Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   In defense of nihilism
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 61 of 306 (264032)
11-29-2005 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Mammuthus
11-29-2005 5:56 AM


Re: Proof of God
iano writes:
As I pointed out to Robin (Robinihilism anybody?), a nihilist cannot live as if there are no objective morals
mamma writes:
Of course a nihlist can do this.
What I meant was that a nihilist acts as if there are objective rights and wrongs - even though he says there is no such thing. And the nihilist relies on the fact that others act as if there were objective rights and wrongs. The nihilist who acted as if there weren't would end up in jail. A nihilist, for all his philosophy, is as trapped in and objective morality as the next person. In practice.
Objective morality FACT or objective morality FICTION. It makes no practical difference.
Every major religions does this..they merely proclaim they possess objective morals and then proceed to arbitrarily and non-objectively define them...and redefine them..and change them..yet call them "absolute" nonetheless.
So far, both are on a level par. The nihilist is free to do the same.
As does every religious system..they choose whatever value system serves them..and are completely free to...though it usually involves killing off those who disagree with them, but that is a different issue.
So far, both are on a level par. The nihilist is free to do the same.
iano writes:
I don't see how one differs from the other in that sense.
mamma writes:
One requires positive evidence, the other does not.
Why does one require positive evidence. A belief system is a belief system. You can chose either one without any positive evidence. So far they are on a level par
Besides failing to see the appeal of an afterlife for which there is no evidence (and the waste of time dreaming about it when one should probably enjoy the life they DO have),
There is nothing preventing you enjoying this life to the full and believing in an afterlife. There are plenty of religions without particularily onerous requirements...or you could make up your own.
The point was, given no evidence either way, why would one not choose to believe there was an afterlife which involved everything that was pleasant in this one and none of the bad. It would seem to make more sense to me.
This message has been edited by iano, 29-Nov-2005 12:04 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Mammuthus, posted 11-29-2005 5:56 AM Mammuthus has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 62 of 306 (264033)
11-29-2005 7:14 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by PaulK
11-29-2005 6:56 AM


Re: Proof of God
iano writes:
If God provided irrevocable (as opposed to the completely subjective 'strong') evidence as to his existance then there would be no such thing as free will. Everybody would have to believe in him.
Paulk writes:
Completely false, because that sort of proof has nothing to do with free will. There's no value in choosing to beleive that God exists or not. Or in choosing any belief about a factual matter.
On what grounds do you make that case? If (as it turns out to be) the choice to put faith in God - even though one cannot actually believe (for want of irrevocable proof) - is the criteria by which God provides irrevocable proof then there would be immense value in that choice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 6:56 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 7:28 AM iano has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 63 of 306 (264039)
11-29-2005 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by iano
11-29-2005 7:14 AM


Re: Proof of God
It seems perfectly obvious to me that choosing a belief in a simple factual matter has no value in itself. How could it ?
And a Christian should at least consider the possibility that James might be right and the important choice is to truly follow God - a decision which will be manifest in works - rather than simply assenting to the idea that God exists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 7:14 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 7:53 AM PaulK has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 64 of 306 (264044)
11-29-2005 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by PaulK
11-29-2005 7:28 AM


Re: Proof of God
paulk writes:
It seems perfectly obvious to me that choosing a belief in a simple factual matter has no value in itself. How could it ?
I'm not sure what you mean Paul. "Choosing a belief in a factual manner" Could you elaborate on what that means. Analogy maybe?
And a Christian should at least consider the possibility that James might be right and the important choice is to truly follow God - a decision which will be manifest in works - rather than simply assenting to the idea that God exists.
One has to include the context of any verse - for it is easy to pluck a line from the bible and form a doctrine. Especially to arrive at the works = faith/belief/salvation/damnation doctrine. But only by ignoring the bits that show it is not.
There are two types contrasted in the NT (and in the OT but less clearly) Righteous/Unrighteous, Saved/Unsaved In Adam/In Christ, Citizens of heaven/non-citizens of heaven, sons/enemies. In deciding how things like law and obedience work one has to understand the position and characteristics of the person who is being addressed. A particular item, say Law, has different connotations for one that the other.
I'm wondering how to put a nihilistic slant on this....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 7:28 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 8:06 AM iano has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 65 of 306 (264047)
11-29-2005 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by iano
11-29-2005 7:53 AM


