Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   In defense of nihilism
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 46 of 306 (263972)
11-28-2005 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Faith
11-28-2005 10:58 PM


Re: Proof of God
Your tone is pretty clear. "By then it will be too late," etc. And in the past you've described how you're anxious for God's judgement on our society.
You can deny it if you like; I rather suspected you would. But it's pretty obvious from your posts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Faith, posted 11-28-2005 10:58 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Faith, posted 11-28-2005 11:30 PM crashfrog has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 47 of 306 (263974)
11-28-2005 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by crashfrog
11-28-2005 11:10 PM


Re: Proof of God
Your tone is pretty clear. "By then it will be too late," etc. And in the past you've described how you're anxious for God's judgement on our society.
You can deny it if you like; I rather suspected you would. But it's pretty obvious from your posts.
I don't have the slightest desire for anyone to suffer no matter how much I want to see God triumph in this world. If I did I wouldn't bother TELLING anyone how to avoid it. When one says it will be too late one is hoping to provoke ACTION to avoid that consequence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 11:10 PM crashfrog has not replied

Funkaloyd
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 306 (263977)
11-28-2005 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by joshua221
11-28-2005 7:37 PM


prophex writes:
Relativism is deadly.
Indeed. All the worst tyrants and dictators were relativists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by joshua221, posted 11-28-2005 7:37 PM joshua221 has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 49 of 306 (264003)
11-29-2005 4:32 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by robinrohan
11-28-2005 2:41 PM


Re: The accidental nature of life
robin writes:
People live in groups and there are conflicts in groups about our mates and huts and things. The way to solve these conflicts is to set up some rules. Thou shalt not smite thy neighbor on one cheek, even though you would like to
Thus we can say the christian believes there are objective values and the nihilist needs to believe there are objective values. One or other is the lie that is closest to the truth
Free will has nothing to do with tapeworms and hurricanes and bird flu and stomach cancer and meteors crashing into planets and the like. I know, I know--after the Fall nature got mean, etc
Sometimes the consequences of our exercising free will are quite profound. True, from your perspective it is acceptable to suppose that it is all accidental but if it weren't and it is the result of an exercise of certain persons free will then it would give a remarkable picture of mans place in the scheme of things. It would provide us some explaination as to why God sacrificed his son for us. Like, if we stood back for a minute and took a look at ourselves we would have to wonder at that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by robinrohan, posted 11-28-2005 2:41 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by robinrohan, posted 11-29-2005 12:58 PM iano has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 50 of 306 (264004)
11-29-2005 4:44 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by robinrohan
11-28-2005 6:07 PM


Re: Proof of God
robin writes:
He could show up
There's a problem there Robin. If God just showed up or did anything so as to make it certain to you that he existed (not weeping statues or other such things which can be explained away as hoaxes (which they may well be)) then you would have no choice but to believe in him. Despite your current misgivings and lack of belief - you would have to believe. Would you not?
But a central aspect of the whole gig, the reason I would suppose, as to why it had to be done the way it was done, was in order to provide us with choice. God could have chosen to create automatons who would obey every command. He could have even programmed them to hate the taste of apples. He chose otherwise and in making us in his image and likeness, he gave us choice too.
There is an obvious reasons why he should do so (hint: love). So him turning up uninvited is a non-runner.
Is there anything else that would float your boat besides that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by robinrohan, posted 11-28-2005 6:07 PM robinrohan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 5:21 AM iano has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 51 of 306 (264006)
11-29-2005 5:12 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by robinrohan
11-28-2005 8:53 PM


Re: Proof of God
Its not a game. It is the most deadly serious thing you could imagine. There is an apparent dilema. As I explained above God cannot force you to believe in him, by appearing at your doorstep uninvited. You cannot believe in him without a higher quality of evidence than that which may in fact lie all around you.
An apparent Catch-22. But God is rather good at resolving Catch-22's And the ball is in his court. All you have to do is want him. It's essentially down to that. He can provide you with proof a-plenty. Proof that would surprise you - coming as it would in from an unexpected quarter. But if you don't want him to he won't of course. He does respect you and will honour that which you want. Either way.
(p.s. both wanting and not wanting are played out in the heart so it's not like a person can work it up through conscious effort)
I think the nihilist is being the most honest of all the no-God camp. He is facing what reality is if there is no God. I wonder though: he has no particular reason to think there is no God. No hard evidence - only a philosophy. Now why would someone, who had to pick from one or other of these two (apparently) unprovable positions, choose for the one devoid of hope?
We could modify the previous discussion to suppose that the nihilist 'believes' for large portions of his life, that there are objective values and it is only in his more philosophical moments when he comes to his senses, that he remembers there are in fact none.
He could just as easily play both sides of the coin in relation to a belief in God. He could 'believe' there is a God and have all the benefits that would come with that (in that he is free to design a God that suits him - just as with he can with morals). Only in his better moments would he have to face the fact that he doesn't actually believe it and, like the nihilist, face the lonely moments that that may bring.
Yet he picks the "no hope" option.
Is this because for all it's downsides, it is the one that allows him, Adam-like, to be independant of God?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by robinrohan, posted 11-28-2005 8:53 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Mammuthus, posted 11-29-2005 5:33 AM iano has replied
 Message 81 by robinrohan, posted 11-29-2005 1:06 PM iano has replied

