I really liked the philosophy guy that argues belief of humans in the higher power and our ability to be aware that they are existing and awake as if we feel someone put us here. Even having to ask the questions if there is a higher power or the need of asking such questions without anyone influencing me about religion existing leads me somehow to the truth that here is a higher power... Sometimes walking outside with no distractions and looking around yourself, nature & the sky and the awareness you are here because of something bigger gives me the simple answer.
"I'm confused. But I now appreciate the power of Philosophy of Religion." I feel the same way Robert. Hopefully the power of philosophical knowledge will lead us to the Creator, with no more need for arguments or proofs.
God is within you and dropping the idea of external God and seeking within leads to Nirvana. Source of our thoughts is consciousness. Consciousness is God.
@@chandersinghdhillon9490 The Vedas explain everything, but not in English. The meanings of words in Sanskrit do not require dictionaries to understand, because the words are constructed from the laws of grammar. The specific meanings come from the relationship between concepts and the whole. Life is essentially characterized by three aspects that are commonly translated as existence, consciousness and bliss. So consciousness is the aspect of life that is situated between existence and the complete fulfillment of desire. Consciousness is unlimited, allowing definitions to point to it but not encompass it. Abstract concepts are the space in which physical objects exist, so the abstract is more real rather than less.
@@vladimir0700 Your conception of God may not be a reflection of anything in reality, but the understanding of God as the ultimate whole allows the statement to make perfect sense.
You shouldn’t have have an inappropriate emotional reaction to the idea of emotions as a route to knowledge. Interest, curiosity and understanding are emotions that are fairly fundamental to the pursuit of any knowledge. So are wonder and uncertainty.We can make progress in understanding these, though I guess more in a narrative rather than technocratic framework.I think that’s what religious traditions attempt to do.
I always see the mind of God as the problems he or she deals with. The knowledge of good and evil is always a human game. God's problem is what is in between total control and freewill. Discipline is gained through self control. But, we also need to be out of control to create anything new and or to simply adjust the details of what's already given. Mediators always create new guide lines, but always become like God in turn. Is it just we utilize all the aspects of life and allow the learning curb to adjust itself and just lead our selves to what we are designed to do.
I suspect that in the interest of time that no attention was given to the philosophers actually attempting to define god FIRST before exploring the question of whether he/she/it exists.
I so want all of CTT on DVD. On Eleonore Stump's statement "...anything with a mind and a will is a person" seems to discount all animal life. As far I as know, animals have a mind and will.
I believe in God..truely and very deeply in heart..so i don't need any reason for it..believing in God make me Happy..liiving in love..living in peace and harmony...believing in God for loving among peoples in the world for peace and brotherhood of men..
You are similar to the nutjob who believes, deeply and surely, the beauty in his dog's poop and that god communicates to him through that fecal matter, and he does not need reasons and other evidence, for or against, because that poop makes him a "good person." Meanwhile, another nutjob in a different place thinks the same about horse s hi t. Both nutjobs believe in the concept of supreme s hi t, just different denominations.
Your statement is correct. You have beliefs therefore you do not need any knowledge. You don't question your beliefs. You simply concede that they are true without any evidence. I would guess that before you go to a doctor you would like evidence that the person actually is a doctor and has a license to practice medicine though, right? Would you go to a doctor that just said that he or she believed they were a doctor?
And just where did you ‘hear’ that ? A little critical thinking would be of great service to you. Oh, not sure what it means to think critically ? Look it up !
We die. Unless one is suffering deeply, this is not a comfortable truth. Religion serves two purposes about the meaning of life and death: 1) Gives us a sense of deep purpose and meaning which is larger than ourselves 2) A promise of surviving physical death by eternal reward or reincarnation. Religion is a very thoughtful human creation that assuages the mind of discomforting thoughts of meaninglessness, and our lives being short, thereby meaningless as well. Religion is an idea people can rally round. It serves a purpose.
edit: I was way off. I strawmanned. I apologize. Alvin; the fact that most people believe in God “or something like God” can be explained fully via naturalistic mechanisms- even if theism is true. The ubiquity of belief doesn’t require that God somehow fixed or wired our brains to have such beliefs.
Most people, understandably, thought earth was flat, until we understood it is round. and of course not much can be done about flat earthers. If more people believed in god in the future than in the past considering our knowledge of natural world was meager and it grew and will be even greater, then the "more people" argument may hold some water.
I'm not sure his statement is even true... Most eastern religions don't believe in "something like God"... And atheism is picking up a lot lately... I'd bet less than 50% of the world believes in the western concept of God
@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns Yes. He did not say that ubiquity of belief proves God. He said if God exists and hardwired us to know, then it would not be irrational to believe God exists, if you define rational as a properly functioning mind thinking as it should. Those are two different claims
The Jewish and Christian Bible are 2 religious and cultural stories among thousands of others that have existed over time and at the core of every culture. You must keep in mind that there are hundreds of variations of every major world religion today. It is simply because people take religion literally and do not understand it as a way for humans to find meaning in a world that doesn't provide it for them, so religions are created. Religions help humans find meaning in a world where meaning is not obvious. And that's why they have been created.
My question is , does God actually have a "chosen favorite people". If that's the case , how con anyone others created by God hope to be treated equally. Just a thought.
@@ibperson7765 personally , I don't believe there are "chosen" or "favorites". These are human attributes. If God has favorites - then that would make God as simple as us. It would be petty and silly.
Best argument for belief in God is that true vs false, or assertions and claims at all, would not exist in a monist physicalist universe. Ideas cannot be “about” anything since they have no physical connection. Minds, truth, even consciousness. There is another world, the world of ideas and truth and awareness and knowing. Any exploration of this world leads to the great Discovery.
"Best argument for belief in God is that true vs false, or assertions and claims at all, would not exist in a monist physicalist universe." This assertion is wrong for two reasons. 1 - you conflate monism with physicalism. They appear similar but are very different, IMO. 2 - Even in a monist model, dissent is possible, especially in the realm of apparently non-material phenomenon like consciousness. Your assertion is internally conflicted. Self refuting.
@@con.troller4183 Physicalism is one type of monism. So “monist physicalist” has an unnecessary adjective, but wanted to be clear. I just assume all atheists are monist materialists (which actually turn out to be physicalists when questioned as they certainly believe in non-material physical things like energy and light and charge etc). The reason I assume that is it is the dogma of the day, so if one hasn’t read outside the bubble and then thought about it, they will be one. For example, there arent even Platonists among the public anymore. Platonists think true and false and laws of logic fully exist, but arent material, so not everything is material. Even Goedels theorem shows you can’t have truth just algorithmically, from matter. It takes mind, not just apparent mind. Anyway many people also think consciousness itself disproves physicalism. They would say: The universe can't just be matter. Otherwise there would be no subjective side. It would all just be happening in the dark, no awareness, no knowing. Increasing complexity doesnt make a whole separate reality spring from this side. Or: Goedels theorem there must be mind, not apparent mind. Consider this: information theory has advanced to the point appearing to be absolute laws, but no one can rigorously define information; it takes a mind. No one can say rigorously what makes some configuration (of matter or charge etc) a bit, as opposed to just a physical configuration. It can only be a bit TO someone. So if they don’t exist it is incoherent that these info theory laws are so absolute. A bit requires mind, not just apparent mind. A someone must be there at some point. Anyone who really understands Goedels theorem cannot believe that only the physical universe exists. In any analysis, there is a step that is just called, "Oh c'mon, that's obvious; if you can't take THAT as a given then no one can ever say anything." But who is the "you" who is gonna “c’mon” and take it as given? To make a claim, there must always be an agent - EVEN THE CLAIM that there are no agents only apparent agents, ie the claim that only matter is fundamental and mind is not. Even that claim requires an agent to make. If mind is needed to make any claim about reality, then Mind is what is at the fundamental core of reality. Saying otherwise is a self-contradictory worldview. Penrose’s most recent interview goes into this. Is pretty interesting all around though.
@@ibperson7765 Thanks for your detailed reply. I will give it a closer read this evening but a couple of things jumped out. I was put in mind of Penrose (Quantum Consciousness) and then noticed you referred to him in your final paragraph. While I agree with much of what you say, I conclude differently. Partly because I believe that mind is a localized and individual configuration of matter, as opposed to awareness, which pervades the universe. No time to expand on this at the moment, since my localized arrangement of matter is insisting that I get to work. Cheers.
@@con.troller4183 makes sense. Thanks. Reminds me of Rupert Spira. Is compelling. But to my surprise we agree that the material is not all there is. Much of what i wrote was therefore based on a confusion. God bless and good luck w work.
Every thing of universe is alive, we come from universe, universe is alive, so we alive, our God is universe, so fire as god, air as god, water as god, soil as god, man is mortal, soul is immortal,
To deny the existence of a deity in such absolute terms, requires a belief in the myth of progress. Culturally, God is everywhere, and always has been. To replace God requires an alternative that fills all the god gaps, not just a new creation mythos, or future materialist utopia, but a metaphysical reworking of every aspect of human existence. Currently, atheism is a child of privilege, largely western, geeky and male.
Speculative philosophy can only approach the tip of the toe of the Personality of Godhead, but Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the Supreme Lord's autobiography describing Himself authoritatively.
