tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post5452587811091366506..comments2014-06-19T12:15:15.639-06:00Comments on A New Paradigm...: Atheism...Tonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13236203708498235473noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-59353784176131073512006-12-11T18:47:00.000-07:002006-12-11T18:47:00.000-07:00Wow, I love your blog. I like reading the things y...Wow, I love your blog. I like reading the things you're thinking about. I found your blog through Mike's blog. I realize this is an old blog to you, but I'd like to leave a comment, nonetheless, and I look forward to reading more from you. Anyway...<br /><br />The analogy... I don't know if it's as weak as you assume. I agree that making analogies between ideas and the physical is difficult, but this is often why analogies are used (for understanding the abstract).<br /><br />The strength of the analogy is this: (keep in mind, I don't assume I'm right, just thinking out loud for you)<br />"Darkness" is the absence of "light" as "no meaning" is the absence of "meaning".<br /><br />Darkness cannot be understood without the concept of light as "no meaning" cannot be understood without the concept of "meaning".<br /><br />Both require the "perceived" and the "perciever". Light requires eyes as meaning requires a thinking and reasoning mind.<br /><br />"Begging the question"... I don't know if it's so transparently "begging the question". It may just be what we call a biconditional in logic. Define "P" as the perceived and "Q" as the perceiver... the biconditional would read P <-> Q, or (P implies Q) & (Q implies P). Therefore, the perceived requires the perceiver AND vice versa.<br /><br />Simply put, this means that if the universe has no meaning, then the universe also lacks the tools to perceive meaning (reasoning creatures), and if the universe lacks reasoning creatures, then it also lacks meaning (nothing to perceive meaning). You could be right that this "begs the question", but I don't think I've used one to define the other here.<br /><br />I realize I've said nothing about the connection to God, but I haven't got that far in my thinking about this yet.<br /><br />One last thing I find interesting about Lewis' quote is the premiss "the WHOLE universe has NO meaning"... notice the quantifiers... The athiest has to assert "the WHOLE universe has NO meaning" while the theist only has to show "the WHOLE universe has SOME meaning" and not that "the WHOLE universe is ALL meaningful". I have no point here, I'm just making an observation.<br /><br />Thanks for giving me something to "chew on." I look forward to reading more of your writings.<br /><br />peace out!Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17629814124342578551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-89004816666887030562006-12-01T09:51:00.000-07:002006-12-01T09:51:00.000-07:00Hey, I was doing some thinking this morning and re...Hey, I was doing some thinking this morning and realized that we hadn't talked much about this stuff lately. Weird.<br /><br />Anyway, I came to a sort of conclusion (and there's probably already an -ism or -ology associated with this thought) regarding this particular post.<br /><br />I think Atheism is reactionary. I think if you remove the obstacle/consequence of Hell, arguing the existence of God is kind of moot.<br /><br />What do you think of that?Todd Newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10141151129135759156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-52839072962696522492006-10-27T23:43:00.000-06:002006-10-27T23:43:00.000-06:00oooh, my head hurts reading this but it's a good p...oooh, my head hurts reading this but it's a good pain. ;) thanks for linking to my blog and i'll be checking in with yours.lindahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15407759433958686081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-71371453282626559952006-10-27T08:46:00.000-06:002006-10-27T08:46:00.000-06:00i just wanted to say that i'm reading. i don't ha...i just wanted to say that i'm reading. i don't have much new thought for this topic right now, but i wanted to let you know that what i've read so far has been thought provoking. keep writing. <br /><br />i'm out.stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11994914260529830197noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-59674607292252278132006-10-27T08:36:00.000-06:002006-10-27T08:36:00.000-06:00Slight confusion there. When Todd made that comme...Slight confusion there. When Todd made that comment in person, I said he should tell Mike that, but I meant a different Mike, not DM. But eh, it's all good nonetheless.Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13236203708498235473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-63501197001198471532006-10-26T07:44:00.000-06:002006-10-26T07:44:00.000-06:00Also, I said this out loud so Tony told me I had t...Also, I said this out loud so Tony told me I had to say it to Mike.<br /><br />People don't need to prove something is true before they believe it. Or rather, they don't need that "proof" to know something is true; they'll believe it anyway.Todd Newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10141151129135759156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-50776031084979365842006-10-25T17:14:00.000-06:002006-10-25T17:14:00.000-06:00i am no philosopher, i am just a construction work...i am no philosopher, i am just a construction worker, but when i read the quote it seems to ask why we would look for something if we didn't have hints that it existed. i am not sure he was saying that light and meaning are the same in the analogy. but simply that we don't go around looking for things that we don't know don't exist.<br /><br />when it is dark we look for light because we have experienced light.<br /><br />maybe you could say that we look for meaning because we have reason to believe it exists. if it didn't exist then we wouldn't know to look for it.<br /><br />i guess you could say it doesn't exist but then you would have to explain why there are hints to its existance and why so many people accross all cultures feel the drive to create or find meaning.Mike Murrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17953216797987615864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34648742.post-49724250319479772712006-10-25T10:10:00.000-06:002006-10-25T10:10:00.000-06:00First of all, in response to "using something to d...First of all, in response to "using something to define itself," try defining the word Luck without using the word luck. Not good luck or bad luck, just luck itself. I haven't explored this too much so it's entirely plausible that someone <i>could</i> answer this, but when I try to ponder it, I can't.<br /><br />Now, to respond to the Lewis quote, I say the following. I agree that atheism is too simple in that if atheism were "the way", it basically works itself out of a job. Tony, you can dissect what I'm saying here if it's bad argument, but this is just my mind spewing.<br /><br />Frankly, if you believe in nothing, you have to believe that you believe in nothing. At its origin and simplest roots, I think atheism is less of a belief in nothing and more that we want to actually ignore the possibility of things other than mundane day-to-day routine.<br /><br />I'm assuming atheists believe in stuff like evolution because it's there; not that they're "against God" per say, just that they <b>don't need</b> more of an explanation. It's intellectual laziness if people really are just ignoring the existence of things; true atheists would seek to disprove the possibility of deities or the supernatural in general, and that's something I could at least understand.<br /><br />Maybe it's just me, but from what I can tell Christians are the only ones that have some kind of "Campaign Against Atheism." I've never heard anything about Atheists attacking Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, etc (or vise-versa). This bothers me a little... I haven't really "tackled" atheism in my research or my private thoughts; I'd rather take it as a given that people-at-large do believe in <b>a</b> God.Todd Newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10141151129135759156noreply@blogger.com