Friday, September 3, 2010
Is There a Quasi-Personal God ?
Is There a Quasi-Personal God ?
[Due to having chatted before posting further philosophic thoughts on Hawking with the young poet from Jordan on facebook I post the conversation here as best I could copy it from the small window. I find it interesting that this sort of thinking definitely relates to the validity of the scientific issues of anthrocentric global warming as Lubos points out today on this issue close to his heart.
Not to make a crude compromise, as with politics, marriages, philosophies and even religions - but this does speak of the frontier of our understanding of the intelligbility of the universe. The issue in history of a distant or Personal God- and can there be a God that is quasi-personal (at least on our crude perceptive level) or is there more. I mean I am nothing and yet I am everything but that is true even if I am a unique one or many, or even other- which is to ask what is personal? Now if this is all there is then, with or without a theory of everything, something in the reasoning stands above the usual fare... If we are the "image of God or perhaps our personalized consciousness somehow the image of cosmos" but from our perspective as valued somewhat and unique in a world save enough in the main to try to respect this even over decades of a lifetime - for they know they do not ultimately know how to judge others, that or they do not want to see.
Do we then impose upon a more general ultimate theory of say God as our image so as to reduce that to our mundane petty part in the universe? Or in some deep and universal way God himself shares with us the paradoxes of existing? ]
Hey, in my profile links I now have three experimental youtube videos
having scanned fallacies i came up with the following http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/photo.php?pid=5109546&id=628102042&fbid=426082457042
some objected this example lool
Showing a breast to others is immoral.
Surgeons view sick girl's breasts.
Surgeons are immoral.
so i removed it
yes, read them yesterday (but removed tags as with all your comments it fills my mail ith 50 notices a day.
hmmmm well, they do not understand what you were trying to show
yes they were :)
I am not sure about the more religious fallacies
I like logic because it makes me think well
This is what happens in the arab world according to some extreme persons
Logic I guess is either or extreme in the first place it is personal and in a sense religious
I am thinking avbout this this morning after my Hawking post on blogspot yesterday
in the end, beyond induction with set and limited rules the logician knows that logic fails
that is his secret
it certainly fails over time
but why do people in general underestimate philosophers? they say they are insane, wierd...ettc
in my post Hawing's new book says there is no "theory of everything" but that is a theory of everything as much as saying God created the universe!
well, he also said "philosophy is dead"\
yes you are right
but sometimes philosophy starts wars that the religion would not have
if we have no center beyond our selves
thats why religionists say philosophers are secular,liars, blasphemers
maybe Islam went toward a more personal and mystical Allah- but they were not stupid enough to throw away Western logic and science!
this question of personal and not distant empty God, the philosophers god, the god of Spinoza... asks simply
in a paradox, are we nothing or immortal in Gods image
are we greater than He or He us as we say things are personal like us?
I do not know how to resolve this
God is much greater than physics
the only thing I like about Bush when said, I think muslims, chrisitans, jews worship one god
If you believe He is our person then we can say we are the creators of our world and charge carbon tax
heck, let us tax anything a sphere like a ball bearing OR beach ball
Yes, there would hve to be the unique and one God for a theory of everything
after all that is what the people of the book means
... I do not think Hillary should represent us at the peace talk when she now has a Jewish son in law. But I would not marry Chelsea- imagine the two inlaws you would inheret
I was going to post some of these ideas but saw you ffirst- hope it did not bore you
the reason why philosophy isnt liked is that it leads to one to the atheism track
well, that is about all for now yet there is something about falacies funny
that is what the fundamentalist baptists say of any philosopher- and politicians
say of any philosopher- and politicians as Obama is the anti-christ, and even those with very close ideas to their own sect
Atheism applied to many more positions but a hundered years ago than tody
...I think a scientist is blind who said philosophy (or God) is dead and is dishonest thus no scientist
or is that a fallacy?
Spinoza was called a heretic and atheist by the Jews of his day
Nietzches statement by the madman that God is Dead refered to the change from the Industrial age
He had great respect for the Holy book, less for the new testament... and in the end his own god consumed him- the god of wine who laughed a lot by the way
Humor can sometimes hurt when we care deeply about some issues and disrupt our faith- so I understand why some may object and be offended if they are doing that rationally
do u get hurt by others humor if you are mentioned there indirectly?
we are not responsible for what is in anohters head
and some of us- poets perhaps should not shun speaking truth :-)I think it is evidence of compassion and the depth of the human spirit that even if one loses the battle he will insure that someone carries on our dream, even our enemies... And evidence of higher realms of this world
I think in the issue of theory of everthing Hawking proves and changes his position by the example of M and string theory (he is wrong of course or at least last century) is the idea that each of us lives the religins
I think in the issue of theory of everthing Hawking proves and changes his position by the example of M and string theory (he is wrong of course or at least last century) is the idea that each of us lives the religion that becomes the truth in a multiverse opposed to one God or Universe---
But it is more complicated that
for we should respect the truth of our separate religious faiths and not be so postmodern so say it is all one thing that leads to the same path- say Hindu and monotheism
leads to the same path- say Hindu and monotheism
thats the is the original motto of islam
What modernity has done to the Arab world is not solved by the evils of unity in diversity by post modern relativisism for that irrational philosophy leads not only to atheism but depersonalization of the poetry in our hearts and others as machines.
hmmmm original motto I do not know that
.... it must be the coffee and cooler morning you got me philosophizing a lot this morning
Sultan THERE IS NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION
ahhh of course peace, under one sphere of influence the other religions (of the book at least) are allowed to be
Sultan I liked what you said about modernity
Me good but I have to make it clearer even to myself
* * *
[More thoughts this afternoon on a windy day seeing next article on New Scientist: Again stuff that fits my intuitive pictures and posts on the nature of less flux and a more absolute vacuum - but I wonder how some can find such things mathematically and why they did not find it before. Anyway another nearby article link was there and is it me or are these two articles not related?]