How do we know we know?

[elliebean]

I once read a really interesting critique of Descartes' famous statement. All I can remember of it is something along the lines of, "it thinks" (as in "it rains" or it snows", ie. a thought is happening), for all I know possibly without me. So thought happens (or this thought is happening), therefore thought exists.
 

"There is thinking: therefore there is something that thinks": this is the upshot of all Descartes' argumentation. But that means positing as "true a priori" our belief in the concept of substanceâ€"that when there is thought there has to be something "that thinks" is simply a formulation of our grammatical custom that adds a doer to every deed. In short, this is not merely the substantiation of a fact but a logical-metaphysical postulateâ€" Along the lines followed by Descartes one does not come upon something absolutely certain but only upon the fact of a very strong belief.
If one reduces the proposition to "There is thinking, therefore there are thoughts," one has produced a mere tautology: and precisely that which is in question, the "reality of thought," is not touched uponâ€"that is, in this form the "apparent reality" of thought cannot be denied. But what Descartes desired was that thought should have, not an apparent reality, but a reality in itself.

Oh, well nevermind, then. The same can be applied to "I am aware of thought". It assumes the subject of the sentence to be real, while it's actually only grammatically a necessity.

The intuition above can be formally described as follows:

    1.Whatever I clearly and distinctly perceive to be contained in the idea of something is true of that thing.
    2.I clearly and distinctly perceive that necessary existence is contained in the idea of God.
    3.Therefore, God exists.

Remind you of something else? viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4686&p=61844#p61844

Haha, it does. that was one of the most blatant examples. Easy enough to refute thusly:

    1.Whatever I clearly and distinctly perceive to be contained in the idea of something is true of that thing.
    2.I clearly and distinctly perceive that necessary existence is contained in the idea of God's superior evil twin.
    3.Therefore, God's superior evil twin exists.

[Sophus]

The really ironic thing is a lot of theists don't seem to claim to have a clear and distinct perception of what God is. "God works in mysterious ways." The Christian community I'm surrounded by always says "it's not for us to know yet", or "his ways are beyond ours" in regards to apparent contradictions of God's behavior.

[idiotsavant]

Ouch!  Descartes’ proof of God was painful, but do I detect a note of sarcasm?

I think I was confusing "internal dialog" with thought.  Does thought exist without dialog?  I think so, but I don't know what that looks like...

The really ironic thing is a lot of theists don't seem to claim to have a clear and distinct perception of what God is. "God works in mysterious ways." The Christian community I'm surrounded by always says "it's not for us to know yet", or "his ways are beyond ours" in regards to apparent contradictions of God's behavior.

Please elaborate.

Peace - I/s

[Sophus]

The really ironic thing is a lot of theists don't seem to claim to have a clear and distinct perception of what God is. "God works in mysterious ways." The Christian community I'm surrounded by always says "it's not for us to know yet", or "his ways are beyond ours" in regards to apparent contradictions of God's behavior.

Please elaborate.

I know a few pastors personally. They use these sort of automated responses mainly for tough theological issues. For example, if I ask, "why did God put the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden there in the first place if He knew what would happen? Doesn't that mean He wanted everything to happen this way? That He made it so people would go to hell when there was an alternative? If He is capable of anything why did He fail at making a perfect Universe/creation? Why did he commit murder so frequently? If you were God would you have done the same?"etc. One also once told me that according to the Bible God has to let Satan run loose for a while after He has already won. "I don't know. I wouldn't do it, but He's God! He can do what He wants."
I think books like The Shack sell so well because they attempt to reason out God's behavior; make Him comprehensible. To give Christians a "clear, distinct perception."

[idiotsavant]

I know a few pastors personally. They use these sort of automated responses mainly for tough theological issues. For example, if I ask, "why did God put the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden there in the first place if He knew what would happen? Doesn't that mean He wanted everything to happen this way? That He made it so people would go to hell when there was an alternative? If He is capable of anything why did He fail at making a perfect Universe/creation? Why did he commit murder so frequently? If you were God would you have done the same?"etc. One also once told me that according to the Bible God has to let Satan run loose for a while after He has already won. "I don't know. I wouldn't do it, but He's God! He can do what He wants."
I think books like The Shack sell so well because they attempt to reason out God's behavior; make Him comprehensible. To give Christians a "clear, distinct perception."

Yes, I know these people.  I fear dogma has dulled their minds.  Let’s take a look at hose tough theological issues:

Why did God put the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden there in the first place if He knew what would happen?
All  part of His plan.  

Doesn't that mean He wanted everything to happen this way?
Yes, His plan is right on schedule.  (Feels like Logic 101 doesn’t it?)

That He made it so people would go to hell when there was an alternative?
Probably, but I don’t think I fully understand the question.  Please describe the alternative you have in mind..  
 
If  He is capable of anything why did He fail at making a perfect Universe/creation?
He didn’t fail... to do what He planned.  Perfection is in the eye of the beholder.  And why would a currently imperfect Universe/creation be judged a failure?    

Why did he commit murder so frequently?
He seems to differentiate between killing for the common good (Capital Punishment) and killing for selfish motives (murder).  So if you asked Him, I think He would say he didn’t murder.    

