dunno, philosophy brings me closer to my belief.....

What difference does it make whether or not gods exist?

Wolf: what belief? Well, Wer, I don't know about you, but I rather love this life. Thinking that a superior Being exists, makes the necessity to die some day somehow more bearable. Or does the thought of dying and there being nothing and no-one after this make you happy and content? PS: Why do you call yourself Kitchen Manager anyway - or does that not make a difference either?

If I'm dead, what do I care? or, why should I care? and/or if being with your god is so cool, why aren't there more people dying to be with theirs? ps--it's my current job, my life...

o man, take care. what does the deep midnight declare? i was asleep; and from a deep sleep i woke, and swear: the world is deep. deep is it's woe. and joy, deeper still. woe implores- go! but all joy wants eternity. wants deep wants deep eternity. (nietzche) (that's why, i think)

Kitchen Man, why in the hell are you such a sceptic? I mean, if you did truly think, that there were no such thing as God, why should you trouble yourself to contradict me so cruelly? Don't get me wrong. I don't go to church, I have not the faintest idea what or who God is, and I am essentially against fixed religion - I think it very dangerous. And I'm certainly not dying to go ANYWHERE. I'm sure it is as natural to die, as it is to be born; and to a little infant perhaps, the one is as painful as the other, but I admit that I fear death as children fear the dark. I suppose seeing people weep for their loved-ones shows death to be terrible - it clouds the fact of it with vanity a d superstition. I am a very happy person, I love my work, I love the joys and sorrows of Life. That is why I need to know there is something or someone on the other side.

So you're a Relativist, Riette? You believe in some "superior being" but that being is different for everyone, yes? Let's get the intellectual guns out for the suicide show.

:Don't get me wrong. I don't go to church, I have not the faintest idea what or :who God is, and I am essentially against fixed religion i'm going to open a new topic about the "danger" of religion

I think we'll have to wait till tonight. Riette may be a night being. It's great she's jumping in to this conference with so much enthusiasm.

Hi, boys! Yes, I suppose I am a Relativist. I feel that giving the Being we all call God a definite identity is discriminate. I was brought up in a very rigid religious atmosphere where there was only one God, namely the Christians' God. All those who believed in another kind of God was destined for hell. Well, if Heaven is the place where people who only believe in the blue-eyed, fair-haired Jesus, then I'd rather go to hell with all the other normal people. I mean, how can you say the Jews, or Muslims or Buddhists are wrong? Or right, for th t matter. What arrogance to think we can pin God down! Yet, what arrogance to think we little humans need only our selfish selves.

So in being a relativist, you shy away from certainties of faith? Are you certain you're a relativist? Jesus was a historical, living man, having neither blue eyes nor fair hair, being born a Jew. If people attach certain positive qualities that they believe to him, then fair enough I guess - but don't go spreading it around too much. However, seeing as this is the Philosophy conference, I can spleen-vent on this (joy!) If people attach, say, blue n fair to Jesus, then one could say that the whole Jesus concept it delusional since he is "appearing" to different people as different thing. That's fair enough. Now reverse it. Jesus is revealing himself to different people in many different ways, each unique and tuned to that person's exact need; since all people are different, this makes more sense than a two-dimensional "one image" concept, yes? What arrogance to think we can pin God down! Too right! Is Christianity a pinning down of God? Hardly. Most church services I go to usually have something about not putting "God in a box". If God is infinite, then he is entirely non-sensical, since infinity is a no-win concept in four-dimensional space (new topic coming there, I think...). Therefore, if he's infinite and non-sensical, we can only go on what he's done. There's a good amount of evidence to show that he turned up on Earth a while back, and did quite a lot of cool, unexplainable (b normal means) things, claimed to be the son of God. So we nailed him to a tree, as he predicted. Then he popped up again, in a flash manner, and then disappeared in a double-flash manner. That, therefore, is not us pinning him down, but him pinning himself down. What a concept to think that God would exist without pointing out to everyone that he was around.

You give me a great many things to think about, Mike. I'm not sure whether we should carry this discussion on here, or in the religion topic, though. Perhaps I shy away from certain certainties of faith, because I am a Relativist. I hope I do not shock you by saying that sometimes I just wish I were a heathen, because the quarrels and divisions about religion and faith are evils unknown to them. It is important to me that there IS a God out there. I do believe the New Testament more or less, but I certainly do not believe it to be the one and only ultimate Book. I think if one becomes too certain of a certain way of worshipping, you become self-righteous, and that is the last thing I want to be. All I see myself fit to accomplish, is to try and be generous and goodwilled (though I often lack both) so that my life will not be a miserable waste in the end, but I need the protection of a divine Being, a kind of gathered force and drive in my life, which my own human nature in itself could never obtain. As far as the blond-haired, blue-eyed Jesus is concerned; the reason why I was being so ironic, is because I know he must have been exactly the opposite, yet that is the way he was depicted in the Children's Bible from which I had to read every night. If you grow up with an image like that you think: Well, if Jesus was white as me, then I must come directly from him, and therefore I am superior to others - after all, my Jesus was like me. That is why I am against a fixed image of God - no matter how w ll painted or sculptured, it is always, always a distortion of what the truth must be to suit our human fancies. In the same breath I must confess that I have just completed a large painting of the Last Supper for an exhibition I'm holding the end of the year - and my Jesus is as imperfect as any other . . . I must think more about the subject though - I cannot answer it just like that without making a fool of myself. I have to think about your comments on the non-sensical comments. Trying to convert me, are you?

