Quote:
|
Quite possible. However, is it beyond beleif that there is in fact reality to non-rational things? I don't mean to suggest the paranormal, or things that we simply lack the technology to understand. But what i do suggest is that a deep search for meaning takes place in all cultures, and many of those cite an experience with spiritual energy that is not tangible, but very real.
|
Trust me, non-rational things are very real. Ever tried to read a book on Quantum mechanics, or relativity? nothing "rational" there. The difference is that these things are REAL. We may not be absolutely able to explain them, but all of our explanations are based in what we can objectively experience, in one way or another.
So called experiences of spiritual energy, simply exist in the mind. They have even located the exact area of the brain that is responsible for "immaculate experiences". They can induce a religious experience in about 75% of people simply by stimulating this region of the brain with electromagnetic waves.
Quote:
|
[b]The point is that we are not soley rational beings. And that using only that part of ourselves to understand the world shuts us off. I would not believe in the literal precense of your llama, nor do i conceptualize God as big guy in the clouds. I would believe you that the llama means something to you...and that the physical reality of the llama has nothing to do with its reality in your mind. In thinking that the llama is there, you've created one in your mind. At very least, God is in the minds of believers...[b]
|
I'll let you in on a secret. I don't really believe in the llama. He doesn't exist. He is not what we call REAL. More importantly even if I DID believe in it for some reason, it would in no way make it real. It may conceptually exist in my head, in other words it is a figment of my imagination. I can imagine all sorts of things. But it doesn't make them in any way shape or form, Real, tangible or not.
Quote:
|
Not at all. I would never claim that for instance that the llama is as effective as God. Why? You don't really believe in the llama. The llama doesn't actually help your life...or for you to discover things about you. The llama is a poor god, and a poor god idea becuase it doesn't work. The point of faith tradition is to add, change and retool ideas that help people think about things they can't think about directly.
|
Agreed. Religion is there to answer the questions that we can't answer. (Or at least it was?). Anyhow, the point is, that this long development of a series of ideas has no basis in TRUTH. That is, after all, what we are debating about there right? What is REAL, rather than what is believed?
Quote:
|
It's near impossible to think about "the Meaning of Life" straight up. We tell stories, we think of metaphors, use abstactions, and build constructs to feel and think about realities that our words and logic fail to capture. The llama is absurd only because it doesn't work. God is absurd when "He" doesn't work. Infact, the degendering of God is mearly the changing of the guard in the ideas that people use to think. There was never a Holy Wang that has been suddenly snipped...nor a male deity that's offended that people are calling him a girl. Simply a change in how we have spoken in our hearts about that which our words struggle to describe.
|
In what way does my llama not work, but your God does? If my llama were to take on a specific purpose, that affected the way I lived my life, would that make him real? I already mentioned about how he comforts me. How about if he made some active contributions towards what I do? How about if I ponder the question, why is the sky blue? How about if I deny the fact that the sky is blue because of the refraction of sunlight? Instead I tell you that my llama paints the sky blue every night, when the sun is switched off and nobody is looking. I have answered my question, using the llama in the place of rationality. Does it make the llama as real as God?
Quote:
|
Again, i would nearly agree. These too, do help people think in ways that can quite appropriately be labeled "god talk." However, few have the depth that religions possess. When i want to think about what happens when humans mess up, i can look at conceptualizations of sin posulated by thousands of communities, scholars...where as devotees of sci-fi or the llama have but the sole creator of that idea. The richness that would allow them to delve in to the mystery of God is simply not there....
|
So, by following your line of logic, if a great number of science fiction writers were to come up with a fantastic story which was in itself complete and lacked any plot holes (actually it would appear that this is not even necessary) and it was worked on for many generations, then it could be considered religion, and therefore fact?