God is Dead

[devildavid]

Yeah, he had no real answer to my question to him about this either... He is choosing to "believe" in complete delusion to avoid accepting correction...

It's okay to be corrected devildavid, there's no shame in that... it's part of the journey to knowledge acquisition...

No answers for the silly word games being played here? Your journey to knowledge acquisition took a wrong turn down a dead end street.

 

[CharisRose]

Let's define 'This environment'.... i.e. 'What is the internet'. This environment is a bunch of individual computers (smart phones are computers). What "This environment" happens to be is a tool that allows interactive exchange of information. It reduces things to symbols, and allows those symbols to be distributed and interpreted at remote locations to be interperted at the other end. So, when it comes to the physical, we see a symbolic reprentatin of the physical via symbols. that includes

Photograhs.

Sorry, I don't understand your symbol idea. I think you need to provide a much better explanation as to why your symbol idea alters anything.

Please explain your reasoning why you think, when it comes to the physical, that you can present a symbolic representation of the physical via symbols as evidence of the one physical rutabaga.

That is not a physical photograph, that is an image of a physical photograph. I saw a similar picture presented by you in a previous post.

Okay, so based on your Let's define,'this environment' symbol idea, you now want me to let you off the hook to provide as evidence the one physical rutabaga I seek?

Sorry, not letting you off the hook.

Show me, the one physical rutabaga in this environment without my help.

I did find it interesting your use of the the words symbolic representation.

symbolic representation meaning - definition of symbolic representation by Mnemonic Dictionary

symbolic representation - Dictionary definition and meaning for word symbolic representation

Definition: (noun) something visible that by association or convention represents something else that is invisible.

Synonyms : symbol , symbolisation , symbolization

Example Sentence the eagle is a symbol of the United States

Your replacement symbolic representation being an image of a not physical photograph of a bunch of rutabagas.

In this environment the physical one rutabaga is inaccessible to view. (invisible) In the physical world the one rutabaga which can be accessible to view (visible)

Perhaps, we can expand the idea for the use of symbolic representation to include things that are not physical?

Roseann

 

[RAMOSS]

Sorry, I don't understand your symbol idea. I think you need to provide a much better explanation as to why your symbol idea alters anything.

Please explain your reasoning why you think, when it comes to the physical, that you can present a symbolic representation of the physical via symbols as evidence of the one physical rutabaga.

That is not a physical photograph, that is an image of a physical photograph. I saw a similar picture presented by you in a previous post.

Okay, so based on your Let's define,'this environment' symbol idea, you now want me to let you off the hook to provide as evidence the one physical rutabaga I seek?

Sorry, not letting you off the hook.

Show me, the one physical rutabaga in this environment without my help.

I did find it interesting your use of the the words symbolic representation.

symbolic representation meaning - definition of symbolic representation by Mnemonic Dictionary

symbolic representation - Dictionary definition and meaning for word symbolic representation

Definition: (noun) something visible that by association or convention represents something else that is invisible.

Synonyms : symbol , symbolisation , symbolization

Example Sentence the eagle is a symbol of the United States

Your replacement symbolic representation being an image of a not physical photograph of a bunch of rutabagas.

In this environment the physical one rutabaga is inaccessible to view. (invisible) In the physical world the one rutabaga which can be accessible to view (visible)

Perhaps, we can expand the idea for the use of symbolic representation to include things that are not physical?

Roseann

I gave you information. I gave you a symbolic representation of a real rutabaga that had physical existence. You can either accept information or reject it. That is true no matter what environment. THe symbols in this particular situation corresponded to a real physical rutabaga... and this was evidence in this environment

 

[CharisRose]

No. My purpose was to present evidence that anyone could discover for themselves, and not have to take my word for it.

If your purpose is to present evidence that anyone could discover for themselves, then why do you seek evidence of the spiritual from them when you could discover that for yourself?

 

[CharisRose]

I gave you information. I gave you a symbolic representation of a real rutabaga that had physical existence. You can either accept information or reject it. That is true no matter what environment. THe symbols in this particular situation corresponded to a real physical rutabaga... and this was evidence in this environment

Sadly, I will have to reject it.

 

[RAMOSS]

If your purpose is to present evidence that anyone could discover for themselves, then why do you seek evidence of the spiritual from them when you could discover that for yourself?

