2. You think that people do not accept your beliefs not because they actually disagree with you, but for some other reason, thus you consider them liars. I am not lying about my lack of belief in a god, which is far less than obvious to me.
3. You're assuming that the first cause of the universe must be an intelligent entity of some kind, as opposed to the possibility it could be a non-intelligent event. If you're closed to the possibility that the universe could be caused by anything besides a god, then obviously you'd need to believe in a god. What if you're wrong, though?

2. specific points in my thinking which might be wrong but i cant comprehend right now cos of my lacking in intellectual/scientific/philosophical skills; and suggest me a way to refine it to understand things better...

I was as inclusive as I could be in my replies to you. Read them, consider them. More importantly, though, look into it and consider it all on your own. Look into logic, look into the scientific method, and actually think about it. More important than that, be honest with yourself. If you come across something which contradicts what you think, don't just ignore it. Seriously consider the possibility that you're wrong, because you can never correct yourself without first admitting you were wrong. There's nothing bad about being wrong. It's liberating to admit you were wrong, because it allows you to move past it, and discover truth.

also i want to know whether the IFTPs are the smartest of the lot; cos ive got an iq 140 summthn and i feel most of the posts are highly intellectually enriching than what ive read before and most of you seem more intelligent than me

I don't know of any correlation between type and IQ, but there may be one. Either way, I don't consider it especially important, personally. Having a high IQ is a gift, but, ultimately, it's only that. You need to use it properly in order for it to mean anything. A high IQ doesn't make you innately better than anyone, merely more innately intellectually capable, in the same way someone might be a naturally good runner. If they don't practice, they'll never race.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I too declare myself a deist, but I do not think of a conscious god who abandoned his creation, but rather a god who is physical law, and thus is a pervasive order, and that everything in the universe acts by itself within the confines of this order. Thus from the perspective of humanity, evidence of gods interference can not be seen, but the existence of god can certainly be postulated by virtue of philosophical reasoning, indeed by necessity.

Ah, pantheism. I have another word for your god. I call it "The Universe".

 

[SpaceYeti]

Don't make a nuisance of yourself, it's one of our forum rules.

-Duxwing

We have rules?!

 

[TheScornedReflex]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism......

REFUTE my ideology cos i personally think it is the truth to everything; although i am not sure whether it is correct; which is another question ie, qn 2:

1. So first deism- you could read it thru the above wiki link and get back to me.....
why do i think it is true; 2 reasons:-
a.)Atheism is absurd- Universe cannot possibly evolve out of nothing!!!!
there was definitely a time before the big bang; even if we can study more into our universe's past we might reach a point before the big bang; but my question is what before that?----so what is it an endless loop????........:
((elephant:...http://www.intpforum.com/images/smilies/icon_elefant.gif.....))
lolz
EVEN if it were an endless loop - u prove it that is because of the inherent nature of nothingness to constantly create and expand(absurd, but possible); i still ask you the question why should it be like that????.............who created the LAW of physics(read universe) to be like that..................
So yeah all super intelligent people who think of atheism leave it.....even stephen hawkins ....wtf..some of his reasonings for atheism were BS to me......
(-yeah i dont have any respect for them; and yeah my idea cud be flawed see im a finance guy not a science stream guy....thats y im posting this in first instance..DUHHH)
So yeah atheism is absurd..... dont take me religious cos of this...im agnst all religion......(this guy is crazy......)

b.)Absolutely do not believe any actions of God in our practical life....or any stories of God comin to earth lolz......

REASON: cos the universe is incredibly COMPLICATED!!!!!....God just wont pop out of nowhere and help you......!!!!!.........it will make the universe unstable......universe is a continuous flow of things.....NO SUPERFICIAL thing cna just come and change things, even an atom slightly out of place might destroy the world..........and please dont think that out of trillions of living creatures God will come to help you..............yeah its a good motivational tool otherwise......

(I personally believe religion was created and is being used for reasons other than reaching God; every one of the founders of those religions and higher ranking priests surely know this and have an exterior motive.........)


-----yeah this is different from agnoticism cos i am sure God exists; but he wont do anything cos it will throw the universe out of balance...........