It seems to me that there is more to whether god does or does not exist as always, but the message behind any claims that of existence is 100% percent unchangeable for a truth that is time immemorial and logical. As it already has numerous issues throughout all world teachings, and any false teaching in any way could easily have unintended destructive consequences unknown and known. Beliefs of any irrationalities forcefully imposed by philosophies, religions, sciences and that speak to the material would not speak of the spiritual. And with any angst created regarding death among these would be false if it is then erroneously made up for in the material realm as their main values when there is a supposed logical truth present. A counter value for its compensation and a preoccupation with the palpable things which are substantial, material and a mental value. As something spiritual would not be perceived with the usual senses and would not be comprehensible in an intellect manner and any other would seem to be a bit cultish.
Why can't they do that? One can make value judgements without believing in god. Actually Theists are the ones who must have no value judgements, since everything is created by God and therefore universally good. Even atheists... ;)
@@con.troller4183 That’s a logical question. Thanks. Alright what’s your basis for good or valuable? Without referring to other subjective words that mean positive. If the universe is only matter: there’s no “Good particle” so how can anything be good? I didnt say a good God would only create good. He’s building redemptive history which has immeasurable good over eternity. His judgement determines what’s good. He imputes all goodness and evil is a deprivation thereof. But let’s focus on my first part there
Basically they take properties of God and try to work their way backward to our reality in this universe. The more God and life in this reality share in common then God is more likely. The more our plight as living creatures can be justified to the highest standard the more likely God is. So if I made an effort to prove God I might imagine that if life itself is gloriously magnificent and fulfilling beyond anything, in its ideal form. That virtues are logically consistent and that love, joy, and peace is the ultimate aim of life and thus God's greatest goal. Then I might justify the notion that in order to see the top of the mountain you must first experience and traverse the very bottom. No doubt we are at the very bottom where all ultimate questions are unknown. And all we can do is wonder and have awe. Existential angst, and the whole gamut of emotions about existence are very real and we are starving to know greater realities. And yet we can't even know that our existence has any inherent meaning or truth whatsoever. Is God so great that it's worth it all to stand here at the very bottom of existence having no knowledge beyond our own finite existence. Is there some ultimate choice I must make to enter into the knowledge that God does exist and can be related to? For me it is far from obvious that God exists. I see no solid reference in this reality to the existence of God. Certainly I could take my finite existence and make the complete most of it and die fulfilled certain of ceasing to exist. But there is a longing for God and God's attributes. True love can make one curious as to why life is or is not meant to be. Then there are the usual problems of evil and senseless suffering and Senseless torment. What need do we have that we must stand separate from a God reality in a place such as this? Must I hang my hat on Cicero's comment that the greater the difficulty the greater the glory will be. Or perhaps I'm setting myself up for a big letdown hoping God exists. Just enjoy the ride or push on toward eternal life. Or perhaps both. The struggle, the gift, or a sea of straws with empty promises.
There's no need for longing for God's attributes. As God's Spirit children, we have ALL the attributes that God has. We have mind, consciousness, awareness, desire, creativity, love, ect ect. A lot of people blame God for all the bad. God Created us - WE created the rest. It's like God is like the ocean and we are the individual drops that make up the ocean. Each drop has ALL the same properties (or attributes) of the ocean, but it is ONLY when (or if) WE come together do we have the power of the ocean. We have the power to create Heaven on Earth - if we truly desire such. We have to get past the lie (illusion) that we are separate and evolve enough to realize the Truth that "WE ARE ALL ONE".
So if there is intelligent life outside earth that is non-humanoid; Whose image of god is correct?? ...or does it invalidate the god hypothesis? We are not programmed to believe in god!... ...in the past, our scientific knowledge was more limited; so it was more common to assign god to explain that which we don’t know the answer to. ...because having answers is needed to run a society...even if the answers are not true.
@Übermensch this is just naming a Stars or Astrology, but Quran has Different names for all planets,Meteor,Komets called as Kawakib and Sun is actually a Star called Nujum/Najm
Listening to people reason or argue about the existence of God is like hearing people debating weather Uncle Sam is real. If you'd hear that you'd think 'well they don't get it.' They're missing the point. Uncle Sam is a metaphor for the state. Analogously God is a metaphor for reality regardless of what it is ontologically. Uncle Sam is the state personified, and God is reality personified.
His arguments for god are quite silly. Most of the world once believed the sun revolved around the earth but through reason and science we now know that was unequivocally wrong. We have this belief in god because of course we started out as primitive men who thought that there had to be a creator of us just as we all have mothers and fathers. We are no longer primitive., at least most of us aren’t.
The almighty God is normally supposed to BOTH A) being able to make decisions and B) to know the future. Here you should make a distinction between "optional futures" - God could maybe interact and modify them - and "THE ONE FUTURE", because ONLY ONE DETERMINED future will eventually come true. (The one that will become our ONLY ONE PAST). Well, God is supposed to be able to get the best performance: to know that ONE future. But then God MUST JUST LET IT UNFOLD EXACTLY like it is, He is NOT ALLOWED to change anything in it, because God makes no errors in his knowledge of the future! God cannot decide ANYTHING more: ALL God's decisions are already included in that future. What above means that EITHER God is free to decide, but this implies He does NOT know the ONE future, OR He knows the ONE future, but this prevents Him from making ANY further decision. Even worse than that, GOD WOULD BE OBLIGED to HIMSELF slavishly follow that one determined future. This all means the two abilities A) and B) are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE ("either", "or", but never "BOTH" at the same time). Since obviously God was able to make his decisions and we are also confident that He knows the future, the path followed must be from A) to B). When that transition occurred ? Certainly not during the man's history, of course that must have happened BEFORE the birth of the universe. However, God only arrived at step B) BUT WITHOUT ENTERING that step, we saw earlier that God is absolutely NOT INTERESTED IN TAKING PART to that future: He would be obliged to "SLAVISHLY" follow it. The God's actions in that one future (for example words) will AUTOMATICALLY come true instead. In other words that one future will become true WITHOUT GOD. NOBODY will be there to take the God's actions: that NOBODY is the SPIRIT OF GOD. God was thus FREE from any other duty. But where has the almighty God gone ? Of course He is now the Son of God. The almighty God dropped his then USELESS power to become like a normal man: Jesus. Thus, the almighty God is only IN THE PAST, "no one ever saw God" ""The world has not known you".
nothing can find God since there is nothing other than God :) our thoughts makes us feel there are multiple things but, reality is there is only One Thing (God) !
Let me get this straight. If someone can talk a good game... god exists. "Philosophy is merely the byproduct of misunderstanding language." said Wittgenstein. That goes double for the Philosophy of Religion.
In Order to "find God" first, one has to ask... What is God? Then, a reasonably intelligent person soon will realize that... God is an idea! And... What is an idea? Well, being and idea a concept... Why badder on trying to find anything about a concept that it doesn't exist in reality? But... Pay attention to Religion that are the Legions of Ra the Sun God and... Amen Amon Ra!
At one time a lot of people believed in Zeus, thus because their minds were functioning normally the idea of Zeus is rational and therefore Zeus exists.
Joe Sharpe “gods” are what humans use when we don’t know the answer to a question... We say a “god “ thingy is doing it... Before we could explain how the sun moved across the sky, we invented an answer... “Magic being is moving the sun across the sky using his magic powers “... It’s a primitive thinking answer... The question has changed tho.. Where did life and the universe come from?? “Must be magic entity with magic powers doing it using magic “... It’s the same primitive thinking... We have outgrown it
The problem is choosing to believe. Belief isn't a choice, therefore it isn't something to look for. Beliefs are ideas forced upon a person. People are believed to exist because we die if we don't believe in people. Cars are believed to exist because we die if we don't believe in cars. Morality is believed to exist because we die if we don't believe in it. Try not believing in god for awhile and see if u survive. Everyone does.
I don't think it is a foregone conclusion that if G-d existed, than belief in Him would be warranted. It may still be irrational if you could make a reasonable argument that G-d may not want you to have belief in Him - for some reason, or for some period of time. Perhaps He wants you to come to true knowledge of Him - and not to come to this awareness in faith or in a "properly basic" manner.
God is manifest in the totality of consciousness when in that moment his presence is acknowledged. If it were not in consciousness we would not know him.
Mr Plantinger says that you are not warranted say God doesn't exist unless you can show God doesn't exist and Robert finds some way of saying that is not really circular - don't ask me how. Mr P. also states that belief in God is rational because most people believe it. First, most people in the world may believe it, but most people in the western world probably don't and most people in Europe certainly don't, second, since when was truth decided by a popularity contest?
The only possible reaction to accepting the existence of God is to abandon the accepted, normal way of life and go through the wicker gate that leads to the pilgrim’s life path. Anything else is simple failure to accept the reality of God’s omnipotent existence. You may think you believe - like priests and lay church people do - but you are deceiving yourself; you have not the courage of your convictions. You can become an expert on Buddhist practice, but if you are still there with your job and your family, it’s all just pie in the sky The world you see around you is not God’s world. Anyone can see from a simple reading of the Old Testament that the material world around you is today’s product of generation after generation failing to follow God and leading lives of delusion as described above
You shall seek me and you shall find me when you search for me with all of your heart. You can't find god by experiments or thinking. God reveals himself to those he chooses. The humble and pure of heart not the so called learned.
O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, thank you for hiding these things from those who think themselves wise and clever, and for revealing them to the childlike.
So, if god chooses not to reveal ‘himself’ to me, then woe to me as I will go to hell for not believing in ‘him’. That will be god’s fault that I am burning in the fiery of the netherworld. So, god is love ? Does god only love those to whom he has revealed himself to ? That’s some god you have concocted. Do us all a favour please. Complete at least eight grade before you post comments.