Re: Proof of God
That's a typo. It should be "choosing a belief ON a simple factual matter"
As for the James reference I did consider the context of the verse, and it does make it clear that simple belief is not nearly enough. Managing to be as "good" as a demon is not especially impressive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 7:53 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 8:24 AM PaulK has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 66 of 306 (264049)
11-29-2005 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by PaulK
11-29-2005 8:06 AM


Re: Proof of God
I'm sorry Paul, am still a bit lost. Choosing a belief on a simple factual matter. What simple factual matter are you referring to?
As for the James reference I did consider the context of the verse, and it does make it clear that simple belief is not nearly enough. Managing to be as "good" as a demon is not especially impressive.
I've got no problem with no works = faith is dead. But as in so many things one has to decide is works a causal thing or a consequential thing. James "I will show you my faith by my works" seems to me to point to works being a consequence of faith. If true faith then works will follow.
A man cannot actually believe in God (nor Christ as his savior) without evidence. Once he has the evidence he will believe and have faith. We can see that God must be the one to instigate things. Belief and faith are thus from God - not man. And faith, given by God, results in works.
A person may believe in God, as the demons did. Better that than nought says James - but little use. Did not the Jews believe in God? But they didn't believe they had need of personal salvation in Christ.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 8:06 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 8:57 AM iano has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 67 of 306 (264054)
11-29-2005 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by iano
11-29-2005 8:24 AM


Re: Proof of God
The simple factual matter is wheter God exists or not.
And you see, to be quie confused on my point on James'. My point is that works stem from the desire to follow God not just to beleive that He exists. Beleiving that God exists and stoppng there is "Faith" of a sort, but it is the dead Faith that James speaks of.
Works could, perhaps, be motivated by the belief that God exists - but only out of self interest in the hope of getting to Heaven. But isn't that salvation by works - isn't James point that true Faith will produce works of itself, without thought of reward ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 8:24 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 9:40 AM PaulK has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 68 of 306 (264067)
11-29-2005 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by PaulK
11-29-2005 8:57 AM


Re: Proof of God
paulk writes:
It seems perfectly obvious to me that choosing a belief on a simple factual matter (whether God exists or not) has no value in itself. How could it ?
This about it? I am not being deliberately obtuse here, honest, but I am still confused as to what you mean precisely. I'll make a guess though. Could I take it that you mean "choosing to believe that God in fact exists (or does not in fact exist)...has no value in itself"?
If so I would agree. A persons belief in itself does not make something fact or not fact. A fact is independant of anyone believing it. But I wouldn't say it has no value. The belief may result in that which is very valuable both to them and others. I won't elaborate as I'm not sure I'm on the right track here.
My point is that works stem from the desire to follow God not just to beleive that He exists. Beleiving that God exists and stoppng there is "Faith" of a sort, but it is the dead Faith that James speaks of.
A person can believe the earth is 250,000 km from the moon. They haven't satisfied themselves personally that that is the case. But they believe it on various good grounds - always faith-based and faith in the sense that the faith is blind in some way. It hasn't actually seen.
A person can also believe something because they know it themselves - they have the actual proof available to them. I believe this screen is sitting on front of me for instance. That is the same as my belief in God. That God is a fact, not dependant on my belief for his factuality. But I happen to know that fact. This is a different kind of faith. It is not blind faith. It is like the faith I have in my brakes to stop me. They have been proven - that's how I have that kind of faith.
Now it must appear obvious that that kind of faith can only come into my possession because of an act on Gods part - I couldn't work up that kind of faith no matter how hard I tried. No human argument - no matter how compelling - could establish that kind of faith for me.
Now if one were to imagine for a moment what it would be like to have that kind of faith. To actually know for sure that the person who made the whole show exists. And not only exists but has chosen to reveal that fact to me. To reveal something of his nature to me. It would, I suggest, be the most life changing event one could undergo. There is nothing: not having kids, not winning the lotto, nothing...which would trump that. Nothing would come even close.
That kind of faith is something that God has produced by his very action in revealing himself. The belief in him is total: throw me to the lions total. That one would therefore look on what God says with new eyes and interest is not a difficult thing to imagine. That one would have a different view of oneself in relation to the world around than one had previously is not a difficult thing to imagine (if one is still meditating on what the significance of what God revealing himself to them would actually mean mean - take your time).
And this change, this faith or belief, is going to manifest itself in some way. That is not too difficult to imagine either.
That is, I would argue, what James is talking about here. Believing that God exists due to the efforts of your religion - no matter how effective, is not the same as belief yuo possess because you 100% know. And if there is no manifestation of it (in this case works) then whatever you may say about it, it is not the kind of belief that causes change. It is not the kind of belief that arises when one comes face to face with God (so to speak). And the other kind of faith - the intellectual assent, the religious belief cannot produce works because the motor to drive such a thing doesn't exist. It may well produce works that on the surface appear to be works: money to the poor etc. But the motivation is completely different. One could compare those works to a beautifully decorated Christmas tree - no matter how sparkly and twinkly it appears - it is in fact dead - stuck in a pot in your living room. That kind of faith is useless in the end. It has no living heart in it. It is not being done to glorify God - simply for the fact that one cannot glorify and thank and praise - somebody one doesn't know. Such a faith is indeed dead.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 8:57 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 10:50 AM iano has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 69 of 306 (264071)
11-29-2005 9:46 AM