-----Actually some times i just feel we are just a play/movie/experiment in Gods eyes lolz..cos he cannot change the world once it is initiated; he just creates an universe with different starting ingredients each time!!!!!!!!...and this universe was the successful experiment to be alive so loong.........



2.) Now my second question--pretty weird..... HAVE YOU EVER THAUGHT OF COMMITTING SUICIDE FOR SAKE OF DYING!!!!.....i mean your life is all pleasant...alls well......good future.....but thaught---the only way to check my philosophy is to die and see everything from that angle!!!!!-AS in EXPERIENCE the after life???????.......lolz

I used to think a lot about this when i was younger(lolz i was more brilliant philosophically then; ie before college and high school brain washed me)


But now i believe YOLO is the truth for living happily and i tend to wait for death and am less eager than before......:/......one of the benefits of YOLO is that i am happy WITH anythin that FUCKIN happens to me.....I suceed or fail or have an accident or even if one of my friends die.....yeah i am not happy at that point and take all steps to prevent all hardships like any rational person..........but once a hardship is irrevertable......i tend to become happy that i faced it............i am really crazy aint i????,.....gotta check a mental hospital........i really dont care about the situation i am put in.......
Since becoming a believer in YOLO i have made my life's goal to only be to seek new experiences!!!!!--i dont care whether they are good bad hard easy costly miserly-----i want every single experiece in the world to happen to me before i die-----(i obviously seek out happier experiences but i dont lament hardships although i talk to others so that i get sympathy i really dont feel anything...........).


exhausting post.................yeah and many lines in firstpoint cud be wrong cos i am not trained in science and scientific research/analysis......


So what do you think...?...:-
1. i need to go the nearest mental hospital and get a lethal injection cos i am a danger to all those around me( i forgot to mention.. that i am sure i am really the only being(living) in the world.... and all of you are just dreams of my mind...or just that you were my previous life(it does contradict YOLO a bit; but cos experiences dont carry over; it is still YOLO by my definition..and also i aint sure too!!)

2. i am truly enlightened and should quit preparing for my actuarial science (yeah it is called science but only has math so i am not contradicting that i am a finance guy) and chartered accountancy exams; and start a religion(although i totally oppose religions; but i might start one where i am the god and you are my slaves-that will be a nice experience indeed!!!!)


if u really think 2 is true!!!---you could join my cult--myemail id @ (lokeshthedeist@gmail.com
facebook- n lokesh chettiar from chennai, india......try facebook i might respond to gmail cos thats not my official id in gmail)
current members - 1 and counting!!!!
but remember as my follower you are just as material to me as the chair i am sitting on and i might sacrifice you any time................(yeah every religion and cult leader is on the same lines but i openly profess it lolzszz)






YEAH SO please post comments my rationality or utter lack of it!!!!

I want to shoot you in the face. Repeatedly. Learn to use proper grammar.

 

[Nezaros]

I'm not even going to try to read the OP. My brain hurts just glancing at it.

I used to consider myself an atheist due to my rejection of the Christian concept of a God, but deism makes sense to me. The universe can't have come out of nothing. Whether it was that some extra-universal thing that created our universe, or that our universe is one of an endless cycle of universes (the latter being more likely imo) there must have been something before the Big Bang. Though I've yet to decide if this makes me a deism or a pantheist. Either way, I suspect there may be something of an intelligent design to the universe. I regard nomological determinism as absolute fact, but synchronicity almost seems to be just as true as well. The only way I've thought of for the two concepts to work together is through intelligent design of events. Such could only arise from the existence of a god, but that still just as well may be a pantheistic deity.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I'm not even going to try to read the OP. My brain hurts just glancing at it.

I used to consider myself an atheist due to my rejection of the Christian concept of a God, but deism makes sense to me. The universe can't have come out of nothing. Whether it was that some extra-universal thing that created our universe, or that our universe is one of an endless cycle of universes (the latter being more likely imo) there must have been something before the Big Bang. Though I've yet to decide if this makes me a deism or a pantheist. Either way, I suspect there may be something of an intelligent design to the universe. I regard nomological determinism as absolute fact, but synchronicity almost seems to be just as true as well. The only way I've thought of for the two concepts to work together is through intelligent design of events. Such could only arise from the existence of a god, but that still just as well may be a pantheistic deity.