Can philosophy find meaning of this universe, obviously it did, even if no such meaning exist. We wouldn't talk about it and definitely not over internet if meaning wouldn't be created, by property of human mind to enjoy exploring reality, by seeking for deeper understanding of it's workings and potentials. Science doesn't do meaning unless this is desired goal of a project, doesn't work well beyond well defined parameters, so philosophy had plenty of space and potentials to work with. Universe is probably just a physical entity, maybe just a temporal phenomena or accidental anomaly. Life could be just molecular chemistry, the way potentials cycle over some material geometry, only forces, no matter the illusion of something special those lumps of material self induce, to keep chemical processes going until nature balance us out of eminent physical reduction. It's because of local material composition and influx of energy from a star, driving chemical forces around the planet in certain patterns, not life but electric plasma and radiation caught in unstable elementary soup, just like aurora over northern sky, but on a material fluid surface. And consciousness, this is what brain do when detached from sensory inputs, try to project volumetric shapes and colorful patterns into organic electrical noise. What reality are we even talk about here, who cares about universe or it's entire history, it will all go away together with a each individual person and never return. This is what real multiverse is, space branching with birth of every conscious individual, since we have free imagination and are not bound by physical or chemical rules. A brand new copy of universe is created trough our birth, than growth and die with each and every single one of us, regardless of material nothing that exist as we perceive it only inside our individual minds. Universe is everything we say God is, it's existence of entire reality, beyond what we can see and experience. Prove universe doesn't exist and our commonly shared sense of sanity is over. Can philosophy of religion find God, i don't see any reason why it couldn't. It might be i just created a part of it, by claiming multiverse exist only in minds of individual observers, but not like multiplication of physical universe, since mater alone can't chose what to do with physical potentials, but our minds can shape any kind of variation, distinctive to every individual self. We are share same origins of life, so biological multiverse God does exist, by definition and this is a fact nobody can deny.
Philosophy can find as many different Gods as you want. For any given conclusion, there is always a set of metaphysical assumptions from where you can derive it.
@@ferdinandkraft857 Classical philosophy is based on general epistemology, logic, axioms, geometry, ethics and such, but philosophy of religion is kinda different, not founded in materialistic perception of the world but rather on humanism, traditions, aesthetics, secret geometry or occult mysticism. It's because of pagan origins, ancient Greeks and Romans believed in multitude of gods, never the less they gave rise to monotheistic theology, epistemological methodology and modern way of life. We could say classical philosophy invented a God, as a logical consequence from their careful studies. Than idea of God lead to naturalistic ideology, resulting in particular kind of religious philosophy, favorite among kings and politicians up to a present age. Classical philosophy became modern scientific and artistic community, whereas their product became a new breed of philosophy fit for modern times. Here's an example, what would Plato or Socrates say if they could meet Jesus, Buddha or Mohamed, would they recognize a simple African shepherd as divine being, capable to create and rule entire universe or they would go and ask those guys many interesting questions they struggled with all their lives? Old school philosopher would never do that unless convinced by out of this world phenomena, infinitely larger and more powerful than any man could undertake, since all humans are made from same kind human flesh and bones that tear and brake if stressed over certain limits. Philosophy of ideology doesn't care about realism, since all is just a manifestation of natural forces and hidden order of living, if we can imagine it than it could be or became real, so they must ask what does those sensations, visions and ideas mean for future of human consciousness. They ask very deep questions, so new things will emerge from their research and explorations just the same, real like life was a real possibility when Earth was still just another barren rock or times when human were just another kind of animal, but than miracles happened and all in universe has changed forever. Nature is what it is, a physical machine not capable to do anything meaningful on it's own, but if enough people are thinking about something long enough, new kinds of potentials get accumulated in a non local dimension, those opening space for extraordinary and not very probable events that would never ever arise from physical causes alone. Philosophy of religion will bring an end to all ideology, religious traditions and superstitions, old concepts will be replaced by new symbols and believes, fit for a new kind of humanism and new solar system based civilization. No religion will survive, old ideologies will be replaces by some evolved concepts that will unite and fill emptiness of our cultivated, expanded and enhanced, little simple minds. One more example, what did first astronauts though when they reached orbit around the planet, did they thought about technology that kept space capsule in one piece or did they got scared and start to doubt their sanity, regardless of training, knowledge and personal traits? It could be all just physics and under control of mathematics, than again it could be they went to far beyond unknown, where powerful entities exist inside strange, star lit void, nobody could know and prepare them for. Or how it must feel like when you suddenly wake up on International space station, strapped in floating restrains, before your mind can grasp what happened and realize everything will be alright somehow? It must take a lot of faith not to panic and make mistakes, asking yourself over and over again was it all worth it and how will this end, but than again, this is how first explorers must have felt on their voyage to an undiscovered continent or extreme regions of a planet. Human consciousness can't change over night, it takes time and many brave apostles must sacrifice before new state of awareness can be formed and spiritual sensations assimilated into collective human mentality. Change is a long and complicated psychological process, not just a small step, great adventures always feel like a religious experience.
Please send me message if possible i don't usually reach out but i have the answer to consciousness that will ease your fear of death to the point of irrelevance. Its so much more simpler than ever thought yet also factual and evidential to have a sense of self actualisation and relief. Regards.
Perhaps Mr. Kuhn is a computer hologram, guided by artificial intelligence, constructed by illuminate behind every world government. Unless you meat him in person, how can you be sure he is real?
Ruby Badilla will you not paste these statements . I am being sarcastic about Mr Kuhn. Yes I am an atheist and agree with your statements to some degree I guess. Also respond to comments by addressing the comment directly in proportion to the comments context. Pasting is lazy. You are not helping your cause. You sound like an idiot. Dont be stuck on stupid.
Just because we do not think about the need for evidence that other people exist because it is trivially true, it does not mean, if one insists that we can not bring the evidence to prove it to a reasonable person. That does not apply to God. So it is a category mistake. "That does not seem to me much of a decent argument" is not an argument. You have to give a positive argument. Before we finally were convinced (well barring the people from flat-earth society) that earth is round and not center of the universe, a day before that all of humanity believed that earth is flat. That is not an argument that earth is flat. The lady starts by asserting what she needs to prove. That is not how arguments work in a discussion. Sad.
The problem is arguments against God do not end as non sequiturs, they attempt to replace factors attributed to a deity (consciousness, altruism, creativity, etc) with answers that require more postulates, and are therefor inflationary, or with axioms that are by no means axiomatic. The comments on this video illustrate people don't just provide poor answers, in many case they don't even understand the problems posed by the question. Polemical atheism (aka New Atheism) offers such people a chance to think they've covered all the bases without doing the groundwork. It's an ideological movement, not a philosophical one, and uses the language of politics to address the issue.
@@borderlands6606 did not understand what you said. Sorry. "New Atheism" - is simply lack of special deference to assertions made by the religious, just because those assertions are about god or about one's personal faith. In the marketplace of ideas, even the religious ideas have to be held to same scrutiny as any other. Traditionally religious have enjoyed much deference, now that is being taken away they do not like it. In the end, that "New" part is not important, the "Atheism" part is. The "New" is just about the approach.
God has given us a gift. Let us share our present with the world. God do exist and the proof is in mathematics. Here is that proof. Infinity = 1/x(delta) + 1. This equation says a number, or any number is a set in space that change with space. It reveals how one number is different from any other number. In Number Theory this equation delineates the process as to how we count or measure anything using numbers. In physics this equation reads: Gravity is matter changing with space. It combines Relativity/fractured space with Quantum mechanics/spatial expansion and information/complete symmetry of a space. How dose God fit into this equation? This equation is God's mathematical name. God's name in this equation reads: God's Mind Is Man Changed With God. Breakdown: God's mind is infinite. In math this measure out as the set of infinity In math (1/x) represents a fraction of a whole. Any child is a fraction of a parent and man according to the Bible is God's child. Therefore, man is a fraction of God Change in math is represented by the Greek letter (delta) and it denotes a difference of some kind. Plus (+) in math means to combine or add something with something. There is only one God. In math the number 1 means something, or someone is complete and individual from all the rest. Spelled out: God's Mind (Infinity) is (=) Man (1/x) Changed (delta) With (+) God (1). Scientific Method Step 1 Observation: Math can deliver unbreakable truths such as 2+2 will always = 4 Step 2 Question: Do math and Divinity share a common truth? Step 3 Hypothesis: If God exist, He should be found in the house of mathematics. Step 4 Prediction: God's Mind Is Man Change With God is an equation Step 5 Test: Any number (Infinity) is (=) a set in space (1/x) that change (x^2) with (+) space (1)) Note: "X" describes any set, (1) describes any kind of space physical or otherwise This equation tells us why 2 feet is not the same as 2 inches. Both distances are measured out as 2 units of space but there is a change or difference between both units. They are each sets in a space of distance but they represent changes in their measurement of distance. Step 6 Iterate: New look at what makes up reality. Reality consists of 3 domains of space. a. Fractured space or matter b. spatial expansion or energy c. Complete or unbroken space Step 7 Conclusion: We now know Infinity is real therefore the value in enumeration demand God exists otherwise the domain for enumeration would be incomplete. We know the domain for enumeration is complete because we can count. God must be able to count too all the way to Infinity because His mathematical name tells us what is any number. I wrote a research doc looking deeper into this matter. Anyone who wants a free copy can contact me at: william.mabon@yahoo.com God's Mind Is Man Changed With God
@@LameBushido , sometimes conciseness is the way to answer questions, and this situation is one of them. Please humor us by answering anything other than my response. After all, philosophy and theology are the way to go in obtaining knowledge (snicker, snicker). Thanks.
