Argument From Consciousness

[SoldierofFortune]

I dream of a god(s) that can sparkle sth. with his wisdom and knowledge.

One day humankind will rise to be a god that depends on a definition.
That god can have some post-post-post..modern sci. and tech. and sensitive gadgets. and enhanced calculatin' and computin' technics...
And he will have might to ''creat''; or at least, the power to observe and to be ghost participant...

For ins. how does it sound that idea: To any liveable planet that can give source to live for homo sapiens; some people is sent to there and they are forgotten their past and let them live in earthly conditions...

So let's see by observing them, how will their life styles will improve...

[GSOgymrat]

In brief, I argue for God. My definition of God is being with consciousness only, who created the universe. He doesn't have to be all-knowing, omnipresent, infallible, all-loving... There could be more than one and that's irrelevant.

Let's say a consciousness created the universe. I don't see how that necessarily changes anything. It doesn't mean the consciousness still exists. It doesn't mean the universe in any way reflects the nature of its creator. It doesn't mean human beings can communicate with that consciousness and if we could communicate with it it's highly unlikely we could ever understand it.

People create narratives so they can make sense of experience. Humans are driven to do this because they are uncomfortable with chaos and unpredictatability. As an atheist, the problem I have with the religious is they often convince themselves their narratives are knowledge and that everyone else's narrative is fiction. Atheists do this as well on topics like whether consciousness exists after death. Nobody knows exactly how consciousness works but if the narrative is that it's solely a biological process then consciousness dying along with the body fits the narrative, but it isn't knowledge.

People who can't explain what is happening right here and right now are convinced they know what was going on billions of years ago. People who are convinced by their feelings that God is real were once equally convinced by feelings that their harpy ex-wife or abusive ex-husband was their soulmate. I don't pretend to know the nature of my own existance, much less the universe, and accept that the illusion of what I call "I" is largely governed by psychological, biological and social forces I don't understand and cannot fully control. Could a creator consciousness be an additional force? Maybe but it seems like an unnecessary narrative.

[PickelledEggs]

If god is real, why can't I find my fucking car keys?

[Unbeliever]

Maybe God's punishing you for your grievous sins?

[GSOgymrat]

If god is real, why can't I find my fucking car keys?

Because if you found your car keys you would have left the house on time and been in that intersection precisely when the beer truck ran the light, smashed into your vehicle and killed you. Everything happens for a reason. God intervened and saved your life.

Atheists are so ungrateful.

[Birdy23]

"I can't imagine how it happened, so God must have done it!"

We hear "arguments" like this a lot - argumentum ad ignorantiam - and they never get any better.

You make the mistake of labeling the idea of God as universally hokey. I am not arguing for the God of the Bible, or including any assumptions about the being such as the idea that we were "created in God's image." Arguing that we were created in God's image may seem as if we are putting a human face on the creation of the universe or the universe itself, to make up for the fact that the way our brain's work is social and within a human framework, kind of like how earlier religions believed external forces all had spirits, personifying nature in a way that is ego-centric.

I defined God as simply a being that is self-aware, which naturally includes intellect and desires, whatever those may be.

You fail to realize that this isn't that extraordinary of a concept, atheists in the same context use terms like "magical supernatural being," and stuff to that effect to use words with emotional connotations that make the idea of God sound silly. These words borrow emotional connotations from stories invented by pathological liars, including hokey ghost hunting stories and people who make unsubstantiated claims about witchcraft.

God or no god, we don't understand how the universe came to be. God does not answer the question either. Our human intellects are incapable of understanding how we can get something out of nothing. Instead of disappearing in the abyss of studying physical space, you look for a motivation. Studying physical properties of the universe doesn't get you anywhere, neither does referencing a hokey story about God waving his magic wand and people appearing.

It seems to me that atheists do not assign enough significance to the concept of self-awareness and consciousness. You can't prove that consciousness exists. Consciousness cannot be measured because it is not quantifiable. There are numerous accounts of people leaving their body and near death experiences which I imagine you would dismiss as lies.

As humans, another failing in our reasoning is to expect bad outcomes. In hunting and gathering days, it is a survival advantage to assume a sudden rustle in the bushes is a predator and be prepared to run instead of assuming it is a harmless animal. We are fed magical fairy tales in the form of Disney movies as children, and as we get older we have to accept that what love really is falls way short of what we thought as children. We are under constant pressure to "get real."

