Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (40139)	6/12/1999 11:38:00 AM
From: Jacques Chitte	Respond to of 108807

1) Duh. 2) Duh 3) As if! 4) Double duh. (From my "Surfers for, like, Jesus" tract)

To: Dayuhan who wrote (40139)	6/12/1999 11:42:00 PM
From: Edwarda	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

No disagreement here, Steven. Wading through all that I have missed in a few hours at a family gathering. Whew! I have to say that I weigh in on Christopher's side. I also believe in the existence of something/someone. I think that the three O's are an attempt to describe something ineffable and I see no real conflict between the notion of a being that is omnipotent (N.B., at least by our standards) and benevolent and aware intensely of pain and the existence of evil and pain in the world. I am reminded of all the arguments about how if God is omnipotent and omniscient, human beings can commit sin? We are blessed and cursed with free will. I can conceive of a being that could know what is happening in Kosovo and elsewhere today and yet leave us free to do good or wrong and to try to discover what good is. There is another thought along this line: Omniscience is not such a weird idea if--as Christopher was suggesting--one thinks of a being to whom time is not a continuum but one totality, to whom all of time is now. In this context one can postulate a deep benevolence, even a vivid empathy that can feel all of our joys and every moment of agony--not merely that of humans but of animals, trees, paramecia, beings from other universes, whatever. I do have some difficulties with the citations of interventions. They may have occurred and may still occur, but on this issue I have to be the doubting Thomas. And then there is the issue of worship. Sometimes I think we on this thread have a definitional difficulty here, as crops up from time to time about Christians. Not all worship consists of prostrate adoration--think of the Protestants who refuse to kneel during services because they do not believe that God made mankind to kneel to anyone. Worship can also consist of a lively awe and gratitude for so much of the world in which we live, for its existence and wonders. For many of us, worship consists in an expression of "Thank you, God, for my life--even when it is not going well, it is a gift. Thank you for the existence of the people whom I value and the opportunity to know them." And then there is prayer. I honestly believe that even if there is no "God," there is value to prayer. It focusses our thoughts on the people in need for whom we pray. There may even be some deep species link, at which level our support through this focus can be of help. And I'll close with the joke I think I told once before on SI, possibly on this thread: The little black boy asks his mother, "What is God like?" After a moment's thought, his mother responds, "Well, son, first of all She's black." P.S. If all of this has been said later than your posting, I do apologize for being repetitive. I wanted to respond while my mind is still functioning and before the thread gallops elsewhere.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (40139)	6/13/1999 12:29:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Respond to of 108807

Steven, let's rephrase two of your questions as follows: 1. Is there a tooth fairy? 2. Is any person's idea of the tooth fairy more inherently valid than any other person's? Most intelligent adults would agree that the tooth fairy is a story created by parents for their amusement at the expense of their impressionable offspring. Many children readily accept the existence of this benign deity because of the evidence. But how does one disprove the existence of the tooth fairy to impressionable children? -- only by the admission of the adults who created the myth. What parallel is there to a belief in a god? Instead of quarters under a pillow we have glib explanations of the origins of the universe and unprovable promises of afterlives and just rewards. The difficulty in the disproof is that there is no one able to take the blame for the creation of the myth in the first place. And it is a sad fact of logical life that you cannot prove a negative -- the non-existence of a yeti, or a tooth fairy or a god. How do we know that Athena (my personal favorite) does not exist? TTFN, CTC