Does God exist? (17 Viewers)

[JINOUGA]

But wouldn't asking why acknowledge some sort of supernatural dimension?

How so?

 

[Absolutezero]

But wouldn't asking why acknowledge some sort of supernatural dimension?

I don't think so. Why could entail either a physic descriptions 'why we are here: because these particles came from X' or personal (so I can help my community).

Obviously, it's a slightly different why to a metaphysical answer, but it's still a why question.

 

[iBibah]

I don't think so. Why could entail either a physic descriptions 'why we are here: because these particles came from X' or personal (so I can help my community).

Obviously, it's a slightly different why to a metaphysical answer, but it's still a why question.

That is not why, that is how, where and what.

To ask why would be "Why did these particles come from X?"

 

[Absolutezero]

But that's a different why. If you get recessing backwards, then you obviously get to a metaphysical or non type why.

But then the question can also be used in the God statement. Why did God create mankind. You can keep recessing back, and much like the naturalist answer, you don't get to an end point


Essentially what I'm saying is that why questions aren't limited to religious people. They're more likely, and religion gives a basic answer, but I wouldn't say they're inextricably linked.

 

[iBibah]

But that's a different why. If you get recessing backwards, then you obviously get to a metaphysical or non type why.

But then the question can also be used in the God statement. Why did God create mankind. You can keep recessing back, and much like the naturalist answer, you don't get to an end point


Essentially what I'm saying is that why questions aren't limited to religious people. They're more likely, and religion gives a basic answer, but I wouldn't say they're inextricably linked.

But that is the same as asking "Why do we exist?". If that question was asked to a believer, the answer would be what they spend their whole life trying to find.

But 'why' can never be answered by science, hence it is inextricably linked to believers (religion is irrelevant atm) because one cannot reject the notion of a supernatural dimension but accept the question of why.

 

[Absolutezero]

But that is the same as asking "Why do we exist?". If that question was asked to a believer, the answer would be what they spend their whole life trying to find.

But 'why' can never be answered by science, hence it is inextricably linked to believers (religion is irrelevant atm) because one cannot reject the notion of a supernatural dimension but accept the question of why.

Like I said, it depends on the type of why question. Because a personal response to answering 'Why am I here?' is completely valid and completely non-supernatural.

This being said, someone could reject the idea of a God and still believe in the supernatural. They're not mutually exclusive. Uncommon yes, but not impossible by any means.

 

[iBibah]

Like I said, it depends on the type of why question. Because a personal response to answering 'Why am I here?' is completely valid and completely non-supernatural.

This being said, someone could reject the idea of a God and still believe in the supernatural. They're not mutually exclusive. Uncommon yes, but not impossible by any means.

On your first line, I think we have a clear disagreement there, so I will argue my point no further. However, just think about what you consider to be a 'why' question, because it is often confused with how.

And your second line, I was under the impression that 'God' in the title didn't refer to a particular religion but rather the existence of any super natural being or entity.

 

[Absolutezero]

On your first line, I think we have a clear disagreement there, so I will argue my point no further. However, just think about what you consider to be a 'why' question, because it is often confused with how.

And your second line, I was under the impression that 'God' in the title didn't refer to a particular religion but rather the existence of any super natural being or entity.

I understand what you're getting at. And to be fair, I am liberally applying the term why (and my physics example was poorly phrased). But your main thesis I generally do agree with. I think it's only the details we're getting caught up on.

 

[iBibah]

I understand what you're getting at. And to be fair, I am liberally applying the term why (and my physics example was poorly phrased). But your main thesis I generally do agree with. I think it's only the details we're getting caught up on.

Yes it is the details, it comes down to the definition of every last word used.

I guess that's why it' such a hard topic to discuss. And why 1096 pages later, I highly doubt anyone has changed their views significantly.

 

[Lolsmith]

Belief in God is the most important thing in faith. If someone does not believe that God exists then he is in deep astray.We are told that it is the female bee that makes honey, a very recent bit of knowledge for humans. We know now that male bees die after mating with the queen and live only for about 90 days. Only female bees survive to be the workers, which gather nectar and make honey. This bit of knowledge could never be known to humans before the invention and use of microscopes. It is another piece of evidence that the author of the Holy Quran could never be a human being about 1428 years ago. Rather, He is the All Knowledgeable One.

this is what people actually believe

real human beings that get up in the morning and have thoughts in their brains actually full on, not a hint of lie or irony, *believe* this kind of junk

 

[Frostbitten]

Is it really necessary for there to even be a why? Could it just be a selfish idea to give worth to yourself because the thought of existing for no predetermined reason is too boring for people? Hmmm, I'm sure all of you believe in the theory of evolution (I mean if you don't trust science in one of its most solidly proven theories come on...) and since we are merely extensions from previously more simplistic creatures then asking why for ourselves also entices asking what is the meaning of these "lesser" creatures, this thought i'm sure seems stupid to many of you but if we are to have an amazing and fanticy like meaning then rats and worms shouls also share this grand rainbow smothered meaning. I don't know just a thought...