Could you explain to me how "before the Big Bang" makes sense?

 

[Duxwing]

We have rules?!

Yes, go the Announcements sub-forum and you'll find the main list of forum rules along with a supplement.

-Duxwing

 

[SpaceYeti]

Yes, go the Announcements sub-forum and you'll find the main list of forum rules along with a supplement.

-Duxwing

... That sounds like work.

 

[Duxwing]

... That sounds like work.

Do you want a link?

-Duxwing

 

[Cognisant]

The universe can't have come out of nothing.

If a deity created the universe, who created the deity?

 

[snafupants]

If a deity created the universe, who created the deity?

I have never heard a concise explanation of the first cause issue from a god-fearing christian.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Do you want a link?

-Duxwing

No, thank you, I'm joking. I know we have rules, and I've read them before.

 

[snafupants]

What a silly title. I'm pretty sure anyone could argue with you. They might not win though.

 

[Cognisant]

It's already over, one can't prove a negative, for example that unicorns don't exist, so nor can anyone prove deities don't exist, therefore the onus to provide proof is the burden of those that believe they do, and since there hasn't been any verifiable proof yet given in recorded history, well as I said it's already over.

 

[Nezaros]

Could you explain to me how "before the Big Bang" makes sense?

Assuming that time isn't an objective quality of the universe, spacetime goes on in all directions forever. If the Big Bang truly was the beginning of all existence it would have to have been started by some external force, i.e., a god. But elsewise all the matter and energy that comprised the pinpoint of stuff from whence exploded everything should have come from somewhere. A cyclical model of the universe would have that somewhere as a past universe which collapsed into itself somehow.

If a deity created the universe, who created the deity?

In that case the deity must have always existed. But if not then the universe must have always existed. There's no way around it. Something can't arise out of nothing, so the existence of something would suggest that it has just always been there.

 

[kora]

This is a fun troll, wish they'd stayed around a little longer.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I'm not so sure that was a troll. May have been, but he didn't show any obvious signs of it.

 

[kora]

Wut? Nah no way, even their username screams troll. I would be thrilled if it wasn't though

 

[GodOfOrder]

I laugh at this thread, because I am appalled to think he is of my ilk. I am, myself, a deist, but the deist philosophy is based on the use of reason, this troll had none. Still, it makes me chuckle.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I laugh at this thread, because I am appalled to think he is of my ilk. I am, myself, a deist, but the deist philosophy is based on the use of reason, this troll had none. Still, it makes me chuckle.

What reason is that? If you have different reasons, please provide the single best evidence or argument or reasoning or whatever that you have, up front. Preferably the reason which is the reason you believe.

 

[GodOfOrder]

What reason is that? If you have different reasons, please provide the single best evidence or argument or reasoning or whatever that you have, up front. Preferably the reason which is the reason you believe.

By reason, I mean the use of reason and rationality to objectively explore my universe. It is the only tenet of Deism, and while it is common to may philosophies, to be a deist, your use of reason must lead you naturally to the belief in some kind of god, and this is done without doctrine or revealed truth.

For my part, I observe a mathematically ordered universe, and can not conceive of a way in which perfect and unbreakable order does not imply some type of god. Though many say my philosophical god is unfulfilling and uninteresting, because he is also not interfering.

So by reason, I mean the use of critical thought for the purpose of finding truth, no matter what the truth is.

The best introduction I could give you to classic deism would be Thomas Paine's The Age of Reason, though I differ with Paine on multiple issues.

 

[Duxwing]

By reason, I mean the use of reason and rationality to objectively explore my universe. It is the only tenet of Deism, and while it is common to may philosophies, to be a deist, your use of reason must lead you naturally to the belief in some kind of god, and this is done without doctrine or revealed truth.