Good heavens, Mike, I just read your response again. Where on EARTH did you see/hear evidence that Jesus turned up, whas nailed to a tree, AND DISSAPPEARED IN A DOUBLE-FLASH MANNER?!?! Where was this supposed to happen? You sure it wasn't just someone with very big flash on his camera - Lord Snowdon perhaps? See, that sort of sensationalism does not exist in my Relativist world. All is very personal, very solemn, very unremarkable perhaps. I have even, just this weekend at an art vernisage, heard some artist going through his 'white' phase claim that Mary Magdalene was the bride of Christ . . . What human fancies will dream up next I wonder.

read one of the gospels and try explain jesus ascending to heaven as anything other than "double flash".

darn. pressed the Submit button before I was ready. as for evidence to him having "turned up, been nailed to a tree" etc., read some secular histories based on first-person sources around the time. also, he's mentioned in the Qur'An. many people try and explain away jesus as just "a very good teacher" or "another prophet", but this simply does not work. either what he said was true or it was crap - there is no in between. jesus claimed to be none other than the son of God, along with all of his other teaching, so either he was telling the truth in all of it, or it was all a load of rubbish. no grey areas, just black and white. your adherence to Relativism seems unusual, Riette, since Relativism is a circular, self-defeating concept. a Relativist is a person who believes in there being no absolutes - no absolute values, no absolute truths. yet, this very stance is an absolute - "I absolutely believe there to be no absolute truth". therefore a Relativist can dismiss the idea of absolutes no more than anyone else, since Relativism demands that the Relativist admits "truth for some" in absolutes. which brings another problem. an absolute is exactly that - something which negates something else. this is not allowed by relativism, since Relativism says that absolutes are not allowed; yet it must allow absolutes, since it is Relativism. Relativism contradicts Aristotle's principle of non-contradiction (that a statement cannot be both true and false simultaneously). That's enough Relativistic theory, how about a Relativistic application? The capital of France, to me, is Paris. However, as a Relativist, you could claim that the capital of France - for you - is Rome. That is a direct application of Relativism. But it's wrong, yes? The fact is that we are responding to a real world out there, not creating our own reality. As for me trying to convert you, Riette, I'm just stating the facts and the evidence; however you choose to respond to them is exactly that - your choice. for me, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of one absolute God. carrying this further, which is off topic, points very much toward Jesus.

are you a Protestant then, Mike? which flavor?

Mike, you never cease to amaze me. I now see why this discussion is probably never going to come to an end - except perhaps if we were to meet so that you could see how ordinary I am, that I am no weir extremist! The big difference between our opinions is that you see things black and white, whereas I see black and white and grey. I shall submit my response bit by bit, because my computer is being a real pain with the connection today . . .

To me being a Relativist is not as plain as a black letter drawn upon a white sheet of paper. I think the main problem with the black and white approach to matters, is that one sees not the finer, and often important details of the bigger picture. Don't get me wrong: i certainly do not go around questioning everything in my path - I just try to keep an open mind, that's all.

Saying that relativism has no absolutes is in itself an absolute too, you know, and so I cannot help but disagree. One must be willing to look beyond the simple meaning of the words written so plainly in philosophy dictionaries or even by great philosophers. This is how I look at it: The word 'Relativity' can be connected with many positive words, such as 'correlation', 'interconnection', 'assosiation' and 'approximation'. And that is what is is: not questioning and just not believing things that are obvious to the naked eye anyway, but a certain ALLOWANCE for matters that aren't quite so plain. I mean, for me to claim that Rome was the capital of France would be merely stupid, not in ANY way Relativist or an application of that term; and your very suggestion that it might, insults my intelligence.

I can assure you that my world is no less real, and perhaps even more so, than yours: I shop, I wash, I cook, I work, eat and sleep, and make love to my husband. I don't question any of it, I hold them dear - they are not meaningless fragments of my relativist imagination at all - it is simply so.

