Tomasz

Here's our hard hitting Christian atheist

Yes, off with the celestial dictatorship

__________________
It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts - Sherlock Holmes

romansh

[quote=Og;18502]
Hi Og .... can you give us the gist of the proof ....just curious

all the best

Og

Yah, I frequently do.

The nature of the universe is that there are no ultimate boundaries or individual entities. What is the case with the universe is that it is one gigantic process where all things that you might call an individual are, in fact, expressions of everything else.

This is called interbeing or "Dependant Origination".. It's the nature of the mathematics used to create all of modern technology and to represent our understanding of physics. A neat image to visualize this is an infinite array of jewels in all directions in a big net. Each jewel is polished such that it reflects every other jewel. If one jewel moves, its movement is reflected in every other jewel. If you look in any one jewel you see a reflection of the entire universe.

The ego disconnects us from this reality. It gives us the false impression that we are separate from everything around us. We then walk around with the impression that we have things like free will. In fact, the reality is that we are complex machines that adapt to environmental stimuli in a complex fashion.

The notion of a boundary between you and me is only useful to the ego based world (which is fine to live in and I am not advocating we give it up). But ultimately, just because my skin doesn't enfold your neurons does not mean that we are a different process. Just as the impulse to flex your arm muscle travels down a neuron and stimulates the muscle cells to contract, my text is hitting your eyes and entering your brain right now. It's causing cascades of neurons in your brain that interact with other neural networks that have been laid down over time due to other external stimuli and your genetic makeup. Based on the content of this message and the historical makeup of your brain, you will respond in a certain way to this text.

All that being said, the Judeo/Christian/Muslim God... The god of the west... Is defined as an individual entity that we are necessarily separate from. Furthermore, this entity inserts us into the world, and then takes us out and judges us based on our behavior during our lives.

Given my above commentary, this God notion is clearly a product of the ego which is an illusion. If there is an ultimate God entity, then it must be identical with us and the whole universe and us identical with it. Boundaries are just how our control systems (brain) relate to the world to create our behavior. They do not have some sort of cosmic meaning where an ultimate creator of all the universe is concerned.

Pick up a neuroscience textbook or a physics/engineering course and get the feeling for the math used to describe the universe. You'll see arbitrary reference points and imaginary boundaries used as intermediates to understand elements of the cosmos. Engineers make a profession out of defining boundaries and manipulating the contents of the boundary to respond in a fixed and known way to information crossing that boundary (I/O systems engineering).

The judeo/christian god is a product of our ignorance.

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
The self is not a fixed entity but a dynamic process of relationships
You & I, no distinction. - Tat Tvam Asi
Become Who You Are

Og

http://www.agnosticforums.com/god-ta...nterbeing.html

Here's a thread I started with more details on "Interbeing" or "Dependant Origination" that I just mentioned.

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
The self is not a fixed entity but a dynamic process of relationships
You & I, no distinction. - Tat Tvam Asi
Become Who You Are

danarch

religion served its purpose in the past. we need to let it go and move on.

__________________
"We can be as honest as we are ignorant. If we are, when asked what is beyond the horizon of the known, we must say that we do not know."

Robert G. Ingersoll
http://www.wickedcpu.com

Og

Literal interpretations of stories that are in conflict with modern understanding of the cosmos need to be dropped. The metaphors that myths are speak to a transcendent mystery that is timeless. The story of jesus and the buddha and the garden of eden are powerful and meaningful metaphors for modern life.

Literalist religion needs to get its fingers away from politics and science. What we need is a real religion that incorporates in the realities of our current understanding of the cosmos and offers a framework to support the human psyche.

There's a difference

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
The self is not a fixed entity but a dynamic process of relationships
You & I, no distinction. - Tat Tvam Asi
Become Who You Are

Tomasz

Sam Harris commenting on his book The End Of Faith speaks about eastern contemplative traditions (especially Bhuddism)the whole speach of Sam Harris
By the way Sam Harris is considered one of the four most important musketeers of atheism. Seems to me like atheists are so much closer to Bhuddism than some 99% Christians - fans of God in the sky

__________________
It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts - Sherlock Holmes

Og

Sam Harris got stimulated into his work after hitting some ecstasy (true)

Not that that has anything to do with the validity of his claims. I do, however, dislike his use of the term "beyond" in his talk about categories of thought. He talks about beyond "joy/sorrow" etc... Beyond implies a category as well.

I prefer to just stick with the term "transcendence."

Also, both hinduism and buddhism are atheistic in nature. The ultimate realization of the eastern path is that the images of gods that you have held as outside of you are, in fact, expressions of powers within you and that there is no distinction.

There is a whole realm of hindu art where the deities are cutting off their heads and such in order to free you from the impediment to enlightenment that their reality represents. It's the notion of dependant origination and transcending maya (the illusion that is the categories of the world).