For my part, I observe a mathematically ordered universe, and can not conceive of a way in which perfect and unbreakable order does not imply some type of god. Though many say my philosophical god is unfulfilling and uninteresting, because he is also not interfering.

So by reason, I mean the use of critical thought for the purpose of finding truth, no matter what the truth is.

The best introduction I could give you to classic deism would be Thomas Paine's The Age of Reason, though I differ with Paine on multiple issues.

Why does the mathematical order of the universe imply a God? Such a statement smacks of wishful thinking: mathematics models reality, not the other way around.

-Duxwing

 

[GodOfOrder]

@Duxwing

Well, on this I would say that order implies intent, and I see order. It is like observing the difference between a randomly arranged pile of rocks and a brick wall. It is only my opinion, he asked how I cam to the conclusion.

But because that argument seems interesting, let us explore it for fun.

While it is true that mathematics do not exist physically (there aren't triangles floating in space), mathematical principle seems to govern all physical interaction. We conceived of math, because it makes itself fundamentally apparent in nature. Take the perfect interaction of particles in chemistry, perfect math. Or perhaps take an example from engineering, the many inventions mankind has produced based on mathematical principle generates products that work and adhere to these principles.

You can easily argue against one number system or another, but it is much more difficult to argue against the concept of predictable patterns in nature. This is the foundation of scientific study, it is formulaic. If you do one thing, its logical result will follow. This is logic, this is math. It is why we are, with what ever amount of limited perception we have, able to determine anything. The rational mind can only exist and process information if logic exists to make a determinable universe.

 

[Cognisant]

Well, on this I would say that order implies intent, and I see order.

Nice comeback.

Except mostly the universe defies order, it's entropic, every molecule of which you're comprised is slowly decaying, and sure physics may be consistent but if anything that's further proof for of the lack of intervention, physics has no reason to change unless changed by some outside influence.

Then again physics isn't really my thing so let's call in the resident expert.
@Architect

 

[Architect]

Physics has a lot to say about order and disorder.

Thermodynamics says that things tend toward disorder, it is a lower energy state and lower energy states are preferred over higher energy. Simple example; build a cairn. You know a pile of rocks. A high energy state that doesn't occur in nature very often, have you ever seen a pile of rocks on top of each other going from big (bottom) to small? Doesn't happen.

Come back in a thousand years; the Cairn is gone. Scattered around most likely - lower energy. This makes mathematical sense too - there are many more lower energy disordered states, then the single ordered state. Over time which is a more likely state?

There are some mysteries here too though; such as why does time apparently only go forward? That's an imposed ordering to events. Symmetry would allow for more disorder - time going both backwards and forwards. A groundhog day is more disordered than what we have now. This is something we don't have a good explanation for yet.

Finally the kind of order discussed above isn't really order, it's our pattern seeking brains seeing order and intent where it doesn't exist. Take a shovelful of sand at the beach and drop it on a white marble countertop*. What do you see? Order! Patterns! All sorts of interesting things. That's not intended pattern, but Monte Carlo luck. Do it a billion times and you'll get out a trillion interesting patterns.

The other example is the incredible order we see in the world. Trees, grass, bugs, animals, humans, credit cards. These are the product of evolution, which is a rule that our universe has that says that things that work better will survive, and things that don't work won't.

If you want to call any of that God, I'd call it a difference of nomenclature that brings nothing new to the discussion.

* ignore for the moment that as an evolved primate you mess up the experiment because you (the order creation machine) are dropping the sand. The same argument applies to walking on the beach and seeing all the interesting patterns created by the mechanical waves. This highlights that purely mechanical systems create order and beauty all the time, but that is simply one of the many Monte Carlo accidental states.

 

[GodOfOrder]

Nice comeback.

Except mostly the universe defies order, it's entropic, every molecule of which you're comprised is slowly decaying, and sure physics may be consistent but if anything that's further proof for of the lack of intervention, physics has no reason to change unless changed by some outside influence.

Then again physics isn't really my thing so let's call in the resident expert.
@Architect

Well, physics is constant, that is all that matters. A dice has six sides, so when I roll it, I know I wont get seven, hence order. How things move within in this order does not effect the argument, the important thing is there is a limited number of possibilities.