 

[AAEldar]

I don't think so. Why could entail either a physic descriptions 'why we are here: because these particles came from X' or personal (so I can help my community).

Obviously, it's a slightly different why to a metaphysical answer, but it's still a why question.

I think that is the answer to the 'Why' question. It's possible for multiple questions to have the same answer (in this case how and why). This reason just doesn't satisfy peoples thoughts that there must be a grand reason that we are here.

 

[Absolutezero]

Grand Reasoning is different to Why, in my mind.

If you (not you in particular, a generalised you) are after a grand reason, then I (probably) don't think you'll find it through science or philosophy. But I also think your question is misguided.

 

[Absolutezero]

To add to that though, if we were placed seeded here by aliens, that would be a natural scientific reason as to why/how we are here.

Does this satisfy the why question? And if not, why if aliens is replaced by god, does it?

 

[moll.]

Why don't you all just read through the 328 other pages in this thread rather than arguing? I can guarantee that everyone's point has already been made at least once before.

 

[Absolutezero]

In terms of non-existence/existence, that's probably correct. There are new offshoots however.

 

[iBibah]

I think that is the answer to the 'Why' question. It's possible for multiple questions to have the same answer (in this case how and why). This reason just doesn't satisfy peoples thoughts that there must be a grand reason that we are here.

Why and how are never the same, and often mixed up. Why can never be how, and vice versa.

Say there is a car accident and a close relative was killed. How: Car accident/driver drunk/ran a red light. Why: No one knows/no reason, just happened. Some people turn to a God(s)/supernatural being in search of answers for these types of why questions.

To add to that though, if we were placed seeded here by aliens, that would be a natural scientific reason as to why/how we are here.

Does this satisfy the why question? And if not, why if aliens is replaced by god, does it?

"Why" is used when one wishes to uncover the motives behind an action/decision/etc.

"How" is used to discover the process or steps used to perform an action.

To ask why would be why did the aliens place us here. So no it does not satisfy the why question.

Replace aliens with a god or supernatural being then the reason why he/she/it placed here depends on the beliefs of a particular person, or what they discover.
There is a difference also because aliens aren't supernatural in any sense.

 

[AAEldar]

Why and how are never the same, and often mixed up. Why can never be how, and vice versa.

Say there is a car accident and a close relative was killed. How: Car accident/driver drunk/ran a red light. Why: No one knows/no reason, just happened. Some people turn to a God(s)/supernatural being in search of answers for these types of why questions.



"Why" is used when one wishes to uncover the motives behind an action/decision/etc.

"How" is used to discover the process or steps used to perform an action.

To ask why would be why did the aliens place us here. So no it does not satisfy the why question.

Replace aliens with a god or supernatural being then the reason why he/she/it placed here depends on the beliefs of a particular person, or what they discover.
There is a difference also because aliens aren't supernatural in any sense.

And you just disregarded what I said. I said it's possible for them to be the same, and that in this case I think they satisfy both questions.

Whose to say there has to be a motive or a purpose for an event? Shit happens without a reason that you would be happy with all the time.

 

[iBibah]

And you just disregarded what I said. I said it's possible for them to be the same, and that in this case I think they satisfy both questions.

Whose to say there has to be a motive or a purpose for an event? Shit happens without a reason that you would be happy with all the time.

I didn't disregard it, I disagreed:

Why and how are never the same, and often mixed up.

Though if you think they satisfy both question that's fine.

I'm not saying there has to be a purpose for an event or life, and that everyone should believe so. I'm saying that whether you do think there is a purpose to life or not, is directly linked with your belief in the supernatural/god. You don't, and that's fine.
Did you even read the previous pages?

Some people believe 'why' question such as 'purpose of life' to be valid, and hence they search for answers and meaning through the supernatural dimension.

Some people think it's stupid to ask 'why', and just live their lives normal. They a nor better or worse than people who do believe.

I'm not trying proving the existence or non-existence of a god or super natural being, because it's not possible, hence why I haven't even stated my opinion on whether I think there is a god. I am simply saying that one cannot be convinced of God if he/she does not think ultimate 'why' questions are valid. And vice versa, if someone believes in the validity of the ultimate 'why' questions, they can't not completely reject the idea of a super natural being.

 

[Garygaz]

i don't understand

if you ask the question 'why', you then gain the power of delving into the supernatural dimension to find your answers?