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


Message 52 of 306 (264010)
11-29-2005 5:21 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by iano
11-29-2005 4:44 AM


Re: Proof of God
Oh, the "God wants you to guess" idea.
I have a number of points to raise about this:
1) Having to guess does not make us any more free
2) As James 2:19 says beleiving that God exists does not entail choosing to follow God.
So since we cannot really choose to follow and obey God without knowing if He exists - indeed which of the many ideas of God is true - it follows that not knowing that God exists does not make us more free. If anything it makes us less free because it takes that choice away from us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 4:44 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:36 AM PaulK has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 53 of 306 (264011)
11-29-2005 5:22 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Omnivorous
11-28-2005 10:34 PM


Re: Proof of God
omnivorous writes:
Ah, but there is a similar pleasure...right here and now. Atheists can enjoy a Garden of Earthly Delights free of the shadows of sin, guilt, and damnation.
You would have to be free of the shadow of sin and guilt and damnation in order to appreciate what it feels like. The error here is in the presumption that the shadow is for man to impose on himself. Not believing in something, as in so many areas of life, influences not the existance of something.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Omnivorous, posted 11-28-2005 10:34 PM Omnivorous has not replied

Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 54 of 306 (264012)
11-29-2005 5:33 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by iano
11-29-2005 5:12 AM


Re: Proof of God
quote:
He could just as easily play both sides of the coin in relation to a belief in God. He could 'believe' there is a God and have all the benefits that would come with that (in that he is free to design a God that suits him - just as with he can with morals).
This is no different from believers. Each one chooses to believe in a version of god that suits them...they even have different churches with radically different beliefs (protestants, catholics, mormons etc.)..and each group chooses the "morals" they wish to follow so that you have Xians who say peace is moral, war is moral, slavery is moral, slavery is immoral. It is completely arbitrary...it is certainly a more arrogant stance than nihlism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:12 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:46 AM Mammuthus has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 55 of 306 (264013)
11-29-2005 5:36 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by PaulK
11-29-2005 5:21 AM


Re: Proof of God
PaulK writes:
Oh, the "God wants you to guess" idea.
Never heard of it m8. How does it go?
We cannot really choose to follow and obey God without knowing if He exists
I agree wholeheartedly. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times: "You cannot believe in something you have no concrete evidence for". That would be irrational. Irrational as nihilism probably
indeed which of the many ideas of God is true
The old "driving around the spiritual roundabout" problem and wondering which exit to take? There are clues of course

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 5:21 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 6:18 AM iano has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 56 of 306 (264016)
11-29-2005 5:46 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Mammuthus
11-29-2005 5:33 AM


Re: Proof of God
mammathus writes:
This is no different from believers. Each one chooses to believe in a version of god that suits them...they even have different churches with radically different beliefs (protestants, catholics, mormons etc.)..and each group chooses the "morals" they wish to follow so that you have Xians who say peace is moral, war is moral, slavery is moral, slavery is immoral. It is completely arbitrary...it is certainly a more arrogant stance than nihlism.
As I pointed out to Robin (Robinihilism anybody?), a nihilist cannot live as if there are no objective morals. He must 'believe' there are such things in everyday life. Robin agreed with this. And he would I think, agree that the nihilist is completely free to chose whatever value system he likes for himself - just like the belief systems you pose above seem to. I don't see how one differs from the other in that sense. My point was that the one offered at least hope of an afterlife. So if one was going to chose when there is no concrete evidence apparent to the person, why chose the hopeless option?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Mammuthus, posted 11-29-2005 5:33 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Mammuthus, posted 11-29-2005 5:56 AM iano has replied

Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 57 of 306 (264019)
11-29-2005 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by iano
11-29-2005 5:46 AM


Re: Proof of God
quote:
As I pointed out to Robin (Robinihilism anybody?), a nihilist cannot live as if there are no objective morals
Of course a nihlist can do this. 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.
quote:
Robin agreed with this. And he would I think, agree that the nihilist is completely free to chose whatever value system he likes for himself
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.
quote:
I don't see how one differs from the other in that sense.
One requires positive evidence, the other does not.
quote:
My point was that the one offered at least hope of an afterlife. So if one was going to chose when there is no concrete evidence apparent to the person, why chose the hopeless option?
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), why is lack of an afterlife a hopeless option? It is also incumbent on those who say there is an afterlife to convince me that there is one. There is no evidence for one and I choose not believe in fantasies, and I am far from feeling hopeless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:46 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 7:03 AM Mammuthus has not replied

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


Message 58 of 306 (264022)
11-29-2005 6:18 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by iano
11-29-2005 5:36 AM


Re: Proof of God
So we agree that God's failure to provide strong evidence of His existence has nothign to do with "free will".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 5:36 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 6:37 AM PaulK has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 59 of 306 (264024)
11-29-2005 6:37 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by PaulK
11-29-2005 6:18 AM


Re: Proof of God
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:
So we agree that God's failure to provide strong evidence of His existence has nothing to do with "free will".
Thus, we do not agree at all it would seem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 6:18 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 6:56 AM iano has replied

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


Message 60 of 306 (264029)
11-29-2005 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by iano
11-29-2005 6:37 AM


Re: Proof of God
quote:
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.
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 6:37 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by iano, posted 11-29-2005 7:14 AM PaulK has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024