Also, on the point of intervention, a Deist, like myself, does not believe in a god that either would or could intervene. Simply put the perfection of god is such that IF he were to meddle with his creation, it would be an admission that his creation was imperfect, and thus he was imperfect. IF god was imperfect, he would not be god.

Hence my passive philosophical god.

 

[Etheri]

^^^^lolz i am a teen....if i dont use any smileys wont i cease to exist as one......
omg i dint expect so many replies in a few replies.....i m really humbled by your interest in helpin me out............(....really had to add one smiley there....)

also i want to know whether the IFTPs are the smartest of the lot; cos ive got an iq 140 summthn and i feel most of the posts are highly intellectually enriching than what ive read before and most of you seem more intelligent than me

Definitely trolling. Should really work on making the amount of dots you use more random, however.

Don't make a nuisance of yourself, it's one of our forum rules.

-Duxwing

Oh dux. I agree, but I think we'd all consider you do have your emotional moments too . I agree with your point, I just had to smile when you said you'd never been as emotional as he is. I'm pretty sure he's completely calm, or perhaps pissing himself over his 'omagod gud trollz all these srs guise.'

I'm not so sure that was a troll. May have been, but he didn't show any obvious signs of it.

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. Or perhaps trolling is. Or perhaps trolling is an art. If trolling is an art, is doing is as awful as this anti-art, which in itself could be considered art too?

Except mostly the universe defies order, it's entropic, every molecule of which you're comprised is slowly decaying, and sure physics may be consistent but if anything that's further proof for of the lack of intervention, physics has no reason to change unless changed by some outside influence.

Then again physics isn't really my thing so let's call in the resident expert.
@Architect

Actually, order and entropy are very, very closely related. In fact, the entire goal of statistical physics is to explain and theoretically approach entropy through order and simple combinatorics / chances along with a few basic principles.

In it's most simple form, statistical physics claims that any microstructure is equally likely. The most common macrostructure is the one which most microstructures correspond to, which is order on a higher (and thus more easily visible) level. The universe being entropic is an expression of it's order through chances and combinatorics.

What I'm trying to say is that stastisical physics was used before QM was. We can apply entropy to both a deterministic as a quantummechanic view of the universe. The universe being entropic does not deny the posibility of order, in fact it confirms the fact that we can, at the very least, use statistical means to find patterns. Truth be told, entropy is a means to calculation and understanding, and while it's a measurement of 'chaos', this does not in any way implicate true randomness.

Edit : I probably made no sense. Too much wine. My point is, cognisant, that entropy does not deny or confirm the order or disorder in the universe. As history has proven, it is usable regardless. Yay for statistics!

 

[Cognisant]

Also, on the point of intervention, a Deist, like myself, does not believe in a god that either would or could intervene. Simply put the perfection of god is such that IF he were to meddle with his creation, it would be an admission that his creation was imperfect, and thus he was imperfect. IF god was imperfect, he would not be god.

Hence my passive philosophical god.

Well your "god" is irrelevant.

Did you catch my dolls and corpses speech?
As I see it, the way you're presenting your god to me as inactive for lack of bias really suggests to me that your god is just like a doll or a corpse, in fact if you pick up a doll and declared it your god I wouldn't disagree with you, if you so declare it then that is your god, I will accept that as indisputable fact, it may merely be a contrived label but it's indisputable that you've applied that label to said doll, so it is your g-o-d, god.

I just don't see the point, it's still just a doll, all you've achieved is creating the potential for confusion by applying such a philosophically meaningful term to an inanimate object, that is still just an inanimate object.

*picks up the doll by its little hands and pretends to dance with it*

Y'know I get the impression you're using deism in an attempt to reconcile theism with nihilism *twirls* but you have to understand they have totally different, indeed contradictory foundational premises *waltzes around the room contemplatively* in fact I would go so far as to say each can only be properly understood by a different kind of person, so this deism of yours isn't so much a matter of existential philosophy as it is about your personal identity *having finished he bows to the doll and places it upon a chair* tell me do you believe in faith itself or would you rather figure out things for yourself?