When it comes to 'discover it by yourself'... information and instructions can be given so that the evidence can be independently confirmed. Definitions can be given to enchance communications.

Can you define spiritual in a way that isn't complete relying on concepts that have no real world analogy and pure metaphysics?

 

[CharisRose]

When it comes to 'discover it by yourself'... information and instructions can be given so that the evidence can be independently confirmed. Definitions can be given to enchance communications.

Can you define spiritual in a way that isn't complete relying on concepts that have no real world analogy and pure metaphysics?

Can you produce the evidence I requested, the one physical rutabaga in this environment without my help or symbolism?

 

[CharisRose]

When it comes to 'discover it by yourself'... information and instructions can be given so that the evidence can be independently confirmed. Definitions can be given to enchance communications.

Can you define spiritual in a way that isn't complete relying on concepts that have no real world analogy and pure metaphysics?

Why do you need me to define spiritual for you?

 

[devildavid]

If your purpose is to present evidence that anyone could discover for themselves, then why do you seek evidence of the spiritual from them when you could discover that for yourself?

And how would I do that? Is there evidence at the grocery store, next to the rutabagas?

 

[RAMOSS]

Sadly, I will have to reject it.

That is your prerogative. It's sort of saying "Using symbols in an environment of symbols, give me physical evidence"

 

[devildavid]

Why do you need me to define spiritual for you?

So that we will recognize it when we encounter it. We don't want to confuse it with something else, say, like a rutabaga.

 

[Daisy]

So that we will recognize it when we encounter it. We don't want to confuse it with something else, say, like a rutabaga.

Well, you may be waiting for a long time...He is not something you just encounter without putting forth some endeavour...

"In his haughtiness, the wicked man makes no investigation; All his thoughts are: “There is no God.” Psalm 10:4

"And he made out of one man every nation of men to dwell on the entire surface of the earth, and he decreed the appointed times and the set limits of where men would dwell, so that they would seek God, if they might grope for him and really find him, although, in fact, he is not far off from each one of us. For by him we have life and move and exist, even as some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also his children.’" Acts 17:26-28

 

[devildavid]

Well, you may be waiting for a long time...He is not something you just encounter without putting forth some endeavour...

"In his haughtiness, the wicked man makes no investigation; All his thoughts are: “There is no God.” Psalm 10:4

"And he made out of one man every nation of men to dwell on the entire surface of the earth, and he decreed the appointed times and the set limits of where men would dwell, so that they would seek God, if they might grope for him and really find him, although, in fact, he is not far off from each one of us. For by him we have life and move and exist, even as some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also his children.’" Acts 17:26-28

Still leaves unanswered the question of how can we be sure what we encounter is what it is claimed to be?

 

[Daisy]

Still leaves unanswered the question of how can we be sure what we encounter is what it is claimed to be?

If you're not seeking Him, then why worry about it?

 

[devildavid]

If you're not seeking Him, then why worry about it?

I'm not worried about it. I like to debate it. You know, on a debate forum.

 

[Daisy]

I'm not worried about it. I like to debate it. You know, on a debate forum.

Oh, I think you are...you just afraid to admit it...

 

[gfm7175]

No answers for the silly word games being played here? Your journey to knowledge acquisition took a wrong turn down a dead end street.

Angel and I aren't playing any silly word games. We're just showing you that reductive materialism falls flat on its face, and that you don't even truly believe your own belief...


"To further philosophically define the exact point at which reductive materialism breaks down, we need to look at a philosophical problem called strong emergence. Strong emergence entails consciousness arising from a conglomeration of whole-brain activity (if you stick enough brain matter together and wire it all up in just the right way, suddenly you get emotions.)

This belief that consciousness springs into existence at some undefined point of brain complexity is a violation of reductive materialism. If consciousness is “irreducible” beyond a certain level of brain complexity, then this is a clear failure of reductive materialist science.

The ONLY way the brain can achieve “awareness” AND be in compliance with a reductionist philosophy is if the components that make up the brain contain elements of conscious awareness to them. Such a situation is called “weak emergence.” Weak emergence is the only philosophically valid form of emergence that does not violate the rules of causality. Since weak emergence must be true, this means consciousness cannot simply be a by-product of whole brain activity.