It's a choice between believing life has a purpose and life is meaningless, the result of mysterious forces non-sentient forces that exist magically and supernaturally and we are at the mercy of these forces.

[Birdy23]

To a Western mind, sure. In Eastern tradition it is often held that... in very simplistic and probably very layman's understanding terms... that experience is universal; the concept of "I" is a way of pretending we are separate from the rest of reality. What you said would run antithesis to the core tenants of Eastern mythology.

Almost all modern Eastern theological mythology revolves around dissolving the concept of an internal experience; nirvana is achieved by realizing that all experience is one universal entity rather than infinite, separate things.

Alot of your ideology does seem to revolve around, as Hydra pointed out, "I, me, mine"... that the self is the end all, be all of understanding. Studying both Western and Eastern ideology, I find that a bit short-sighted, but I understand that is the common mindset now. But even in Western tradition there are many philosophies that stress the importance of recognizing universal experience rather than the personal experience.

Naturally, if someone else is experiencing something, you are not experiencing it. I believe in the possibility of overlap, in collective consciousness/unconscious, and empathy. However, if I am not experiencing something, I don't know what it feels like.

Through my process of philosophy I have thought a lot about solipsism so you picked up on that.

[Birdy23]

Consciousness is part of the evolutionary process.  It allows a species a better chance of survival.  Our consciousness gives us awareness in the form of our senses.  Those senses are quite limited when compared to many other species.  Those species use their awarnesses to give them a better chance to survive within the niche they are in; they have evolved those senses to allow them to fit into whatever environment they are in.  Humans are not unique in that respect--or almost any other respect.  And the universe is simply unaware or any of this.  The universe places no premium (or anything else) on what you think of as value.  It is totally and completely neutral--it just is.  Nature on this planet is the same--it just is; neither good nor bad, it just is.  And your god is still simply a fiction.

First of all, do you believe in free will?

The brain can send signals that cause the body to move or act, regardless if there is someone who "experiences" the emotions, desires, pain, etc.

[Mike Cl]

First of all, do you believe in free will?

The brain can send signals that cause the body to move or act, regardless if there is someone who "experiences" the emotions, desires, pain, etc.

I answered your free will question several posts back.  I said:"Free will?  No, humans do not have free will.  We do have the ability to make choices.  In fact, even when we don't make choices, that was a choice.  We are faced with choices daily--shoot, every second of every day.  I'd suggest it as the dictatorship of choice--we must choose, for even not choosing is a choice.  Is this free will?  Not really.  I did not chose to be born, for example.  And according to most religions, we cannot even choose when we leave this life.  We make choices within certain boundaries--we are not free to choose what we want to."

Yes, the brain does have what is called the autonomic system--it powers the heart, glands, etc, and works whether we want it to or not.  So, in that that system is at work, we don't have free will over it.  So, no, little if any free will. 

[Unbeliever]

You make the mistake of labeling the idea of God as universally hokey.

Yep, that's because the idea of God is universally hokey. Whatever it is you believe in, why do you call it "God"?

I am not arguing for the God of the Bible, or including any assumptions about the being such as the idea that we were "created in God's image." Arguing that we were created in God's image may seem as if we are putting a human face on the creation of the universe or the universe itself, to make up for the fact that the way our brain's work is social and within a human framework, kind of like how earlier religions believed external forces all had spirits, personifying nature in a way that is ego-centric.

Yep, we're hard-wired to think of ourselves as the be-all and end-all of existence. If giraffes could have a religion, their God would look just like a giraffe, and they'd claim they were made in God's image.

I defined God as simply a being that is self-aware, which naturally includes intellect and desires, whatever those may be.

That's not a definition of God, it's simply blatherskite. There are as many definitions of God as there are God-believers.

You fail to realize that this isn't that extraordinary of a concept, atheists in the same context use terms like "magical supernatural being," and stuff to that effect to use words with emotional connotations that make the idea of God sound silly. These words borrow emotional connotations from stories invented by pathological liars, including hokey ghost hunting stories and people who make unsubstantiated claims about witchcraft.

Isn't what you're doing is making an unsubstantiated claim about God?