Hinduism and buddhism have gods and other images, but are finally atheistic in their goals.

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
The self is not a fixed entity but a dynamic process of relationships
You & I, no distinction. - Tat Tvam Asi
Become Who You Are

Tomasz

Well, most of what I would personally call "bhuddist talk", quoted either by you or Sam Harris are impossibly abstract for me. I don't see it as any failure on my part. I just don't feel this way, I just can't get it, so I simply can't refer to it. You may say my mind is not awakened (whatever that means )
I considered once being a nonbeliever becoming a protestant because I thought they were true believers in God, they strongly empasized importance of subjective interpretation of the Bible, they really knew it, unlike catholics for whom what the pope(/the priests) says is good enough.
What "atehist musketeers" (S. Harris/R. Dawkins/C. Hitchens/D. Dannet) did for me is to drag me away from the idea that believing in God will have a beneficial effect on me. I realized that it's only psychological propensity to unlink from reality, to give in to false comfort of delusion. (It was in fact Sam Harris who really broke through psychological barrier in my brain. )

I mean one doesn't have to conceive Bhuddism to arrive at certain conclusions.

__________________
It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts - Sherlock Holmes

romansh

Hi Og
I'm not sure I understand or buy your proof. I'm sceptical...for which I do not apologize, I'm also not well (not at all) read on this aspect of "religion", for which I apologize .... "arguing" with you in a state of ignorance.

The nature of the universe is that there are no ultimate boundaries or individual entities. What is the case with the universe is that it is one gigantic process where all things that you might call an individual are, in fact, expressions of everything else.

OK I can buy this ..after all we are stardust and some butterfly in Sumatra can be blamed for hurricane Katrina. There is an interconnectedness (Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency)?

The ego disconnects us from this reality. It gives us the false impression that we are separate from everything around us. We then walk around with the impression that we have things like free will. In fact, the reality is that we are complex machines that adapt to environmental stimuli in a complex fashion.

I'm not sure I understand this? OK on a day to day basis I don't worry too much about my actions.... much in the same the Sumatran butterfly did not...is this what you mean by disconnected from reality? Or do you mean the 'power of now' kind of reality?

I can buy we are extremely complex machines. Certain aspects of me have no control, without argument. But I'm having a problem letting go of the concept that I have no free will. I can understand that I loose my free will after my fourth beer and have the fifth regardless of the consequences, but I can stop at two! OK, so I don't apparently have a genetic predisposition. I have been very angry with my son, he was about to get a smack from me but I realized I did not have to be angry and the situation turned around immediately. During that moment of realization it felt like a deeply 'now' moment. It certainly felt like I had free will, it certainly was buried while I was in an emotional state. The philosophers and neuroscientists seem split on the free will aspect.

..... Just as the impulse to flex your arm muscle travels down a neuron and stimulates the muscle cells to contract, my text is hitting your eyes and entering your brain right now. It's causing cascades of neurons in your brain that interact with other neural networks that have been laid down over time due to other external stimuli and your genetic makeup. Based on the content of this message and the historical makeup of your brain, you will respond in a certain way to this text.

OK this describes the machine like aspect of our lives. Your argument asserts (I think) that the programming of our "apparent free will" started from before conception (actually from the moment time began). But do we have free will?

All that being said, the Judeo/Christian/Muslim God... The god of the west... Is defined as an individual entity that we are necessarily separate from. Furthermore, this entity inserts us into the world, and then takes us out and judges us based on our behavior during our lives.

I think many theists might argue this interpretation. Thinking back to my early indoctrination.... God is in us all type arguments.

Given my above commentary, this God notion is clearly a product of the ego which is an illusion. If there is an ultimate God entity, then it must be identical with us and the whole universe and us identical with it. Boundaries are just how our control systems (brain) relate to the world to create our behavior. They do not have some sort of cosmic meaning where an ultimate creator of all the universe is concerned.

I still think many theists would argue this point

.... get the feeling for the math used to describe the universe. You'll see arbitrary reference points and imaginary boundaries used as intermediates to understand elements of the cosmos. Engineers make a profession out of defining boundaries and manipulating the contents of the boundary to respond in a fixed and known way to information crossing that boundary (I/O systems engineering).

I'm a chemist by training who walks in the footsteps of chemical engineers. Chem engineers use boundary conditions to help simplify a model, because the contents of the model are often complex and adding the complexity of the universe would get them (and me) to the sixth beer. Different types of engineers may use boundaries in other senses?

The judeo/christian god is a product of our ignorance.

I agree with the sentiment though I would say "faulty logic" rather than "ignorance" for we and they are capable of both. I agree with much and don't understand much too, but for me it does not constitute a proof.

A picture I use is that the various religions, theistic and deistic, and atheism are just models to explain the meaning of life universe and everything. Wise people have noted all models are wrong, just that some are useful.

I also apologize for being a fan of Douglas Adams.

All the best