I too believe in you Bible, yes, every word of it - the New Testament, that is - but nothing, no-one will ever move me to exclamations of invalue or, even worse, Falsities with regard to the Koran or any other book of belief by a different culture. They are merely different. To you God is the holy Trinity. To certain tribes in Africa, like the bushman, God was at first a mortal like us, and then was cast into the heavans by the trickster god, Karatuma, where He became divine. To the Jews Jesus is yet o come. Are you so arrogant that you cannot allow for God's greatness? The mighty force, the great complicatedness of His very nature? How can you for one moment suggest that He be so simple, so vile as to care about the stories made up about Him in order to make him REAL to us? How can you pretend to see through those mighty eyes? It is the fruits of the belief that counts - and is it not remarkable how those fruits seem to be the same throughout the world with all its different cultures and beliefs, namely oodwill, kindness, generosity, care, affection towards others? Are these things not a great deal more important than our petty human differences on how it all came to be?

very interesting... I prefer to stay away from organized religion and avoid frustrating cyclical arguements such as this (actually I relish the arguement but I believe their is no 'universal truth' to be discovered) Speaking of Truth... sounds like some of you have differing opinions on the subject when a god is mentioned? What say ye??? BTW, I believe in energy. And in matter. And in the spirit. For me it comes together in a way I never "expect" others to understand.

so explain anyway, and let's see if any of us can grasp it

Ag, who cares whether they understand or not, Stacey? As long as our Truths and opinions don't hurt others, it cannot possibly be judged negatively. I think religion and atheism interesting and challenging subjects of conversation, ones that will never become exhausted, but I agree with you: the Truth of the matter is that it is beyond any of us. Explain to me about energy, matter and the spirit - it would interest me, and I think, appeal.

well there is a law in physics that states matter can neither be created nor destroyed. Matter, when it 'disappears' can be transformed into energy. Of course it makes sense to think that when we 'die' our bodies trade one form of matter for another in the decomposition process, but where does our spiritual/emotional energy go? Blah, blah, blah... I could go on and on about my thoughts but here is at least one of my premises.

reincarnationist, eh?

I don't believe in reincarnation - more in dust to dust and all that. But I do like the lines along which you are thinking. Is there more where that came from?

not reincarnation... maybe just recycling of energy. Never think I'll become another human, animal or insect... just pure (unbridled) energy

I thought that was what you are now, at least when you're not sick...

Energy sounds good to me. I can handle that. As long as I know I'm not going to be DEAD dead when I die, I can live with just about anything. I just hope one gets tired of living at some point - hopefully somewhere near the point where death occurs.

the law of physics states that energy cannot be destroyed, stacey, not matter. However, the law of entropy states that that energy becomes gradually less and less useful as it passes through processes. The entropy of the universe is gradually increasing. reincarnation is negated by the fact that we have an exponential population growth.

what about the thousands of extinct species, and those headed there, Mike?

Oh God, I'm gonna be a dino in a million years' time?!!!

sorry, i don't get your point, wer!

if'n matter is destroyed Mike... what is created?? Energy. That is the crux of my point.

energy with ever-increasing entropy and therefore ever-decreasing usefulness. if that energy is not bolstered by something then it will gradually die and become useless.

That is why we have sex.

sex when we're dead? that's the direction we're talking about at the moment - what happens when we die.

No, sex while we are alive. We make babies, and our energy is given to them. And believe me, there is no decrease in energy to be found there. The theories that we have been discussing here are very interesting, but for myself . . .I can see how other people can think so, but personally I don't think anything dead can be a source of energy. To me energy and life go very much hand in hand. (That's one of the reasons why dead people don't tend to have sex. Ha-ha!) I think that when one dies it is the soul that lives on; now, the soul must also be a form of energy, but I think it is energy in a whole different sphere and dimension from what we know. Hence the fear that ghosts instill in us. Ghost don't infuse life into living creatures, they do not contribute in any way to the cycle of life - because they exist on a different level from us. Yet they exist, and therefore I cannot but believe that there must be something hereafter.

my point, Mike, was that in some reincarnation belief systems, one does not necessarily come back as human, so your exponential population growth means nothing because of the extremely large populations of other living organisms on the earth, and if one takes into account the number of species dying on a daily basis then there is more than enough dying to cover those being born... you do know, unless they've changed the law in the last year or so, sex with a corpse is not illegal in florida...

Or Maryland. Some guy just got a reduced sentence last week because his lawyer was able to prove he sexually assaulted his victim with a beer bottle after he murdered her.

I think, wer, that the vast majority of surviving species experience exponential growth rates. without mass extinctions happening every day to large-population species, the two curves (dead and alive) will not meet up. i don't have any hard data for this yet, though, so give me some time.

that's why we have happy, evening-out things like... the plague, cancer, aids... and human-designed catastrophes like... car-wrecks, wars, serial killers... oh and there's always famine if'n we should fall way behind!