@@86645ut Philosophy is about asking conceptual questions and forming systemic arguments to try and answer them. It is not about "obtaining knowledge" as you say, that is science, a methodology of gathering empirical data and forming predictions and laws out of them. They're just different things. This is basic information you can find on a wikipedia page. Grow up.
@@86645ut I'm saying philosophy is an approach to answering the question. Whatever answers come will lead to more questions. It doesn't end, this is not in the realm of empiricism. Stick to the sciences if this is beyond you.
You should release some interviews with physicists. With all those videos about philosophy and religion, your comment section is attraction a lot of strange figures.
At 8:00 Plantinga says: Well, What about belief in God without an argument? Is that irrational in that way? Surely not! Again, most of the world population believes in God or something like God, and the vast majority of those people don't belive on the basis of argument. So it's not irrational either. That is the weakest argument ever. His whole interview was very bland and disappointing.
You can’t find what doesn’t exist. I gave up on the whole god thing a long time ago after much thought and research. After a certain amount of searching you just have to admit to yourself that there’s nothing there
Listening to christians talk about "god" is like listening to third graders talk about physics. They sound like such blissfully ignorant simpletons who think they're experts and have it all figured out because they just learned about gravity, lol. If you want to believe in "god," your best bet is to go to Judaism. They invented (discovered?) the whole thing and have it all worked out to perfection. They're the pros. No one else even comes close to the richness of their philosophy, certainly not these watered-down, weakened, and in christianity's case, Disney-fied derivative versions (per/versions).
@@kootdirker2448 Let me know when you find out. That kind of information comes only by revelation through living prophets. Do you know any? Jesus Christ is God's only begotten son. His mother was mortal and his Father is immortal. Christ had power to lay his life down and to take it up again. He broke the bands of death and rose from the dead on the third day.
First speaker weak arguments. Very weak. I do not care about warrant; I care about what is true. You cannot prove a god does not exist, therefore I can assume a god exists. What kind of bull is that? And Stump...what do you say about her? You cannot argue a god into existence.
Argument is, it doesn't matter, if you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt God can't exist, it's just a believe, like any other, therefore is OK and can't be prevented.
@@xspotbox4400 That why it is pointless. You can substitute god with any other thing, such as ghosts or faeries or magic or Vishnu or Allah. Just circular reasoning.
@@andrebrown8969 Almost there. Point is, if you can't prove something can't exist, than how can you be sure it doesn't exist? If it can exist, than person has a choice, stick with faith or not, your belief is of no concern to others and is not wrong. Let's compare this logic with belief in unicorns or ancient astronauts. We found many fossils of prehistoric creatures, they fit perfectly inside evolutionary tree of life scheme. Unicorn is just another kind of goat, therefore they couldn't exist since no such mutations are possible. Same goes for ancient astronauts, space ships obviously couldn't be build before nuclear reactor and hi tech materials, therefore idea must be nonsense. Both kind of people can still believe what ever they want, right to believe is not an issue here since their personal beliefs does not affect other people. But church is a part of government apparatus, heads of any state authorities must respect common sense, they can't forbid belief in something nobody can claim 100% is a lie or prove it can't exist because of some other fact we know is true. Hope you see the difference in logic here, it's not just what you can prove most certainly exist, it's also about what you can't disapprove could exist. If something can be real, nobody can forbid you to believe in it. But if you can prove it can't be real, than those who still believe that nonsense are just idiots or insane. Forget about what you or other people think, tell me one single reason why God could not exist, if you can. If you can't, than religion is perfectly legit activity and God will remain a possibility, no matter how remote or distant from reality it seems to be. If there's no reason why God couldn't exist, than he's just one more fact of life science didn't discover yet, but it might.
@@xspotbox4400 I get the argument. I do not buy into it. For me it allows anyone to believe anything no matter how far fetched; just because someone wants to believe in that thing. I prefer the ugly truth to a beautiful lie. God does not get to logic it's way out of the same scrutiny one gives to big foot or alien abductions. Those other beliefs can be rather harmless, but believing in a god had had some devastating effects; I take that more seriously. One has to hold their god up to the same scrutiny as anything else. God; no god, gets a pass here. I finds these logical arguments to force a god into existence highly suspicious.
@@andrebrown8969 I don't know, but i would feel like idiot if i would be forced to believe something that is obviously not true, no matter how big or small is the importance of that issue. To know something is not true because it can't be true for any well defined and practical reasons means there's no hope it can ever became real. Why would anybody waste his time on nonsense like that, or even better question, why not rather spend time for ideas that can be true, at least in principle? It because life itself is a very unusual phenomena that obviously has a huge cosmological significance, therefore it's better to stay open to idea of divine presence existence than not. And this is exactly how this classical argument from logic end, if you don't believe in God, you can be wrong and you'll pay your ignorance with eternity in hell. But if you do believe, that is a single thing God demand of you and he will repay for all your faith and devotion once you arrive in Heaven. It's about what can you lose, if you say you believe, you might get rewarded with eternity of pure bliss, but if you say you don't believe, you lose in both cases, God exist or not, you gain nothing. Think about Lotto ticket, gambling might be fake or real, can't know what is going on behind a curtain, but we do know you can't win a lottery if you don't buy a ticket. Now compare same example with reverse option, would anybody buy a lottery ticket if they would know for sure it's all fake and there's no way they could ever win a price? This is the power of a simple difference in epistemology, there are also much better examples, like would you take a medicine if there's even a slightest chance it can make you stay alive somehow, or not, because you know for sure snake oil doesn't exist since snakes can't sweat, therefore medicine based on that substance can't ever work? Both might be fake medicine, but you can see no reason why first medicine couldn't help your body or at least it can't hurt, whereas other medicine is based on imaginary substance that is proven not real and trying it might kill you even faster, but can never do you any good.
I know this episode is a fossil, but still, if you want to understand God, don't start by asking stupid questions that reveal your ignorance of religion, and don't begin by announcing the presumptions of philosophy that betray sloppy thinking. Just a tip. 🤣
The word "God" must first be defined before asking if it exists.
I really liked the philosophy guy that argues belief of humans in the higher power and our ability to be aware that they are existing and awake as if we feel someone put us here. Even having to ask the questions if there is a higher power or the need of asking such questions without anyone influencing me about religion existing leads me somehow to the truth that here is a higher power... Sometimes walking outside with no distractions and looking around yourself, nature & the sky and the awareness you are here because of something bigger gives me the simple answer.
"I'm confused. But I now appreciate the power of Philosophy of Religion." I feel the same way Robert. Hopefully the power of philosophical knowledge will lead us to the Creator, with no more need for arguments or proofs.
God is within you and dropping the idea of external God and seeking within leads to Nirvana.
Source of our thoughts is consciousness.
Consciousness is God.
Define consciousness?? Well, No two people define consciousness in similar way. So your consciousness is as abstract as god is.
@@chandersinghdhillon9490 The Vedas explain everything, but not in English. The meanings of words in Sanskrit do not require dictionaries to understand, because the words are constructed from the laws of grammar. The specific meanings come from the relationship between concepts and the whole.
Life is essentially characterized by three aspects that are commonly translated as existence, consciousness and bliss. So consciousness is the aspect of life that is situated between existence and the complete fulfillment of desire. Consciousness is unlimited, allowing definitions to point to it but not encompass it.
Abstract concepts are the space in which physical objects exist, so the abstract is more real rather than less.
“God is within you”-to me, that’s just another way of saying there is no god, something I realized some time ago
@@vladimir0700 Your conception of God may not be a reflection of anything in reality, but the understanding of God as the ultimate whole allows the statement to make perfect sense.
You shouldn’t have have an inappropriate emotional reaction to the idea of emotions as a route to knowledge. Interest, curiosity and understanding are emotions that are fairly fundamental to the pursuit of any knowledge. So are wonder and uncertainty.We can make progress in understanding these, though I guess more in a narrative rather than technocratic framework.I think that’s what religious traditions attempt to do.
At least religion and philosophy knows what is ment for knowing and what is for just accepting and realizing.
I always see the mind of God as the problems he or she deals with. The knowledge of good and evil is always a human game. God's problem is what is in between total control and freewill. Discipline is gained through self control. But, we also need to be out of control to create anything new and or to simply adjust the details of what's already given. Mediators always create new guide lines, but always become like God in turn. Is it just we utilize all the aspects of life and allow the learning curb to adjust itself and just lead our selves to what we are designed to do.
I suspect that in the interest of time that no attention was given to the philosophers actually attempting to define god FIRST before exploring the question of whether he/she/it exists.
This program rarely spends any time defining terms before they engage them. Its a major failing.
@@con.troller4183 Define definition. What is the meaning of meaning?
@@eternallight88 ;)
I so want all of CTT on DVD. On Eleonore Stump's statement "...anything with a mind and a will is a person" seems to discount all animal life. As far I as know, animals have a mind and will.
nope they are just programmed to kill eat and reproduce
She more than likely speaking to a rational mind capable of moral agency.
@@pete745 Like people are?
Dennis Tucker not even close dipshit animals are not self aware
@@pete745 And what evidence are you referring to concerning "animals are not self aware"?
I believe in God..truely and very deeply in heart..so i don't need any reason for it..believing in God make me Happy..liiving in love..living in peace and harmony...believing in God for loving among peoples in the world for peace and brotherhood of men..