In defense of nihilism
That kind of faith is something that God has produced by his very action in revealing himself
I really am incorrigible....
I will offer no resistance, should the Thought Police come a-screaming in....
This message has been edited by iano, 29-Nov-2005 02:46 PM

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 70 of 306 (264091)
11-29-2005 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by iano
11-29-2005 9:40 AM


Re: Proof of God
So here's a simple question. If you have proof that God exists - proof so convincing that you cannot deny it - and that does not interfere with your free will - how could making such proof available to everyone interfere with their free will ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 9:40 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 11:22 AM PaulK has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 71 of 306 (264093)
11-29-2005 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by PaulK
11-29-2005 10:50 AM


Re: Proof of God
paulk writes:
So here's a simple question. If you have proof that God exists - proof so convincing that you cannot deny it - and that does not interfere with your free will - how could making such proof available to everyone interfere with their free will ?
The presenting of the proof to me was at my request. I asked God, out of my own free will, if he would do so. And he did. He wasn't tramping on my free will
But if he were to just 'appear', unbidden, then he would be trampling on our free-will.
Note, there is no problem with the fact I didn't have any proof of his existance when I asked. I couldn't like I say, have believed in someone I'd no apparent evidence for.
"God...if you are there" does not constitute belief but it does constitute an act of will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 10:50 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 11-29-2005 12:12 PM iano has replied
 Message 73 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 12:28 PM iano has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 72 of 306 (264109)
11-29-2005 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by iano
11-29-2005 11:22 AM


Re: Proof of God
I asked God, out of my own free will, if he would do so. And he did.
I repeated your experiment but was unable to duplicate your results. Can you explain?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 11:22 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by robinrohan, posted 11-29-2005 12:37 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 80 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 1:04 PM crashfrog has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 73 of 306 (264113)
11-29-2005 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by iano
11-29-2005 11:22 AM


Re: Proof of God
THere are several questions here
How does just knowing something trample on your free will ? And how would asking to know it make a difference ?
I wouldn't think that God would need an explicit request - after all how could we possibly direct it correctly without knowledge of God ?
So I would think that valuing and wanting to know the truth would be enough. Why then, do I not have proof ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 11:22 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 2:03 PM PaulK has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 306 (264120)
11-29-2005 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Parasomnium
11-27-2005 5:43 PM


Re: Primum viveri deinde philosophari
Nice touch, Robin, this Nihilistic Bible. You have the gift of the written word.
Thanks, Parasomnium. It was just an experiment in style. I like playing around with different writing styles, for some reason.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Parasomnium, posted 11-27-2005 5:43 PM Parasomnium has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 306 (264121)
11-29-2005 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by crashfrog
11-29-2005 12:12 PM


Re: Proof of God
I repeated your experiment but was unable to duplicate your results. Can you explain?
Obviously you have a bad attitude. You were not sufficiently sincere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 11-29-2005 12:12 PM crashfrog has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024