You can agree what you want,it isn’t true.
That’s ignorant hubris. I was virtually quoting David Hume‘s argument, which to the best of my knowledge has never been refuted and is compatible with the preponderance of eastern philosophy as well as western Judaic, Christian and Islamic mystical theology.
Hey, Crazy….looking for someone who claims reality is an illusion?
It ain’t I, Crazy…..it’s this crazy cat, felix…..he’s one of your own.
Only if you include God in the natural (when you mean God when you say Nature). And by that I don’t mean pantheism… I mean something more like when someone means my body (WITH my mind) when they say my name (perhaps panENtheism…but not the goofy kind).
Hell why not redefine every word to accommodate our delusion?
I move to redefine nature as Magic…..
JRR Tolkein & CS Lewis vibe^
I wanna see a direct quote and an actual reference.
You haven’t got a clue about anything Silenus.
Crazy, this Christian is claiming reality is an illusion…..go at it.
Give us a spectacle.
The only thing you fuckers are good for.
Are you looking in the mirror when you say that?
Even if the self is a “bundle of perceptions” constantly in flux, this does not answer question #4: How can we reliably distinguish what the theist calls ‘God’ from something that is merely imaginary.
I include everything that exists in the natural, whatever it may be, because to exist is to possess a specific nature and therefore to be natural.
So you’re an essentialist.
Question #4 is based on the mistaken premise the God is a thing in the universe of things. That is a basic misunderstanding of the concept of God. God is the Absolute. As such God is existence itself. Everything that exists does so only relatively insofar is it participates in absolute being itself.
So basically, the Godhead is the top (parent) category being and everything contingent inhabits as subsets (child categories). I don’t know enough about symbolic logic to know if we have the language to articulate that. I think that “my” harmonic triads are getting there, but I need to know more about all the rest of the logic I haven’t learned yet.
As you said to me a while back:
I would actually do that, you know.
This does not move us any closer to a reliable method for distinguishing God from something the theist merely imagines. I can imagine Sparky the Wonder Unicorn, and I can say that Sparky is not a thing in the universe of things. As such, Sparky is existence itself.
I am an Objectivist. That is what I am.
To deny existence itself is absurd.