You are similar to the nutjob who believes, deeply and surely, the beauty in his dog's poop and that god communicates to him through that fecal matter, and he does not need reasons and other evidence, for or against, because that poop makes him a "good person."
Meanwhile, another nutjob in a different place thinks the same about horse s hi t.
Both nutjobs believe in the concept of supreme s hi t, just different denominations.
Your statement is correct. You have beliefs therefore you do not need any knowledge. You don't question your beliefs. You simply concede that they are true without any evidence. I would guess that before you go to a doctor you would like evidence that the person actually is a doctor and has a license to practice medicine though, right? Would you go to a doctor that just said that he or she believed they were a doctor?
I heard that we were created in the image of God and therefore we strive to be like God.
And just where did you ‘hear’ that ? A little critical thinking would be of great service to you. Oh, not sure what it means to think critically ? Look it up !
That escalated quickly!!! 😮
@Übermensch hopefully his creator's mind image
Just because most people in the world believes in god doesn’t mean the thought is not irrational. Ergo hoc propter hoc.
Lack of God contradicting existence per se. Between existence and not existence is infinite gap ,only something infinite can fill it up.
All gods are the creations of man.
Look within you will find GOD. Because GOD is LOVE.
Read numbers 32, Leviticus various chapters
It'll take alot of park benches to figure that out
We die. Unless one is suffering deeply, this is not a comfortable truth. Religion serves two purposes about the meaning of life and death: 1) Gives us a sense of deep purpose and meaning which is larger than ourselves 2) A promise of surviving physical death by eternal reward or reincarnation.
Religion is a very thoughtful human creation that assuages the mind of discomforting thoughts of meaninglessness, and our lives being short, thereby meaningless as well. Religion is an idea people can rally round. It serves a purpose.
Robert, thank you for you're perennial Socratic Manner. Dialectic as dialogue.
edit: I was way off. I strawmanned. I apologize.
Alvin; the fact that most people believe in God “or something like God” can be explained fully via naturalistic mechanisms- even if theism is true. The ubiquity of belief doesn’t require that God somehow fixed or wired our brains to have such beliefs.
Most people, understandably, thought earth was flat, until we understood it is round. and of course not much can be done about flat earthers. If more people believed in god in the future than in the past considering our knowledge of natural world was meager and it grew and will be even greater, then the "more people" argument may hold some water.
I'm not sure his statement is even true... Most eastern religions don't believe in "something like God"... And atheism is picking up a lot lately... I'd bet less than 50% of the world believes in the western concept of God
True. Good thing he never said any of that
@@ibperson7765 oh?
@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns Yes.
He did not say that ubiquity of belief proves God. He said if God exists and hardwired us to know, then it would not be irrational to believe God exists, if you define rational as a properly functioning mind thinking as it should.
Those are two different claims
Human Consciousness has evolved ---- Bible is a story of this evolution.
The Jewish and Christian Bible are 2 religious and cultural stories among thousands of others that have existed over time and at the core of every culture. You must keep in mind that there are hundreds of variations of every major world religion today. It is simply because people take religion literally and do not understand it as a way for humans to find meaning in a world that doesn't provide it for them, so religions are created. Religions help humans find meaning in a world where meaning is not obvious. And that's why they have been created.
My question is , does God actually have a "chosen favorite people". If that's the case , how con anyone others created by God hope to be treated equally. Just a thought.
Per Christianity, his favorite are the believers. Other religions may differ
This is one of my dilemma atm.
@@ibperson7765 personally , I don't believe there are "chosen" or "favorites". These are human attributes. If God has favorites - then that would make God as simple as us. It would be petty and silly.
People create gods who favor them. That's pretty convenient, don't you think?
Best argument for belief in God is that true vs false, or assertions and claims at all, would not exist in a monist physicalist universe. Ideas cannot be “about” anything since they have no physical connection. Minds, truth, even consciousness. There is another world, the world of ideas and truth and awareness and knowing. Any exploration of this world leads to the great Discovery.
"Best argument for belief in God is that true vs false, or assertions and claims at all, would not exist in a monist physicalist universe."
This assertion is wrong for two reasons. 1 - you conflate monism with physicalism. They appear similar but are very different, IMO. 2 - Even in a monist model, dissent is possible, especially in the realm of apparently non-material phenomenon like consciousness.
Your assertion is internally conflicted. Self refuting.
@@con.troller4183 Physicalism is one type of monism. So “monist physicalist” has an unnecessary adjective, but wanted to be clear. I just assume all atheists are monist materialists (which actually turn out to be physicalists when questioned as they certainly believe in non-material physical things like energy and light and charge etc). The reason I assume that is it is the dogma of the day, so if one hasn’t read outside the bubble and then thought about it, they will be one. For example, there arent even Platonists among the public anymore. Platonists think true and false and laws of logic fully exist, but arent material, so not everything is material. Even Goedels theorem shows you can’t have truth just algorithmically, from matter. It takes mind, not just apparent mind.
Anyway many people also think consciousness itself disproves physicalism. They would say: The universe can't just be matter. Otherwise there would be no subjective side. It would all just be happening in the dark, no awareness, no knowing. Increasing complexity doesnt make a whole separate reality spring from this side.
Or: Goedels theorem there must be mind, not apparent mind. Consider this: information theory has advanced to the point appearing to be absolute laws, but no one can rigorously define information; it takes a mind. No one can say rigorously what makes some configuration (of matter or charge etc) a bit, as opposed to just a physical configuration. It can only be a bit TO someone. So if they don’t exist it is incoherent that these info theory laws are so absolute. A bit requires mind, not just apparent mind. A someone must be there at some point.
Anyone who really understands Goedels theorem cannot believe that only the physical universe exists. In any analysis, there is a step that is just called, "Oh c'mon, that's obvious; if you can't take THAT as a given then no one can ever say anything." But who is the "you" who is gonna “c’mon” and take it as given? To make a claim, there must always be an agent - EVEN THE CLAIM that there are no agents only apparent agents, ie the claim that only matter is fundamental and mind is not. Even that claim requires an agent to make. If mind is needed to make any claim about reality, then Mind is what is at the fundamental core of reality. Saying otherwise is a self-contradictory worldview.
Penrose’s most recent interview goes into this. Is pretty interesting all around though.
Thanks for the replies. That interview was penrose, lex fridman if interested
@@ibperson7765 Thanks for your detailed reply. I will give it a closer read this evening but a couple of things jumped out.
I was put in mind of Penrose (Quantum Consciousness) and then noticed you referred to him in your final paragraph.
While I agree with much of what you say, I conclude differently. Partly because I believe that mind is a localized and individual configuration of matter, as opposed to awareness, which pervades the universe.
No time to expand on this at the moment, since my localized arrangement of matter is insisting that I get to work. Cheers.
@@con.troller4183 makes sense. Thanks. Reminds me of Rupert Spira. Is compelling. But to my surprise we agree that the material is not all there is. Much of what i wrote was therefore based on a confusion. God bless and good luck w work.
Every thing of universe is alive, we come from universe, universe is alive, so we alive, our God is universe, so fire as god, air as god, water as god, soil as god, man is mortal, soul is immortal,
Yes... and then again, No... depending on one's characterization of God.
👉Arjuna said ; my dear krsna, seeing my friends and relatives present befor me in such a fighting spirit😃😊
You presuppose god...
Then come up with the most complex arguments you can to support what you already believe....
It’s a ridiculous formula
Ruby Badilla
TL:DR
Ruby Badilla
You didn’t text any proof...
You copy/pasted a long section from your folder, in several places in the comments section...
Ruby Badilla
Truth is what you can demonstrate true...
You failed to do that
To deny the existence of a deity in such absolute terms, requires a belief in the myth of progress. Culturally, God is everywhere, and always has been. To replace God requires an alternative that fills all the god gaps, not just a new creation mythos, or future materialist utopia, but a metaphysical reworking of every aspect of human existence. Currently, atheism is a child of privilege, largely western, geeky and male.
Borderlands
Bollocks...
There is no denying something that has never been demonstrated to exist in the first place...
The burden of proof is all yours
Speculative philosophy can only approach the tip of the toe of the Personality of Godhead, but Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the Supreme Lord's autobiography describing Himself authoritatively.
It seems to me that there is more to whether god does or does not exist as always, but the message behind any claims that of existence is 100% percent unchangeable for a truth that is time immemorial and logical. As it already has numerous issues throughout all world teachings, and any false teaching in any way could easily have unintended destructive consequences unknown and known. Beliefs of any irrationalities forcefully imposed by philosophies, religions, sciences and that speak to the material would not speak of the spiritual. And with any angst created regarding death among these would be false if it is then erroneously made up for in the material realm as their main values when there is a supposed logical truth present. A counter value for its compensation and a preoccupation with the palpable things which are substantial, material and a mental value. As something spiritual would not be perceived with the usual senses and would not be comprehensible in an intellect manner and any other would seem to be a bit cultish.
22:43 Lol. Atheists making claims that some things have “worth” or are “good” 🙄.
Why can't they do that? One can make value judgements without believing in god.
Actually Theists are the ones who must have no value judgements, since everything is created by God and therefore universally good. Even atheists... ;)
@@con.troller4183 That’s a logical question. Thanks. Alright what’s your basis for good or valuable? Without referring to other subjective words that mean positive. If the universe is only matter: there’s no “Good particle” so how can anything be good?