God or no god, we don't understand how the universe came to be. God does not answer the question either. Our human intellects are incapable of understanding how we can get something out of nothing. Instead of disappearing in the abyss of studying physical space, you look for a motivation. Studying physical properties of the universe doesn't get you anywhere, neither does referencing a hokey story about God waving his magic wand and people appearing.

It seems to me that atheists do not assign enough significance to the concept of self-awareness and consciousness. You can't prove that consciousness exists. Consciousness cannot be measured because it is not quantifiable. There are numerous accounts of people leaving their body and near death experiences which I imagine you would dismiss as lies.

Yep, all lies. I tried for many years to accomplish astral projection, until I finally realized that I'd been duped into believing bullshit.

It's a choice between believing life has a purpose and life is meaningless, the result of mysterious forces non-sentient forces that exist magically and supernaturally and we are at the mercy of these forces.

Why does life need a purpose? Especially one imposed on us from outside ourselves? I choose my own purpose, not some fairy-tale God, or those who believe in such a thing.

[Birdy23]

Yep, that's because the idea of God is universally hokey. Whatever it is you believe in, why do you call it "God"?
Yep, we're hard-wired to think of ourselves as the be-all and end-all of existence. If giraffes could have a religion, their God would look just like a giraffe, and they'd claim they were made in God's image.

That's not a definition of God, it's simply blatherskite. There are as many definitions of God as there are God-believers.
Isn't what you're doing is making an unsubstantiated claim about God?

Yep, all lies. I tried for many years to accomplish astral projection, until I finally realized that I'd been duped into believing bullshit.

Why does life need a purpose? Especially one imposed on us from outside ourselves? I choose my own purpose, not some fairy-tale God, or those who believe in such a thing.

Okay, I'm going to try one more time. I'm talking about a being who is self-aware who possesses intelligence and will. You can call that hokey, but the alternative is particles that behave according to properties that "just are."

Honestly I feel like there is a concept in my mind I am trying to express with the words "awareness," "consciousnessness," "intelligence," etc., That doesn't register in your mind so I will just have to accept that there is some sort of barrier here.

And yes, "unsubstantiated claims of witchcraft," I am talking about things pathological liars say. Defining the definition of God for the purpose of an argument is not an unsubstantiated claim about God and I think you should know the difference between these two concepts.

[Birdy23]

I answered your free will question several posts back.  I said:"Free will?  No, humans do not have free will.  We do have the ability to make choices.  In fact, even when we don't make choices, that was a choice.  We are faced with choices daily--shoot, every second of every day.  I'd suggest it as the dictatorship of choice--we must choose, for even not choosing is a choice.  Is this free will?  Not really.  I did not chose to be born, for example.  And according to most religions, we cannot even choose when we leave this life.  We make choices within certain boundaries--we are not free to choose what we want to."

Yes, the brain does have what is called the autonomic system--it powers the heart, glands, etc, and works whether we want it to or not.  So, in that that system is at work, we don't have free will over it.  So, no, little if any free will.

Yes, the mighty tracing team, which is the human race and the conscious experience.

I had a blog post on this concept but apparently I'm not supposed to include links.

[Unbeliever]

Okay, I'm going to try one more time. I'm talking about a being who is self-aware who possesses intelligence and will. You can call that hokey, but the alternative is particles that behave according to properties that "just are."

Honestly I feel like there is a concept in my mind I am trying to express with the words "awareness," "consciousnessness," "intelligence," etc., That doesn't register in your mind so I will just have to accept that there is some sort of barrier here.

And yes, "unsubstantiated claims of witchcraft," I am talking about things pathological liars say. Defining the definition of God for the purpose of an argument is not an unsubstantiated claim about God and I think you should know the difference between these two concepts.

Well, when you say that God has awareness, intelligence, consciousness, etc., that's not defining God, it's only listing some possible attributes of what you think of as God. Presumably, if Santa Claus existed, he too would have those very same attributes, so he'd be no different from this God you're going on about.

[Mike Cl]

Okay, I'm going to try one more time. I'm talking about a being who is self-aware who possesses intelligence and will.

Okay--gotcha.  Can you explain to me what proof you have of such an entity? 

[Mike Cl]

Yes, the mighty tracing team, which is the human race and the conscious experience.

I had a blog post on this concept but apparently I'm not supposed to include links.

What does this have to do with free will.  What is your idea of free will?