I don't think anyone is saying that faith and church attendance are synonymous.
But it is a communal expression of faith. As we have been mentioning and a chance for those who don’t believe to see communal faith in action. Not that is the reason they do Food Bank etc, it is a consequence.
As to the mystery. Well God in many ways is a mystery. Our faith must have that in it.
I have communal faith that people are worth it. Nothing to do with religion.
What mystery? There are infinite real ones of of course. But God isn't one of them. He's a synthetic mystery from irreconcilable arbitrary religious propositions.
And yet what evidence do you have that God is synthetic? You can believe that and are free to do so, I will not deny that. That said what actual evidence do you have to back up your view on a discussion board such as this. In a sub board such as Purgatory. We can neither prove it disprove outright. God will always be a mystery to us because we cannot fully comprehend him.
Missed this! We make God up. And that is no belief. It is a fact. I'm not free to 'believe' anything else. I know. Ancient Egypt, The Bible, Judaism, Christianity, Islam are synthetic. Fiction. Made up. They made themselves up. Like all religion, all cultures, all art, even science and philosophy and history. We make it all up. We make ourselves up. The Greeks made up atoms. They happened to be right. In matters of religion there is nothing there to disprove, there is no mystery but nature.
Unless you have a universal instance of the fingerpost?
If everything is made up then what does the making up? If we’re made up and all of reality is made up, then what is it made up out of?
Do you know what you did there?
I don’t, what did I do?
All, every, human expression, thought, word, action is synthetic. No? Made up. We make it all up. No? Anything we don't? We make ourselves up, we actually have a part in our own emergence. In the chain of factorial emergence, complexity on complexity on... complexity from the ground of being. No?
That's what comes out of a man.
What goes in is sense data, second hand, third rate, from reality. No? Stirs the stuff in the bone pot. No?
The natural infinite ground of being makes all stuff up. Including this. The lab is empty and the chemicals talk. Bags of enzymes realise they are bags of enzymes.
It's all reality, but not all reality is equal. The taste of the brew fermented in our bone pots is not the taste of anything we're tasting. In itself. No?
And no superfluous outside intentional agency required.
Unless you know something I don't. You know, like a universal instance of the fingerpost?
No?
Nah. For us to "have a part in our own emergence" means that there is an "us" already there to do the emerging. So there's a kernel of "us," and then there's sense data and then there's reality that is evidently in layers. So it sounds like there are plenty of things that aren't made up. Sure, you're not a scientific realist, why would you be it's boring. All language is made up? I mean, pretty roundly argued against by all sorts of linguists, philosophers, psychologists, and cognitive scientists but yeah man why not. So we drift into constructivism with a dash of philosophical idealism for spice. But since we've already acknowledged that there are things that aren't made up, I'm not sure why we'd then suddenly go all constructivist.
Regardless, my question was what does the making up if everything is made up, your answer is that we do the making up because we make ourselves, so there's a part of us that isn't made up, and that seems like a contradiction to me.
Well it would wouldn't it. As your reiteration of the - meaningless - question, preceded by specious fallacy, ad hominem, false dichotomy, shows.
We are synthesized by emergent evolution before we emerge. We are hard wired for experience including language, morality. So yes all language is made up, one way or another.
Once we have emerged, once there is an "us", in the royal plural, utterly dependent on us, then that entity participates in further emergent development. Like this "conversation".
I'm not sure how humans can be hard wired for something and then that something be made up. If we're hard wired for it then surely it's natural? So that would mean it isn't made up? It also seems difficult to argue that a universal feature of human experience and culture is made up. Unless you're using "made up" in a way that I'm not familiar with.
The hard wiring is evolved. I.e. made up. Synthesized. Nature, from the natural ground of being, synthesizes. Makes stuff up. What universal features of human experience aren't made up?
In what sense is evolution a made up process? By ‘made up’ do you simply mean something constructed? In the way that all biological organisms can be said to be constructed out of various bits of biological stuff?
Sorry, I hadn't inferred non-evolutionary. But if "synthesized" you mean a new organization of existing materials, are you not courting an infinite regression? How would the first primates acquire something like adaptation if they themselves did not possess/embody it? What is the name of the inaugural adaptation?
I don't think anyone is saying that faith and church attendance are synonymous.
But it is a communal expression of faith. As we have been mentioning and a chance for those who don’t believe to see communal faith in action. Not that is the reason they do Food Bank etc, it is a consequence.
As to the mystery. Well God in many ways is a mystery. Our faith must have that in it.
I have communal faith that people are worth it. Nothing to do with religion.
What mystery? There are infinite real ones of of course. But God isn't one of them. He's a synthetic mystery from irreconcilable arbitrary religious propositions.
And yet what evidence do you have that God is synthetic? You can believe that and are free to do so, I will not deny that. That said what actual evidence do you have to back up your view on a discussion board such as this. In a sub board such as Purgatory. We can neither prove it disprove outright. God will always be a mystery to us because we cannot fully comprehend him.
Missed this! We make God up. And that is no belief. It is a fact. I'm not free to 'believe' anything else. I know. Ancient Egypt, The Bible, Judaism, Christianity, Islam are synthetic. Fiction. Made up. They made themselves up. Like all religion, all cultures, all art, even science and philosophy and history. We make it all up. We make ourselves up. The Greeks made up atoms. They happened to be right. In matters of religion there is nothing there to disprove, there is no mystery but nature.