Serial killers you say? See, they do have a function in society. I once read an article about a serial killer who used his victims' . . . ahm . . . well, balls to make wallets. Gosh! But practical I suppose. One ball for coins, the other for notes . . .

What did he do with his credit cards and the pictures of his kids?

Why would he have pictures of his kids? They're in the fridge where he can see them every day, aren't they? Credit cards go in the back pocket of his jeans.

more people die in auto accidents than at the hands of serial killers. much more. some data: In the Unites States, 4,000,000 people are injured each year in motor-vehicle accidents; about 70,000 of these suffer spinal-cord or brain damage. 50,000 people lose their lives. An infant born in the United States today faces a chance of 2 in 3 of suffering an injury in a motor-vehicle accident at some time during his life, and he faces a chance of 1 in 60 of ending his life in such an accident. [Source: Physics, 2nd Edition, O'Hanian, H.C., published by W.W. Norton and Co.]

Mike, a personal question: do you ever joke around? If not, then come and join us on the couch . . . I'm dying to provoke you into laughter and silly fooling around.

fool around? yup. but not here. this is my serious zone. if you want to see me fooling, join us in "Babes". :-)

(how's finals?)

(just musing about Mike not being able to 'fool around' in ATHEISM...)

(would seem like the perfect place, wouldn't it?)

exactly my thoughts!

The perfect place for fooling around, or arounding the fool?

that is too deep for me on the last day of school. i will consider it and respond tomorrow.

Was it? No idea what I meant by it either. It was just one of those thoughts that sometimes pop up about two seconds before the total blank. . . .

i think i meant 'fooling around' but 'arounding the fool' really intrigued me!

Well, you know . . . like wrapping him up in his own sideburns.

now THAT'S a visual!

I've SEEN that! You get these men; they lose all their hair, except for that little bit by the sideburn. Then they grow this little cluster of hair very long, and wrap it around their heads, so people will think they've still got all their hair. Now, that's what I call blasphemy!!

i'm taking a friend to church tomorrow. one less athiest to worry about...

Yes - if one is under the impression that going to church makes a person a good Christian . . .

did a conversion take place Mike? BTW, your exams are now complete, are they not?!?! How'd it go?

my friend is the most indecisive person you could ever meet. All I've ever been able to get out of her, on ANY subject, is "I don't know..." She drives me crazy :)

Marry her!! She'll be good for you! I hope she shakes you for the rest of her life! What I'm trying to say, is that I think it is good to be indecisive and not too sure of everything. Because not being sure leaves room for thought and growth and development. Imagine what it would have been like if she had the answers to everything or most things. It would be boring, and you'd probably not bother to be friends with her, being the natural teacher that you are. Also I find that people who are completely certain of everything are generally pretty self-righteous, they feel that they don't need to learn or grow spiritually, they grow fanatic over their own (human) certainties, and that is very unpleasant. You know what I'm trying to say? Besides, I cannot imagine your not relishing the challenge she presents . . .

*laugh* indecisiveness is a gift! (and a way of life!)

but don't quote me on that 'cause I'm not really sure, I think...

See, Mike? (We all put up with Wer and love him all the more for that very thing . . .)

is that what we love him for?!?! I thought it was his ability to handle hot things barehanded!

Not to mention stuffing them . . .

in the appropriate places while still warm?

that's the credit I was giving you!

thanks, I guess, as we don't really know, do we? *wink-wink* *nudge-nudge* (still ain't quite figured that out yet, neither...)

How to stuff, or how to do it to the appropriate things in the appropriate places?

something along the lines of, why wasn't there more stuff in general?

That's more like it!!

then I guess you like it?

Psh - what a question. Shit, yeah!

aack...now you're starting to sound like Stacey... (almost said, "oh, my god," instead of aack, but then I remembered what topic we're in...)

and that is surely a marvelous thing, Riette... sound like me all you want! let's see if we can make WER crazy as a cockroach...(in the can thing)

fair enough

ha-ha! So, which part sounded like Stacey? The blowing noise?

Oh, and Wer, that would be, 'Oh my godless!'

how about, "oh my non-god" ?

or, more in line with Riette's French, "wha da f***?"

in answer to your question in re: sounding like Stacey, Riette, "Shit, yeah!"

Yeah? $hit!!!!

*grin*

Good morning, muffin! Or should I say, night night?

either/or/both... didja miss me?

Like mad!

a think you had a typo, shouldn't it have been Like the mad!

ha-ha Like the hare! Did you miss me is a more difficult question . . . So did ya?

sure, why not?

Too difficult a question to answer. But you know why not.

because I'm empty and thoughtless?

No, because I can't imagine anyone missing the pain in his butt!

You're pi$$ed off with me, aren't you?

nope...