I didnt say a good God would only create good. He’s building redemptive history which has immeasurable good over eternity. His judgement determines what’s good. He imputes all goodness and evil is a deprivation thereof. But let’s focus on my first part there
doc, thank you for the content you are providing. sincerely and heartfelt. Grazie my Brother.
Is reality independent of humanity and linguistic perceptions? Don’t we need a philosophy of philosophies to answer that?
Why people believe what defies reason
Basically they take properties of God and try to work their way backward to our reality in this universe.
The more God and life in this reality share in common then God is more likely. The more our plight as living creatures can be justified to the highest standard the more likely God is.
So if I made an effort to prove God I might imagine that if life itself is gloriously magnificent and fulfilling beyond anything, in its ideal form. That virtues are logically consistent and that love, joy, and peace is the ultimate aim of life and thus God's greatest goal. Then I might justify the notion that in order to see the top of the mountain you must first experience and traverse the very bottom.
No doubt we are at the very bottom where all ultimate questions are unknown. And all we can do is wonder and have awe. Existential angst, and the whole gamut of emotions about existence are very real and we are starving to know greater realities. And yet we can't even know that our existence has any inherent meaning or truth whatsoever.
Is God so great that it's worth it all to stand here at the very bottom of existence having no knowledge beyond our own finite existence. Is there some ultimate choice I must make to enter into the knowledge that God does exist and can be related to?
For me it is far from obvious that God exists. I see no solid reference in this reality to the existence of God.
Certainly I could take my finite existence and make the complete most of it and die fulfilled certain of ceasing to exist.
But there is a longing for God and God's attributes. True love can make one curious as to why life is or is not meant to be.
Then there are the usual problems of evil and senseless suffering and Senseless torment.
What need do we have that we must stand separate from a God reality in a place such as this?
Must I hang my hat on Cicero's comment that the greater the difficulty the greater the glory will be.
Or perhaps I'm setting myself up for a big letdown hoping God exists.
Just enjoy the ride or push on toward eternal life. Or perhaps both.
The struggle, the gift, or a sea of straws with empty promises.
There's no need for longing for God's attributes. As God's Spirit children, we have ALL the attributes that God has. We have mind, consciousness, awareness, desire, creativity, love, ect ect.
A lot of people blame God for all the bad. God Created us - WE created the rest.
It's like God is like the ocean and we are the individual drops that make up the ocean. Each drop has ALL the same properties (or attributes) of the ocean, but it is ONLY when (or if) WE come together do we have the power of the ocean. We have the power to create Heaven on Earth - if we truly desire such. We have to get past the lie (illusion) that we are separate and evolve enough to realize the Truth that "WE ARE ALL ONE".
So if there is intelligent life outside earth that is non-humanoid;
Whose image of god is correct??
...or does it invalidate the god hypothesis?
We are not programmed to believe in god!...
...in the past, our scientific knowledge was more limited; so it was more common to assign god to explain that which we don’t know the answer to.
...because having answers is needed to run a society...even if the answers are not true.
Amazing
it just a belief, a belief that comes from a true revelation from their scriptures and the sign from Nature, with very persuasive evidence.
A philosopher you ain’t. Educate yourself before you post irrational comments !
@Übermensch yes.....Quran and cosmology is awesome correlation 😇
@Übermensch no Im not should I show you the chapter that differentiate the Stars and Planets?
@Übermensch in Quran there is different words of Stars,Sun and Planets, each of them called as "Najm","Syams",and "Kawakib"
@Übermensch this is just naming a Stars or Astrology, but Quran has Different names for all planets,Meteor,Komets called as Kawakib and Sun is actually a Star called Nujum/Najm
Listening to people reason or argue about the existence of God is like hearing people debating weather Uncle Sam is real. If you'd hear that you'd think 'well they don't get it.' They're missing the point. Uncle Sam is a metaphor for the state. Analogously God is a metaphor for reality regardless of what it is ontologically. Uncle Sam is the state personified, and God is reality personified.
Philosophy and religion are different.
Kudos -- 444 Gematria -- 🗽
His arguments for god are quite silly. Most of the world once believed the sun revolved around the earth but through reason and science we now know that was unequivocally wrong. We have this belief in god because of course we started out as primitive men who thought that there had to be a creator of us just as we all have mothers and fathers. We are no longer primitive., at least most of us aren’t.
The almighty God is normally supposed to BOTH A) being able to make decisions and B) to know the future.
Here you should make a distinction between "optional futures" - God could maybe interact and modify them - and "THE ONE FUTURE", because ONLY ONE DETERMINED future will eventually come true. (The one that will become our ONLY ONE PAST). Well, God is supposed to be able to get the best performance: to know that ONE future. But then God MUST JUST LET IT UNFOLD EXACTLY like it is, He is NOT ALLOWED to change anything in it, because God makes no errors in his knowledge of the future! God cannot decide ANYTHING more: ALL God's decisions are already included in that future.
What above means that EITHER God is free to decide, but this implies He does NOT know the ONE future, OR He knows the ONE future, but this prevents Him from making ANY further decision. Even worse than that, GOD WOULD BE OBLIGED to HIMSELF slavishly follow that one determined future. This all means the two abilities A) and B) are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE ("either", "or", but never "BOTH" at the same time). Since obviously God was able to make his decisions and we are also confident that He knows the future, the path followed must be from A) to B). When that transition occurred ? Certainly not during the man's history, of course that must have happened BEFORE the birth of the universe.
However, God only arrived at step B) BUT WITHOUT ENTERING that step, we saw earlier that God is absolutely NOT INTERESTED IN TAKING PART to that future: He would be obliged to "SLAVISHLY" follow it. The God's actions in that one future (for example words) will AUTOMATICALLY come true instead. In other words that one future will become true WITHOUT GOD. NOBODY will be there to take the God's actions: that NOBODY is the SPIRIT OF GOD. God was thus FREE from any other duty. But where has the almighty God gone ? Of course He is now the Son of God. The almighty God dropped his then USELESS power to become like a normal man: Jesus. Thus, the almighty God is only IN THE PAST, "no one ever saw God" ""The world has not known you".
nothing can find God since there is nothing other than God :)
our thoughts makes us feel there are multiple things but, reality is there is only One Thing (God) !
Let me get this straight. If someone can talk a good game... god exists.
"Philosophy is merely the byproduct of misunderstanding language." said Wittgenstein. That goes double for the Philosophy of Religion.
Theologie is most interesting filosofie ever
@Ruby Badilla, pourquoi devrait-il vous obéir, mademoiselle?
What's a person?
In Order to "find God" first, one has to ask... What is God? Then, a reasonably intelligent person soon will realize that... God is an idea! And... What is an idea?
Well, being and idea a concept... Why badder on trying to find anything about a concept that it doesn't exist in reality? But... Pay attention to Religion that are the Legions of Ra the Sun God and... Amen Amon Ra!
If a God exists I suspect I'm a "crayon eater" compared to what it would take to understand........the purple ones are the best BTW!
I didn't know they were looking for him, however if you want to Find JEHOVAH God, you can start with the Two Worthy(Honest) Books, The Bible.
At one time a lot of people believed in Zeus, thus because their minds were functioning normally the idea of Zeus is rational and therefore Zeus exists.
So what? How does this disprove if God does truly exist?
@@joetech12 which god?
Stephen Dedalus what do you mean by god?
Joe Sharpe “gods” are what humans use when we don’t know the answer to a question...
We say a “god “ thingy is doing it...
Before we could explain how the sun moved across the sky, we invented an answer...
“Magic being is moving the sun across the sky using his magic powers “...
It’s a primitive thinking answer...
The question has changed tho..
Where did life and the universe come from??
“Must be magic entity with magic powers doing it using magic “...
It’s the same primitive thinking...
We have outgrown it
@@joetech12 the real question here is what do you, Joe Sharpe, mean by "G"od?
The problem is choosing to believe. Belief isn't a choice, therefore it isn't something to look for. Beliefs are ideas forced upon a person. People are believed to exist because we die if we don't believe in people. Cars are believed to exist because we die if we don't believe in cars. Morality is believed to exist because we die if we don't believe in it. Try not believing in god for awhile and see if u survive. Everyone does.
Which god?
Yahwe?
Alla?
Jeus?
Many gods
oh, god.
I don't think it is a foregone conclusion that if G-d existed, than belief in Him would be warranted. It may still be irrational if you could make a reasonable argument that G-d may not want you to have belief in Him - for some reason, or for some period of time. Perhaps He wants you to come to true knowledge of Him - and not to come to this awareness in faith or in a "properly basic" manner.
If there is not God, then there is no such thing as “properly basic”
God is manifest in the totality of consciousness when in that moment his presence is acknowledged. If it were not in consciousness we would not know him.
I think god is the cosmos
only if he wants you too son...are you sure your ready for that?
Mr Plantinger says that you are not warranted say God doesn't exist unless you can show God doesn't exist and Robert finds some way of saying that is not really circular - don't ask me how. Mr P. also states that belief in God is rational because most people believe it. First, most people in the world may believe it, but most people in the western world probably don't and most people in Europe certainly don't, second, since when was truth decided by a popularity contest?
There are one other thing we could consider as a god or AI, Its the base of all life, and humans are up to of 70% of it.
Uh, no
عالی بود.👏
The only possible reaction to accepting the existence of God is to abandon the accepted, normal way of life and go through the wicker gate that leads to the pilgrim’s life path.
Anything else is simple failure to accept the reality of God’s omnipotent existence. You may think you believe - like priests and lay church people do - but you are deceiving yourself; you have not the courage of your convictions.