If you were God would you have done the same?
I don't know, probably.  

One also once told me that according to the Bible God has to let Satan run loose for a while after He has already won.
He’s wrong, God doesn't have to do anything, because...

"... He's God! He can do what He wants."
Yes He can...

I think I was confusing "internal dialog" with thought.  Does thought exist without dialog?  I think so, but I don't know what that looks like...

What relation has our mind with our brain?

[Sophus]

All  part of His plan.

A plan for Man to fall and inevitably have a large portion of the human race burn in hell. Keep in mind, even today Christianity, although the largest, only makes up about 1/3 of religious views out of nearly 7 billion people. If the tree is not there to begin with then eternity would consist of a heaven like state. After all, will there be such a tree in heaven. Why not just start that way and then nobody goes to hell?

Yes, His plan is right on schedule.

An evil plan. Contradiction concluded: not an all loving being.

Probably, but I don’t think I fully understand the question.  Please describe the alternative you have in mind..

Starting out with the perfection the dead will have in heaven. Just begin with a place like that, lacking a tree, and viola! Nobody suffers for all of eternity. That's the only loving thing to do.

He didn’t fail... to do what He planned.  Perfection is in the eye of the beholder.  And why would a currently imperfect Universe/creation be judged a failure?

He has regretting making Man. Regret usually signifies a mistake. Why would anyone want to accomplish an imperfect plan?

He seems to differentiate between killing for the common good (Capital Punishment) and killing for selfish motives (murder).  So if you asked Him, I think He would say he didn’t murder.

Not only were some did some of His laws call for murder for silly things such as homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13 NAB), sorcery (Exodus 22:17 NAB), not obeying priests (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT), slapping your daddy (Exodus 21:15 NAB), palm reading (Leviticus 20:27 NAB), fornication (Leviticus 21:9 NAB), worshiping false gods (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB), being a false prophet (Zechariah 13:3 NAB), blasphemy (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT), working on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT) and on and on and on.... He also killed people directly himself for equally petty reasons. Even having sacrifices made which would seem to be unnecessary for an omnipotent being.

I don't know, probably.

Really?

"... He's God! He can do what He wants."
Yes He can...

Would that mean even if he had sinned he would be worthy of worship? I've gotten a "yes" response to that before.

[idiotsavant]

A plan for Man to fall and inevitably have a large portion of the human race burn in hell. Keep in mind, even today Christianity, although the largest, only makes up about 1/3 of religious views out of nearly 7 billion people.

I don’t think the Christians have the corner on eternal life, but why would their numbers matter anyway?    
Still, Hellish suffering, however short lived seems overkill.  (No pun intended)  I’m glad it’s not eternal.  (Matthew 10:28)

If the tree is not there to begin with then eternity would consist of a heaven like state. After all, will there be such a tree in heaven.   Why not just start that way and then nobody goes to hell?

Could God reproduce Himself without pain and suffering?   Probably, but why would the potential for an alternative plan, (a plan more to your liking), invalidate His plan?

An evil plan.  Contradiction concluded: not an all loving being.

Hmm...  Who told you He was “all loving”?   He made it clear that He hates as intensely as He loves.   And even if we consider Him all loving, why would that exclude hate?   I live both emotions concurrently.

Starting out with the perfection the dead will have in heaven.   Just begin with a place like that, lacking a tree, and viola! Nobody suffers for all of eternity..

When the Supreme being in Time Bandits was asked why we have evil, He replied thoughtfully, “I think it has something to do with free will."    I agree, and I add the idea that for His children be like daddy God, they must know evil, and choose good.  

That's the only loving thing to do.

Really?   What makes you so sure?   Do you consider yourself a master in the ways of agape?  

He didn’t fail... to do what He planned.  Perfection is in the eye of the beholder.  And why would a currently imperfect Universe/creation be judged a failure?

He has regretting making Man. Regret usually signifies a mistake. Why would anyone want to accomplish an imperfect plan?

He can be such a girl.   “I hate you forever, don’t leave me...”  His exasperation and frustration don’t make His plan imperfect.  

He seems to differentiate between killing for the common good (Capital Punishment) and killing for selfish motives (murder).  So if you asked Him, I think He would say he didn’t murder.

Not only were some did some of His laws call for murder for silly things such as homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13 NAB), sorcery (Exodus 22:17 NAB), not obeying priests (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT), slapping your daddy (Exodus 21:15 NAB), palm reading (Leviticus 20:27 NAB), fornication (Leviticus 21:9 NAB), worshiping false gods (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB), being a false prophet (Zechariah 13:3 NAB), blasphemy (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT), working on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT) and on and on and on.... He also killed people directly himself for equally petty reasons. Even having sacrifices made which would seem to be unnecessary for an omnipotent being.

Killing unjustly is considered evil, while killing with just cause is considered good.   I’m suggesting that a creator god would be the author of all that is and thus the final authority on all that is, including justification.  Our opinions would be irrelevant...

If you were God would you have done the same?

I don't know, probably.

Really?

