To one degree or another, someone either does or does not believe in a God connected to behaviors that are chosen on this side of the grave connected to what they image their fate to be on the other side. And, to one degree or another, this frame of mind comforts and consoles them.
The part about bullshit revolves around an assumption that all of the actual existential complexities that coagulate into any one particular “I” in any one particular context can be reduced down to an optimal frame of mind.
Still, all we can do [in places like this], is to explore each other’s perspectives.
Though, sure, why you either would or would not want to explore this with KT, is no less an existential contraption.
Me too. This thread merely allows those who do this to examine their likes and dislikes “here and now” as that relates to what they imagine the fate of “I” to be “there and then”. Through God and religion.
And, in particular, what happens when these likes and dislikes come into conflict precisely because the subjective contraption that they call God is not in sync with another’s subjective understanding of Him.
Either in regard to scripture or for the secular a moral philosophy.
Thinking something and demonstrating to others how and why you think what you do is the reason venues like this were created. To go below the surface and to explore a belief more rigorously. And even to explore the extent to which beliefs might never fully be grasped.
Same here.
When people get pissed off at me, though, it’s usually because I aim the discussion more toward examining not what they believe so much as how they have come to believe what they do given the actual accumulation of experiences that encompass their lives.
They like and dislike what they do not because they are in touch with a “real me” able to rationally distinguish “the right thing to like” from “the wrong thing to like”. But, rather, because the very trajectory of their lived lives situated out in particular worlds predispose them to go in particular directions.
“I” as an existential contraption in the is/ought world. Only, for some, God becoming an important factor in this trajectory.
Well, it’s always that simple when expressed as an utterly abstract general description of human interactions.
Indeed, folks like Satyr over at KT could not possibly agree with you more about the biological nature of human morality. Sans God of course.
And, as long as you both stay up in those general description clouds, merely believing what you do is enough.
But let someone suggest that, say, human wants and needs are more biologically in sync with Communism than capitalism…?