Unless you have a universal instance of the fingerpost?
If everything is made up then what does the making up? If we’re made up and all of reality is made up, then what is it made up out of?
Do you know what you did there?
I don’t, what did I do?
All, every, human expression, thought, word, action is synthetic. No? Made up. We make it all up. No? Anything we don't? We make ourselves up, we actually have a part in our own emergence. In the chain of factorial emergence, complexity on complexity on... complexity from the ground of being. No?
That's what comes out of a man.
What goes in is sense data, second hand, third rate, from reality. No? Stirs the stuff in the bone pot. No?
The natural infinite ground of being makes all stuff up. Including this. The lab is empty and the chemicals talk. Bags of enzymes realise they are bags of enzymes.
It's all reality, but not all reality is equal. The taste of the brew fermented in our bone pots is not the taste of anything we're tasting. In itself. No?
And no superfluous outside intentional agency required.
Unless you know something I don't. You know, like a universal instance of the fingerpost?
No?
Nah. For us to "have a part in our own emergence" means that there is an "us" already there to do the emerging. So there's a kernel of "us," and then there's sense data and then there's reality that is evidently in layers. So it sounds like there are plenty of things that aren't made up. Sure, you're not a scientific realist, why would you be it's boring. All language is made up? I mean, pretty roundly argued against by all sorts of linguists, philosophers, psychologists, and cognitive scientists but yeah man why not. So we drift into constructivism with a dash of philosophical idealism for spice. But since we've already acknowledged that there are things that aren't made up, I'm not sure why we'd then suddenly go all constructivist.
Regardless, my question was what does the making up if everything is made up, your answer is that we do the making up because we make ourselves, so there's a part of us that isn't made up, and that seems like a contradiction to me.
Well it would wouldn't it. As your reiteration of the - meaningless - question, preceded by specious fallacy, ad hominem, false dichotomy, shows.
We are synthesized by emergent evolution before we emerge. We are hard wired for experience including language, morality. So yes all language is made up, one way or another.
Once we have emerged, once there is an "us", in the royal plural, utterly dependent on us, then that entity participates in further emergent development. Like this "conversation".
I'm not sure how humans can be hard wired for something and then that something be made up. If we're hard wired for it then surely it's natural? So that would mean it isn't made up? It also seems difficult to argue that a universal feature of human experience and culture is made up. Unless you're using "made up" in a way that I'm not familiar with.
The hard wiring is evolved. I.e. made up. Synthesized. Nature, from the natural ground of being, synthesizes. Makes stuff up. What universal features of human experience aren't made up?
In what sense is evolution a made up process? By ‘made up’ do you simply mean something constructed? In the way that all biological organisms can be said to be constructed out of various bits of biological stuff?
Yep. Self-constructed. Emergent. What isn't? All the way down and back to the (Godless) ground of being.
Sorry, I hadn't inferred non-evolutionary. But if "synthesized" you mean a new organization of existing materials, are you not courting an infinite regression? How would the first primates acquire something like adaptation if they themselves did not possess/embody it? What is the name of the inaugural adaptation?
Reality is an infinite regression, just not qualitatively. I'm sorry, what is this evolutionary adaptation if it isn't natural selection, the state of a population obtained by natural selection and/or a maintained functional trait in the individual also so obtained? What is the inaugural adaptation?
How do you know if you believe in God or Christian teaching, or any other doctrine or ideology that is not easily proven or disproven by material evidence?
I know that many people with a healthy faith experience a significant amount of doubt that is sometimes quite strong, but I am not even sure how to tell if I have ever believed any of the religious things that I have said that I believed.
Is just saying that you believe without the intent to deceive others enough? Or does real belief require something more?
Maybe these three things?
1. I am not intending to deceive anyone, including myself, when I espouse the belief.
2. I take the belief sufficiently seriously that it affects (at least some of) my choices about what I do.
3. Following (2), the feedback from my experience and interaction with others does not suggest my unconscious and conscious ways of knowing are at odds - things generally seem coherent.
I speculate that the longer points 2 and 3 hold then the stronger the belief might become, even if the initial faith was quite small. Like how trust or love build up from small steps, maybe?
Comments
In what sense is evolution a made up process? By ‘made up’ do you simply mean something constructed? In the way that all biological organisms can be said to be constructed out of various bits of biological stuff?
Sorry, I hadn't inferred non-evolutionary. But if "synthesized" you mean a new organization of existing materials, are you not courting an infinite regression? How would the first primates acquire something like adaptation if they themselves did not possess/embody it? What is the name of the inaugural adaptation?
Yep. Self-constructed. Emergent. What isn't? All the way down and back to the (Godless) ground of being.
Just checking.
Not currently, no.
Ta, folks.
Reality is an infinite regression, just not qualitatively. I'm sorry, what is this evolutionary adaptation if it isn't natural selection, the state of a population obtained by natural selection and/or a maintained functional trait in the individual also so obtained? What is the inaugural adaptation?
Maybe these three things?
1. I am not intending to deceive anyone, including myself, when I espouse the belief.
2. I take the belief sufficiently seriously that it affects (at least some of) my choices about what I do.
3. Following (2), the feedback from my experience and interaction with others does not suggest my unconscious and conscious ways of knowing are at odds - things generally seem coherent.
I speculate that the longer points 2 and 3 hold then the stronger the belief might become, even if the initial faith was quite small. Like how trust or love build up from small steps, maybe?