Yes, really.  I’d have a huge problem doing those things as a human, but as Creator God?  I’m sure I’d have a valid reason...  

”... He's God! He can do what He wants." Yes He can...

Would that mean even if he had sinned he would be worthy of worship? I've gotten a "yes" response to that before.

The technical definition of sin is “transgression of God’s law”.  His law is an expression of His nature and His integrity makes it impossible for Him to sin.   Can He do evil?  i.e. cause disaster, calamity, woe, misery, suffering, sorrow?   Obviously.  Is He worthy of worship anyway?...

It took some time for me to get my head around that question.    I’ve never weighed God’s worth.   Worship just happens with me.   And now that I think about it, I seem to be in a constant state of worship, although my awareness of His presences ebbs and flows like the tide...   I know He is the author of evil, and I worship, so I would have to answer “yes".


I’ve heard that Atheists have the same background programs running as Christians.  I’m kinda leaning that way so far, so I’d like to throw this ball on the court and see where it bounces.

I know many Christians who don’t experience God as I do.   Logic fails to prove His exitance, so without experience why do they believe?  What are they standing on?    

Has anyone ever proved a Creator God does not exist?   Can logic take us there?   How did you get there?   And what are you standing on?   If it’s not pure logic, is it faith?  

How do you know what you know?

Peace - I/s

[pinkocommie]

He can be such a girl.   “I hate you forever, don’t leave me...”  His exasperation and frustration don’t make His plan imperfect.  

 :upset:

[Ellainix]

Sorry, there is just one thing I can't handle.

A. God's plan is moving as intended.
B. People goto hell.
C. God is not malevolent.

Only 2 of these statements can ever be true at the same time. Vaguely assuming, of course, that God even could exist.

[idiotsavant]

Sorry, there is just one thing I can't handle.

A. God's plan is moving as intended.
B. People goto hell.
C. God is not malevolent.

Only 2 of these statements can ever be true at the same time. Vaguely assuming, of course, that God even could exist.

Why is the idea that God can be malevolent bother you?
And why do you believe that God can not exist?

Peace - I/s

[idiotsavant]

He can be such a girl.   “I hate you forever, don’t leave me...”  His exasperation and frustration don’t make His plan imperfect.  

 :upset:

I hate religion.  And I have the utmost respect for women.  In my family we use "(s)he is such a girl" to note the expression of contrary emotion, and "(s)he is such a boy" to denote oblique emotional behavior.  They are invalid stereotypes and simply figures of speech.  I wouldn't think them poison to the enlightened.  

Peace - I/s

[pinkocommie]

He can be such a girl.   “I hate you forever, don’t leave me...”  His exasperation and frustration don’t make His plan imperfect.  

 :upset:

I hate religion.  And I have the utmost respect for women.  In my family we use "(s)he is such a girl" to note the expression of contrary emotion, and "(s)he is such a boy" to denote oblique emotional behavior.  They are invalid stereotypes and simply figures of speech.  I wouldn't think them poison to the enlightened.  

Peace - I/s

Who cares what you and your family say?  If you and your family decided calling black people the N word was 'simply a figure of speech', would the term cease to be racist?  No.  I'm not trying to hijack your thread, but If you really have respect for women, stop promoting sexism.

[idiotsavant]

:upset:

I hate religion.  And I have the utmost respect for women.  In my family we use "(s)he is such a girl" to note the expression of contrary emotion, and "(s)he is such a boy" to denote oblique emotional behavior.  They are invalid stereotypes and simply figures of speech.  I wouldn't think them poison to the enlightened.  
Peace - I/s

Who cares what you and your family say?  If you and your family decided calling black people the N word was 'simply a figure of speech', would the term cease to be racist?  No.  I'm not trying to hijack your thread, but If you really have respect for women, stop promoting sexism.

I’m not promoting sexism.   I’ve never heard “He’s such a girl” used as an insult.   (I would insult my God?)   Quite the contrary.   Women are far superior to men when it comes to integrating / expressing contrary emotions, and if a man can do that, he deserves credit for stepping out of the male box.   And why should I care what you say?   Do you care that I have friends that find “Pinko Commie” an insult?

Peace -I/s

[pinkocommie]

I’m not promoting sexism.   I’ve never heard “He’s such a girl” used as an insult.   (I would insult my God?)   Quite the contrary.   Women are far superior to men when it comes to integrating / expressing contrary emotions, and if a man can do that, he deserves credit for stepping out of the male box.   And why should I care what you say?   Do you care that I have friends that find “Pinko Commie” an insult?

Peace -I/s

Wow.  A theist being disingenuous.  What a shock.  When in doubt, act oblivious and try to change the argument into something entirely different from the initial objection.  Super.  

[elliebean]

I’m not promoting racism.   I’ve never heard “He’s such a Jew” used as an insult.   (I would insult my God?)   Quite the contrary.   Jews are far superior to blacks when it comes to integrating / expressing [steroetypical behavior], and if a black man can do that, he deserves credit for stepping out of the projects.   And why should I care what you say?   Do you care that I have friends that find “Idiot Savant” a compliment?

Peace -I/s

Fixed it for you.  

Having a harder time buying the savant part, though.