How can god not exist?

If a dirty, drunken, homeless person was standing outside talking when nobody appeared to be with him, would the cops arrest him for being a public nusense or just assume they were talking to GOD? If for whatever reason they believe that they are talking to GOD, does GOD talk back to them? I'll assume the cops and mental hospitals say he's nuts for believing he could talk to GOD because they don't think GOD exists.

If any welfare mother didn't want to name their babies father, could she put GOD as the father's name....seeing as GOD made us all? Seeing as GOD made us all then why do unwed teenage girls get such a bad rep when they have a baby?

 

"How can God not exist? in the same way that other human mental constructions don't exist, for example, fictional characters, the phlogeston theory of conbustion and so on."

The point is why don't the other mental constructions don't exist? They exist in someone's mind and therefore they exist (somewhere, when we say they exist we don't imply any particular location). Of course this is not practical and the point I'm making is that in this case we trust our intuition over logic. So what does this mean?

 

It means that you have NO PROOF or solid hand-held evidence to show us that GOD, santa claus, tooth fairy, Easter bunny, or charlie Brown's great pumpkin exists except in a book and some people's mind. Guess seeing as they are all in somebody's mind they are all real

 

Any concept is only real in the mind, in the realm of the 'ideal', unless there is either sensory evidence or irrefutable logical proof of it's existence in the actual universe.

To say that because it exists in the mind it must be real is to make an illicit transition from the realm of the ideal to the realm of concrete reality.

Saint Anselm's famous 'proof' of God's exitence - that God is the highest that can be thought or concieved and therefore must exist, because by definition the 'highest that can be thought' must exist (it would't be the highest otherwise) - collapses for the same reason.

At least, this is so for the discursive intellect...

 

Okay. This seems to be the only pertinent part of your post. Thank you. Also, you may want to stop calling whatever you're refering to "string" theory, as there is more than one string theory. Just my opinion though.

 

I would say that that statement is somewhat true, if a bit vague. Do you consider yourself capitalist? Do you think that "Leninism leads to Stalinism"? Do you still believe that most societies on earth today are split between 2 or more antagonistic classes? These are the kinds of questions I was referring to. Please, walk me through your development.

I would completely disagree. That's why statements like these are useless.

I understand your idea completely. That's why I believe the definition you have of "reality" is futile, and that you should no longer use the word.

Also, I missed this before:

Although I tend to disagree slightly with your wording, that is absolutely true. What I feel is not reality, just my model of it. And sometimes I have to sit back and say, "That's rather counter-intuitive. I suppose I was mistaken."

Again, I feel I should *suggest* substituting the word "reality" with "mind model."

This seems to be a false dichotomy, but perhaps I just don't understand what you mean.

Now--and I may be mistaken here--are you referring to pragmatism in the sense of Peirce and James? The idea that basically says, "if you believe something, it's true, because you believe it." I severely hope not. Not only is this idea utterly bunk, but it's dangerous bunk. And being "extremely happy" takes a far backseat to trying to discover the truth--that's a handy little thing I call conscience. If you are a pragmatist in this sense, then you will be happy to know that you were never a Marxist. Someone that believes concepts are true because they make you happy simply does not have the tools necessary to understand Marxism. But again, I may have jumped the gun if this is not the version of pragmatism you subscribe to. If so, I apologize.

 

God, Jesus whatever you wanna call him, was made up my Man, There is no god, Nor is there heaven , hell ,

 

LOL. No, you're the doody-head.

So rich kids are supposed to be intelligent now? When did this happen? Just admit that you're pulling phrases out of your ass and twisting real scientists' hypotheses. Do you actually believe that anyone here--that anyone anywhere--believes you developed the string theory (because there's only one according to you!) and then just happened to figure out it was a theory being discussed by mainstream scientists? It's called illusions of grandeur, kid!!!!!!1112

And what are you talking about, $10,000? How old are you? Because $10,000 isn't even enough for a single semester at some schools nowadays.

 

I believe that their could be A GOD, but that God could not possibly be the Christian God. That God just doesn't work.

Think of it this way.

God creates two perfect humans, Adam and Eve. Perfect. Without flaw. Without the capability to become flawed. They err. This is impossible, but it happens and men are cast from Eden. Some still get to heaven, but some people are doomed to Hell. That really sucks.

So, I wonder, why? Why does God allow this to happen if he loves us so? He is omniscient, which means he knew that Adam and Eve would fail him. He knew that some of us would suffer hellfire and torment, yet he went ahead and did what he did anyway, all in the name of free choice.

Which, if we were created by this God, is also impossible. If he knows what will eventually happen, then he knows how every little change he inflicts upon the Earth will affect the future generations and so on. Something as little as placing a tree in one spot over another could change the course of humanity and, knowing how these things would affect us, he created Earth, and the animals that live with us here. Knowing how all of his creations would interact and how that would decide their fate, he created us.

So, there is no free will, and God would be damning people rather randomly, if he did exist.

That's why I don't believe that he does exist.

 

gosh spent all those dollar bills so you must be clever.

 

Midnight

Interesting stuff.
Sorry for not following the sci and tech forum more closley.
Tend to pick out subjects like time/relativity..and nanotek.

Occam also believes that space... is not simply the 'emptyness'..Or lack of something..
Space, or 3 dimensional extension..
Is a thing in itself.

Zero point theory and others support this.

As to string theory..occam is woefully ignorant..
Thought he understands your conceptualisation to an extent.

Thank you..

Occam

 

One of the many many many reasons why i don' think the ol boy is up there either.

 

God is arbitrary, and selfish.

 

freakyjoeman..have you any smaller pictures of yourself . I just hate seeing your mug. No offense or anything. . its like having a realy expensive sports car , when you have a small............

 

I think you must acknowledge the fact that a nimbly, bimbly, little kitty might have a higher understanding of string theory than yourself. I mean, look how much fun they have with it.

 

Sure it does. Maybe you just don't understand humor. Dork.

 

What is perfect?...the perfect person or perfect body might be different for each of us.
How do you know the hell exists? Can you prove you go to heaven or hell....has anyone came back to tell you where they went after death?

 

i was gonna say it sounded pretty from what i've read. he pulled from the cat and heisenburg's uncertainty principle all i've gotten and put it concisely. now, i don't know what's true (haha, sorry), but could you explain the "the point of the hypoethical for me?"

 

I don't know how to make the images smaller. Curse my horrible photoshop skills!

 

its only as overtly HUGE as some others...not too worry. i wil get used too it..