I’m a big believer in maintaining a reductive materialist mindset when it comes to using science to solve physical problems, build better TVs, create better engines, or produce new materials that benefit mankind. Physical problems require physical solutions. However, when it comes to a creating a “Theory of Everything,” which modern day physicists are so fond of chasing, a purely physicalist theory automatically fails to pass muster because it cannot address how awareness exists"

https://www.libertariannews.org/201...ve-materialism-to-fully-explain-the-universe/

 

[CharisRose]

And how would I do that? Is there evidence at the grocery store, next to the rutabagas?

Do you think you are incapable of finding that evidence for yourself... just like you are incapable of providing that one physical rutabaga from that grocery store in this environment?

Roseann

 

[RAMOSS]

Do you think you are incapable of finding that evidence for yourself... just like you are incapable of providing that one physical rutabaga from that grocery store in this environment?

Roseann

I can get a definition of a rutabaga, and I can get precise and definitive instructions on how to get one for myself. All he wants is an equivalent of that.

 

[devildavid]

Oh, I think you are...you just afraid to admit it...

Don't get your hopes up.

 

[devildavid]

I can get a definition of a rutabaga, and I can get precise and definitive instructions on how to get one for myself. All he wants is an equivalent of that.

Yes, you get it. It's not that complicated.

 

[CharisRose]

That is your prerogative. It's sort of saying "Using symbols in an environment of symbols, give me physical evidence"

It's sort of like you saying to me, "I the skeptic want you to show me the spiritual based on the rules I have set for you to follow."

Then, when I as the skeptic want you to show me the physical based on the rules I have set for you...

You decided it was your prerogative to change my rules. After you changed my rules, you offered me the option of rejecting your rule changes, which I did.

Instead of you accepting the limitations of this environment, that it is impossible to present any actual physical evidence in this environment and that you needed my help to prove your evidence based on those limitations. You sought my help again... to prove your evidence via my acceptance of your changes to my rules. Then you offered me that rejection option which I opted to take...

And, you are still not satisfied... based on the above sentence that you wrote to me... that I am now answering.

Sorry, but I am not letting you off the hook.

P.S. Plus I requested, additional information concerning your symbol idea. If, I remember correctly you kind of told me, the information you provided was good enough.

Roseann

 

[RAMOSS]

It's sort of like you saying to me, "I the skeptic want you to show me the spiritual based on the rules I have set for you to follow."

Then, when I as the skeptic want you to show me the physical based on the rules I have set for you...

You decided it was your prerogative to change my rules. After you changed my rules, you offered me the option of rejecting your rule changes, which I did.

Instead of you accepting the limitations of this environment, that it is impossible to present any actual physical evidence in this environment and that you needed my help to prove your evidence based on those limitations. You sought my help again... to prove your evidence via my acceptance of your changes to my rules. Then you offered me that rejection option which I opted to take...

And, you are still not satisfied... based on the above sentence that you wrote to me... that I am now answering.

Sorry, but I am not letting you off the hook.

P.S. Plus I requested, additional information concerning your symbol idea. If, I remember correctly you kind of told me, the information you provided was good enough.

Roseann

Well.. let's first start with a definition. What is 'the spiritual' .. Can you define 'the spiritual' in a way that is something more than using terms that are merely conceptual in nature? Is there a way to show 'how' you know that?

 

[CharisRose]

So that we will recognize it when we encounter it. We don't want to confuse it with something else, say, like a rutabaga.

Oh, You/We have no need to worry about that happening. You/We will not be confused. You/We will clearly know the difference between the two. But You/We will need to take my word for it. Until You/We find out for yourselves.

Roseann

 

[CharisRose]

I can get a definition of a rutabaga, and I can get precise and definitive instructions on how to get one for myself. All he wants is an equivalent of that.

I know that, I provided a Merriam-Webster link plus a typed rutabaga (turnip) definition in one of my posts.

I know that, if I remember correctly you offered me that information on how to find one for myself. Remember, when you wanted me to help you prove your evidence of the one physical rutabaga existence in the physical world because it is impossible for you to prove your evidence in this environment without my help.

He wants, what you want. To set the rules for spiritual evidence within the standards that are acceptable to both of you.

Plus, the two of you also want to set the rules for physical evidence within the standards that are acceptable to both of you.

Roseann