The God Concept

[Terry]

Tessa K, I will try your tip by quoting you as follows:

In order to quote my post above, I just hit the Quote button. I did this so I could say, ignore the at the end of my post, I don't know how that got in there.

Back to top
llLet's see...

[Tessa K]

That worked, except that the stray [/i] in my post confused it!

[Max]

Hi Terry

I suppose my starting point is social, coming from a political background that embraces philosophy, politics, history

I suspect that makes you a minority among sceptics and therefore an opportunity for us to learn from your varied epistemologies.

Would scepticism be that which homes in on the authentic by exposing beliefs and everyday assumptions about how things are and operate?

Your question now means more to me knowing a bit more about the context from which it was asked. Could you give examples of the beliefs and everyday assumptions to which you refer?

Max

[Terry]

Max, back to our discussion. The American theologian Paul Tillich in his Systematic Theology says: "The question of the existence of God can neither be asked nor answered. If asked, it is a question about that which by its very nature is above existence, and therefore the answer - whether negative or affirmative - implicitly denies the nature of God. It is as atheistic to affirm the existence of God as to deny it. p.262 (my emphasis)

Isn't this wonderous stuff! Kant I think, says that the God concept is a regulative idea, a 'moral intuition' (so did he prefigure the 'god gene'?).
I much prefer his rejoinder to Descartes about the necessary existence of God, when the latter argues that it is impossible to have a triangle without its having three sides and three angles, ergo, it is impossible to have God without having His necessary existence. Kants says to have a triangle without three angles is a contradiction, but you don't have to have a triangle, ergo; if you accept God, it is logical to accept his necessary existence, but you do not have to accept God. The definition of a triangle says nothing about its existence because existence is not a predicate.

For me the argument for God's existence cannot establish reference, God-talk has no reality. No arguments that set out to establish the existence of God are acceptable to someone who does not already believe.

I remind myself of the following: THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS THE EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE. That satisfies me and is a sceptic's major premise.

Terry

[Max]

Hi Terry

Let's take this bits at a time cause there's too much for my wee brain to digest! :)

The question of the existence of God can neither be asked nor answered. If asked, it is a question about that which by its very nature is above existence

Why is the question above existence?

Max

[Terry]

Max wrote:
Let's take this bits at a time cause there's too much for my wee brain to digest!

That's a bit disconcerting Max. Feels as if I'm being taken down a peg or two. The last thing I want to be is a patient teacher instructing a slow-witted pupil. You appear to be condescending, or taking the piss, or simply unaware of others' sensibilities.

I daresay I deserve it and I guess that arcane theology isn't quite suitable for the sceptic forum.

Fair enough chum...ta ta...

[Max]

I do apologise Terry. It was an attempt at humour on my part which clearly failed. What I was trying to convey is that there was so much rich content in your post that I needed to take it a bit at a time since my background is in different areas to yours.

Please do come back and continue the discussion. I'll stay away from attempts at humour.
Max

[Terry]

Max, I feel somewhat ashamed at my petulance and your gentlemanly reply. If anyone should be apologising 'tis I. Getting touchy in me old age...

It occurs to me that I'm just indulging in some self-taught theology and showing how clever I can be. That bullshit weakness that I spoke of got the better of me.

If you would agree I'd like to start over by changing the subject, and perhaps the forum category, to the nature/nurture area of discourse. I am genuinely intrigued by this, being a monozygotic twin, and the science is on a firmer footing perhaps than with theology. I'd be interested to hear from your fellow contributors as I grope about in this field.

I don't know where that leaves the God Concept topic, perhaps just hanging, but if I ever were to return to it, the anti-bull firewall in my head should flag up for me when I'm trying it on.

Again, apologies for my bad manners.

Terry

[Max]

Hi Terry

Thank you and it's no problem at all.

I've often observed that skeptical chat has a tendency toward the emotive, and I'm sure there is a study waiting to happen on this topic!

I think that one possible reason for this emotive potential is that by its nature, and if done properly, skepticism necessarily challenges dearly held beliefs and assumptions. I know I get heated on some topics and then soon regret it.

(As an aside, I believe that skeptics are less willing to question some of our own assumptions, but that is another topic.)

Anyway, you raised some interesting points on the God Concept which I think may impinge nicely on skeptical issues. One was particularly intriguing and that is:

If one can construct a question about something (e.g. like the existence of God), can one then truly say that it is above questioning?

This answer is important to skeptics because it argues that some topics may be off limits. If this is so, what are these topics and what are the grounds for their exclusion? e.g. should we avoid topics for which we cannot formulate questions? Or avoid those for which there is no hope of gathering empirical evidence? Should those topics be handed to more general philosophers?

However, we can leave this topic open if you prefer. Would you like me to kick off a nature/nurture thread?

Max

[Terry]

Max, Thanks for your response. I think that I'll leave the God Concept alone for a while though I do feel that nothing should be off-limits to sceptics; however, religiosity and especially philosophy of religion, can be pretty murky and hard going. There are betters things to do with our time.

Yes, please set up a Nature/Nurture thread and I'll dive in with some comments/questions to kick things off, if that's acceptable.

Terry

[Max]

Hi Terry

Cool - the thread is set up here in the General Skeptical Chat forum:

http://skeptic.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=180

Max