You can become an expert on Buddhist practice, but if you are still there with your job and your family, it’s all just pie in the sky
The world you see around you is not God’s world. Anyone can see from a simple reading of the Old Testament that the material world around you is today’s product of generation after generation failing to follow God and leading lives of delusion as described above
Comparing thoughts of non natural entities to comfirmable natural entities does not warrant such belief in such thoughts.
Lol....non natural entities? An entity that exists in the universe exists......therefore it is natural. In other words totally disagree.
@@VC-jd5eb yes supernatural(non natural) entities based on ones thoughts or ideas of said supernatural entity. All we can verify is natural
God is not a cookie.
You shall seek me and you shall find me when you search for me with all of your heart. You can't find god by experiments or thinking. God reveals himself to those he chooses. The humble and pure of heart not the so called learned.
O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, thank you for hiding these things from those who think themselves wise and clever, and for revealing them to the childlike.
Ever Ready
Grow up
So God is identical to and indistinguishable from the imaginary wishful thinking of a child. Got it!
So, if god chooses not to reveal ‘himself’ to me, then woe to me as I will go to hell for not believing in ‘him’. That will be god’s fault that I am burning in the fiery of the netherworld. So, god is love ? Does god only love those to whom he has revealed himself to ? That’s some god you have concocted. Do us all a favour please. Complete at least eight grade before you post comments.
Krishnamurti and godel are laughing
Can philosophy find meaning of this universe, obviously it did, even if no such meaning exist. We wouldn't talk about it and definitely not over internet if meaning wouldn't be created, by property of human mind to enjoy exploring reality, by seeking for deeper understanding of it's workings and potentials. Science doesn't do meaning unless this is desired goal of a project, doesn't work well beyond well defined parameters, so philosophy had plenty of space and potentials to work with. Universe is probably just a physical entity, maybe just a temporal phenomena or accidental anomaly. Life could be just molecular chemistry, the way potentials cycle over some material geometry, only forces, no matter the illusion of something special those lumps of material self induce, to keep chemical processes going until nature balance us out of eminent physical reduction. It's because of local material composition and influx of energy from a star, driving chemical forces around the planet in certain patterns, not life but electric plasma and radiation caught in unstable elementary soup, just like aurora over northern sky, but on a material fluid surface. And consciousness, this is what brain do when detached from sensory inputs, try to project volumetric shapes and colorful patterns into organic electrical noise.
What reality are we even talk about here, who cares about universe or it's entire history, it will all go away together with a each individual person and never return. This is what real multiverse is, space branching with birth of every conscious individual, since we have free imagination and are not bound by physical or chemical rules. A brand new copy of universe is created trough our birth, than growth and die with each and every single one of us, regardless of material nothing that exist as we perceive it only inside our individual minds.
Universe is everything we say God is, it's existence of entire reality, beyond what we can see and experience. Prove universe doesn't exist and our commonly shared sense of sanity is over.
Can philosophy of religion find God, i don't see any reason why it couldn't. It might be i just created a part of it, by claiming multiverse exist only in minds of individual observers, but not like multiplication of physical universe, since mater alone can't chose what to do with physical potentials, but our minds can shape any kind of variation, distinctive to every individual self. We are share same origins of life, so biological multiverse God does exist, by definition and this is a fact nobody can deny.
Philosophy can find as many different Gods as you want. For any given conclusion, there is always a set of metaphysical assumptions from where you can derive it.
@@ferdinandkraft857 Classical philosophy is based on general epistemology, logic, axioms, geometry, ethics and such, but philosophy of religion is kinda different, not founded in materialistic perception of the world but rather on humanism, traditions, aesthetics, secret geometry or occult mysticism. It's because of pagan origins, ancient Greeks and Romans believed in multitude of gods, never the less they gave rise to monotheistic theology, epistemological methodology and modern way of life.
We could say classical philosophy invented a God, as a logical consequence from their careful studies. Than idea of God lead to naturalistic ideology, resulting in particular kind of religious philosophy, favorite among kings and politicians up to a present age. Classical philosophy became modern scientific and artistic community, whereas their product became a new breed of philosophy fit for modern times.
Here's an example, what would Plato or Socrates say if they could meet Jesus, Buddha or Mohamed, would they recognize a simple African shepherd as divine being, capable to create and rule entire universe or they would go and ask those guys many interesting questions they struggled with all their lives? Old school philosopher would never do that unless convinced by out of this world phenomena, infinitely larger and more powerful than any man could undertake, since all humans are made from same kind human flesh and bones that tear and brake if stressed over certain limits. Philosophy of ideology doesn't care about realism, since all is just a manifestation of natural forces and hidden order of living, if we can imagine it than it could be or became real, so they must ask what does those sensations, visions and ideas mean for future of human consciousness. They ask very deep questions, so new things will emerge from their research and explorations just the same, real like life was a real possibility when Earth was still just another barren rock or times when human were just another kind of animal, but than miracles happened and all in universe has changed forever.
Nature is what it is, a physical machine not capable to do anything meaningful on it's own, but if enough people are thinking about something long enough, new kinds of potentials get accumulated in a non local dimension, those opening space for extraordinary and not very probable events that would never ever arise from physical causes alone.
Philosophy of religion will bring an end to all ideology, religious traditions and superstitions, old concepts will be replaced by new symbols and believes, fit for a new kind of humanism and new solar system based civilization. No religion will survive, old ideologies will be replaces by some evolved concepts that will unite and fill emptiness of our cultivated, expanded and enhanced, little simple minds.
One more example, what did first astronauts though when they reached orbit around the planet, did they thought about technology that kept space capsule in one piece or did they got scared and start to doubt their sanity, regardless of training, knowledge and personal traits? It could be all just physics and under control of mathematics, than again it could be they went to far beyond unknown, where powerful entities exist inside strange, star lit void, nobody could know and prepare them for. Or how it must feel like when you suddenly wake up on International space station, strapped in floating restrains, before your mind can grasp what happened and realize everything will be alright somehow? It must take a lot of faith not to panic and make mistakes, asking yourself over and over again was it all worth it and how will this end, but than again, this is how first explorers must have felt on their voyage to an undiscovered continent or extreme regions of a planet. Human consciousness can't change over night, it takes time and many brave apostles must sacrifice before new state of awareness can be formed and spiritual sensations assimilated into collective human mentality. Change is a long and complicated psychological process, not just a small step, great adventures always feel like a religious experience.
@@xspotbox4400 thank you for such an elaborate response.
The unexamined religion is not worth believing.
Please send me message if possible i don't usually reach out but i have the answer to consciousness that will ease your fear of death to the point of irrelevance. Its so much more simpler than ever thought yet also factual and evidential to have a sense of self actualisation and relief.
Regards.
I’m all ears!
I think Mr Kuhn is god. 1. Mr Kuhn never reply’s to your comments. 2 Mr Kuhn offers more questions then answers
Perhaps Mr. Kuhn is a computer hologram, guided by artificial intelligence, constructed by illuminate behind every world government. Unless you meat him in person, how can you be sure he is real?
Ruby Badilla will you not paste these statements . I am being sarcastic about Mr Kuhn. Yes I am an atheist and agree with your statements to some degree I guess. Also respond to comments by addressing the comment directly in proportion to the comments context. Pasting is lazy. You are not helping your cause. You sound like an idiot. Dont be stuck on stupid.
Sincerity counts?
I'm going to ask YHWH to reveal Himself to you so your Big Question will be answered. God knows you've been searching!
The real question: can English literature majors find the dragons from game of thrones?!
@Übermensch thx. i try!
Just because we do not think about the need for evidence that other people exist because it is trivially true, it does not mean, if one insists that we can not bring the evidence to prove it to a reasonable person. That does not apply to God. So it is a category mistake. "That does not seem to me much of a decent argument" is not an argument. You have to give a positive argument.
Before we finally were convinced (well barring the people from flat-earth society) that earth is round and not center of the universe, a day before that all of humanity believed that earth is flat. That is not an argument that earth is flat.
The lady starts by asserting what she needs to prove. That is not how arguments work in a discussion. Sad.
Those Flat Earth lunatics must be all blind, world is obviously not flat but more like a pancake.
@@xspotbox4400 makes sense.
@@SandipChitale Of course, pancake Earth society is far superior to those flat Earth loonies, lol :)
The problem is arguments against God do not end as non sequiturs, they attempt to replace factors attributed to a deity (consciousness, altruism, creativity, etc) with answers that require more postulates, and are therefor inflationary, or with axioms that are by no means axiomatic. The comments on this video illustrate people don't just provide poor answers, in many case they don't even understand the problems posed by the question. Polemical atheism (aka New Atheism) offers such people a chance to think they've covered all the bases without doing the groundwork. It's an ideological movement, not a philosophical one, and uses the language of politics to address the issue.
@@borderlands6606 did not understand what you said. Sorry. "New Atheism" - is simply lack of special deference to assertions made by the religious, just because those assertions are about god or about one's personal faith. In the marketplace of ideas, even the religious ideas have to be held to same scrutiny as any other. Traditionally religious have enjoyed much deference, now that is being taken away they do not like it. In the end, that "New" part is not important, the "Atheism" part is. The "New" is just about the approach.
Funny to see the so-called champions of reason make such silly objections.
God has given us a gift. Let us share our present with the world.
God do exist and the proof is in mathematics.
Here is that proof. Infinity = 1/x(delta) + 1.