 

[Duxwing]

Well your "god" is irrelevant.

Did you catch my dolls and corpses speech?
As I see it, the way you're presenting your god to me as inactive for lack of bias really suggests to me that your god is just like a doll or a corpse, in fact if you pick up a doll and declared it your god I wouldn't disagree with you, if you so declare it then that is your god, I will accept that as indisputable fact, it may merely be a contrived label but it's indisputable that you've applied that label to said doll, so it is your g-o-d, god.

I just don't see the point, it's still just a doll, all you've achieved is creating the potential for confusion by applying such a philosophically meaningful term to an inanimate object, that is still just an inanimate object.

*picks up the doll by its little hands and pretends to dance with it*

Y'know I get the impression you're using deism in an attempt to reconcile theism with nihilism *twirls* but you have to understand they have totally different, indeed contradictory foundational premises *waltzes around the room contemplatively* in fact I would go so far as to say each can only be properly understood by a different kind of person, so this deism of yours isn't so much a matter of existential philosophy as it is about your personal identity *having finished he bows to the doll and places it upon a chair* tell me do you believe in faith itself or would you rather figure out things for yourself?

*applauds* Bravissimo!.

-Duxwing

 

[Duxwing]

Oh dux. I agree, but I think we'd all consider you do have your emotional moments too . I agree with your point, I just had to smile when you said you'd never been as emotional as he is. I'm pretty sure he's completely calm, or perhaps pissing himself over his 'omagod gud trollz all these srs guise.'

Indeed, I am no Stoic mountaintop, impervious to the rain, wind, cold, and shifting sands of time; I but am a mere mortal, beset by feeling and folly, a mere "mote of dust on the morning sky," as Carl Sagan put so eloquently. Yet despite my best efforts to fly free and far, I am, as you've mentioned, driven by my emotions: fear, tenderness, doubt, and frustration. Nevertheless, my point stands: never am I so moved by the stirrings of my heart that posts as disorganized as Yolo's appear beside my name.

Apart from my short speech, Cognisant has made this debate into a ballroom; so, may I have this dance? *reaches hands out*

-Duxwing

 

[Cognisant]

*gives Duxwing the doll*

 

[Duxwing]

*gives Duxwing the doll*

*Cradles doll, gives it a twirl, and then gives it back* Thanks for the offer, my fine robotic friend, but I was asking to dance with Etheri.

-Duxwing

 

[Cognisant]

Oh, so that's how it is...

Spoiler

You just pissed off a GOD!

 

[joal0503]

Oh, so that's how it is...

Spoiler

You just pissed off a GOD!

BURN IT.

 

[GodOfOrder]

@Cognisant

Sorry, I went to bed last night. Now it is time to respond.

My definition of God is something that is eternal, perfect, ordered, and unified. What meets this definition you ask, the laws of nature. So I see no problem with this being referred to as god.

And, no I do not believe in faith, I prefer to to figure things out for myself. And, I am no Nihilist and I am no Theist either.

We live in not a chaotic universe, but a predictable one. Your mother and father had sex, it produced a human, not a rhinoceros .

Call my god a doll, it does not effect me. I would agree, yes my life, or existence of intelligent beings, or anything else is not determined by fate or providence, but by random combination. It is also worth mentioning, that as a DEIST, I do not worship my god. I only acknowledge its existence. For this reason, Deism it often referred to as the natural religion.

The problem with my definition of god is that the word god is confused by many to be this Christian abomination, and they attach its personifications to my completely different definition, when in fact it is irrelevant. My god is whatever it is that facilitates order, and allows it to exist. God is that first cause which wound the universe up and let it go. The Universe runs by itself, and does not need god anymore after this point, the universe is self sufficient.

PS- Cognisant, go check your Redefine God thread, my definition is over there.

 

[Architect]

As GodOfOrder says he is a Deist, not Theist, a belief he shares with Einstein and Spinoza.

I'm neither, but a Transhumanist. "We as God" if you like. I believe that we are the most interesting thing going, certainly in this corner of the universe, and that our potential is nearly limitless, whereas the universe has dumb and blind limitations.