This equation says a number, or any number is a set in space that change with space. It reveals how one number is different from any other number. In Number Theory this equation delineates the process as to how we count or measure anything using numbers.
In physics this equation reads: Gravity is matter changing with space. It combines Relativity/fractured space with Quantum mechanics/spatial expansion and information/complete symmetry of a space.
How dose God fit into this equation?
This equation is God's mathematical name.
God's name in this equation reads: God's Mind Is Man Changed With God.
Breakdown: God's mind is infinite. In math this measure out as the set of infinity
In math (1/x) represents a fraction of a whole. Any child is a fraction of a parent and man according to the Bible is God's child. Therefore, man is a fraction of God
Change in math is represented by the Greek letter (delta) and it denotes a difference of some kind.
Plus (+) in math means to combine or add something with something.
There is only one God. In math the number 1 means something, or someone is complete and individual from all the rest.
Spelled out: God's Mind (Infinity) is (=) Man (1/x) Changed (delta) With (+) God (1).
Scientific Method
Step 1 Observation: Math can deliver unbreakable truths such as 2+2 will always = 4
Step 2 Question: Do math and Divinity share a common truth?
Step 3 Hypothesis: If God exist, He should be found in the house of mathematics.
Step 4 Prediction: God's Mind Is Man Change With God is an equation
Step 5 Test: Any number (Infinity) is (=) a set in space (1/x) that change (x^2) with (+) space (1))
Note: "X" describes any set, (1) describes any kind of space physical or otherwise
This equation tells us why 2 feet is not the same as 2 inches. Both distances are measured out as 2 units of space but there is a change or difference between both units. They are each sets in a space of distance but they represent changes in their measurement of distance.
Step 6 Iterate: New look at what makes up reality. Reality consists of 3 domains of space.
a. Fractured space or matter b. spatial expansion or energy c. Complete or unbroken space
Step 7 Conclusion: We now know Infinity is real therefore the value in enumeration demand God exists otherwise the domain for enumeration would be incomplete. We know the domain for enumeration is complete because we can count. God must be able to count too all the way to Infinity because His mathematical name tells us what is any number.
I wrote a research doc looking deeper into this matter. Anyone who wants a free copy can contact me at:
william.mabon@yahoo.com
God's Mind Is Man Changed With God
Your philosophy doesn't determine theology, theology determines your philosophy.
If it could, it would have found by now.
No (full stop).
What a great contribution! Such an inquisitive mind, only the smartest can impress his huge brain!
@@LameBushido , sometimes conciseness is the way to answer questions, and this situation is one of them. Please humor us by answering anything other than my response. After all, philosophy and theology are the way to go in obtaining knowledge (snicker, snicker). Thanks.
@@86645ut Philosophy is about asking conceptual questions and forming systemic arguments to try and answer them. It is not about "obtaining knowledge" as you say, that is science, a methodology of gathering empirical data and forming predictions and laws out of them. They're just different things. This is basic information you can find on a wikipedia page. Grow up.
LameBushido , and, your point? Are you saying philosophy CAN find God?
@@86645ut I'm saying philosophy is an approach to answering the question. Whatever answers come will lead to more questions. It doesn't end, this is not in the realm of empiricism. Stick to the sciences if this is beyond you.
You should release some interviews with physicists. With all those videos about philosophy and religion, your comment section is attraction a lot of strange figures.
He has interviewed physicists. Susskin, Kraus, wienburg, Carrol and more
Ruby Badilla why do you ask complete sentence. Kuhn has interviewed physicists. What more is there to say that addresses the questions
Indeed, how dare he explore other topics he might find interesting. Clearly he should cater to you and only you
There are a STAGGERING number of logical fallacies by those attempting to prove god with philosophic arguments in this piece. Sheesh.
I was almost convinced until I read this comment. Much thanks!
No he's AWOL
At 8:00 Plantinga says:
Well, What about belief in God without an argument? Is that irrational in that way? Surely not! Again, most of the world population believes in God or something like God, and the vast majority of those people don't belive on the basis of argument. So it's not irrational either.
That is the weakest argument ever. His whole interview was very bland and disappointing.
You can’t find what doesn’t exist. I gave up on the whole god thing a long time ago after much thought and research. After a certain amount of searching you just have to admit to yourself that there’s nothing there
And by the way. thank Gosh you are not interviewing ALAN Guth. REPEAT NOT.
Listening to christians talk about "god" is like listening to third graders talk about physics. They sound like such blissfully ignorant simpletons who think they're experts and have it all figured out because they just learned about gravity, lol. If you want to believe in "god," your best bet is to go to Judaism. They invented (discovered?) the whole thing and have it all worked out to perfection. They're the pros. No one else even comes close to the richness of their philosophy, certainly not these watered-down, weakened, and in christianity's case, Disney-fied derivative versions (per/versions).
Let's do this the easy way
NO
Is it the easy way or the lazy way? Does it offend you that he gave the question some serious consideration?
Philosophy of religion cannot find God. You can only find God, through faith in his son Jesus Christ and obedience to his commandments.
Something that always puzzles me is how did god created his son.
Artificially?
@@kootdirker2448 Let me know when you find out. That kind of information comes only by revelation through living prophets. Do you know any? Jesus Christ is God's only begotten son. His mother was mortal and his Father is immortal. Christ had power to lay his life down and to take it up again. He broke the bands of death and rose from the dead on the third day.
First speaker weak arguments. Very weak.
I do not care about warrant; I care about what is true.
You cannot prove a god does not exist, therefore I can assume a god exists. What kind of bull is that?
And Stump...what do you say about her? You cannot argue a god into existence.
Argument is, it doesn't matter, if you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt God can't exist, it's just a believe, like any other, therefore is OK and can't be prevented.
@@xspotbox4400 That why it is pointless. You can substitute god with any other thing, such as ghosts or faeries or magic or Vishnu or Allah. Just circular reasoning.
@@andrebrown8969 Almost there. Point is, if you can't prove something can't exist, than how can you be sure it doesn't exist? If it can exist, than person has a choice, stick with faith or not, your belief is of no concern to others and is not wrong.
Let's compare this logic with belief in unicorns or ancient astronauts. We found many fossils of prehistoric creatures, they fit perfectly inside evolutionary tree of life scheme. Unicorn is just another kind of goat, therefore they couldn't exist since no such mutations are possible. Same goes for ancient astronauts, space ships obviously couldn't be build before nuclear reactor and hi tech materials, therefore idea must be nonsense.
Both kind of people can still believe what ever they want, right to believe is not an issue here since their personal beliefs does not affect other people.
But church is a part of government apparatus, heads of any state authorities must respect common sense, they can't forbid belief in something nobody can claim 100% is a lie or prove it can't exist because of some other fact we know is true.
Hope you see the difference in logic here, it's not just what you can prove most certainly exist, it's also about what you can't disapprove could exist. If something can be real, nobody can forbid you to believe in it. But if you can prove it can't be real, than those who still believe that nonsense are just idiots or insane.
Forget about what you or other people think, tell me one single reason why God could not exist, if you can. If you can't, than religion is perfectly legit activity and God will remain a possibility, no matter how remote or distant from reality it seems to be. If there's no reason why God couldn't exist, than he's just one more fact of life science didn't discover yet, but it might.
@@xspotbox4400 I get the argument. I do not buy into it.
For me it allows anyone to believe anything no matter how far fetched; just because someone wants to believe in that thing.
I prefer the ugly truth to a beautiful lie.
God does not get to logic it's way out of the same scrutiny one gives to big foot or alien abductions.
Those other beliefs can be rather harmless, but believing in a god had had some devastating effects; I take that more seriously.
One has to hold their god up to the same scrutiny as anything else.
God; no god, gets a pass here.
I finds these logical arguments to force a god into existence highly suspicious.
@@andrebrown8969 I don't know, but i would feel like idiot if i would be forced to believe something that is obviously not true, no matter how big or small is the importance of that issue. To know something is not true because it can't be true for any well defined and practical reasons means there's no hope it can ever became real. Why would anybody waste his time on nonsense like that, or even better question, why not rather spend time for ideas that can be true, at least in principle?
It because life itself is a very unusual phenomena that obviously has a huge cosmological significance, therefore it's better to stay open to idea of divine presence existence than not. And this is exactly how this classical argument from logic end, if you don't believe in God, you can be wrong and you'll pay your ignorance with eternity in hell. But if you do believe, that is a single thing God demand of you and he will repay for all your faith and devotion once you arrive in Heaven. It's about what can you lose, if you say you believe, you might get rewarded with eternity of pure bliss, but if you say you don't believe, you lose in both cases, God exist or not, you gain nothing. Think about Lotto ticket, gambling might be fake or real, can't know what is going on behind a curtain, but we do know you can't win a lottery if you don't buy a ticket. Now compare same example with reverse option, would anybody buy a lottery ticket if they would know for sure it's all fake and there's no way they could ever win a price? This is the power of a simple difference in epistemology, there are also much better examples, like would you take a medicine if there's even a slightest chance it can make you stay alive somehow, or not, because you know for sure snake oil doesn't exist since snakes can't sweat, therefore medicine based on that substance can't ever work? Both might be fake medicine, but you can see no reason why first medicine couldn't help your body or at least it can't hurt, whereas other medicine is based on imaginary substance that is proven not real and trying it might kill you even faster, but can never do you any good.
I know this episode is a fossil, but still, if you want to understand God, don't start by asking stupid questions that reveal your ignorance of religion, and don't begin by announcing the presumptions of philosophy that betray sloppy thinking.
Just a tip. 🤣