Re: A crisis in prayer

In <38ekc5htrlmlcpvbvmh9boo8il8hbv8phh@xxxxxxx> Yisroel Markov <ey.markov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Maybe I'm unclear of what you meant by "our system." My system, the
scientific system, works very well for dealing with reality.

Right. I use it, too. It works very well within this universe.
Outside, all bets are off.

OK - but you don't seem to use it exclusively, see below.

But I didn't
think that was the system you were referring to, thought you meant your
religious/philosophical system, which of course has nothing to do with
logic applied to observation.

How do you know that? What do you know of my religious/philosophical
system anyway, or how it differs from, say, Micha's? Or whatever
you've observed at Mir?

Pardon me if I misunderstood, but I thought we were talking about the
theodicy contradiction. I guess I'm not being clear - I'm saying that,
IMO, there are two choices with regards to that contradition - either you
say that logic is valid, and therefore God is a) evil b) limited in scope
or c) doesn't exist, or else you say, as I thought you did, that logic is
invalid. In my opinion - and this is my point, my premise - you can't
assert that logic is broken here but OK elsewhere. If you've found even a
single contradiction in logic itself, then all of logic must be discarded
- it's been disproven. (Newtonian physics isn't a contradiction of
Einstienean physics)

That, specifically, is the religious/philosophical system I'm referring
to.

Well, that's the question I was asking - if it is in fact real.

If you can't tell the difference, does it matter?

Well, that's the point back at you - the head-banger chose a different
wall, but can he tell the difference? Is there a difference to him? We're
saying look, you have a choice, you picked a different wall, and he might
well be saying "choice? what kind of choice is that?"

To expand: I have something I perceive as free will. It looks and
feels pretty real to me. So why should I care if it's "real" vis-a-vis
an omnipotent being?

I actually agree with that.

(I hold similar views regarding reincarnation - even if my soul has
visited this world prior to this body, it is completely irrelevant to
me, since I can detect not a whiff of those prior incarnations.)

Certainly. Of course, be careful because I take this precise argument one
step further - if I can't tell whether or not God exists, then it too is
completely irrelevant to me, since I can detect not a whiff of his
existence or lack thereof.

Doesn't work means doesn't work. If you've proven that it's broken, then
it's broken.

Proven? How?

You provided the proof yourself. You've shown that God is Good AND God is
Omnipotent AND God is not (GOOD AND OMNIPOTENT) is not consistent. X = !X,
the system fails.

If it's the case that sometimes (X = Y) AND (X != Y) then you've got a
problem with your entire system, not just at the extremes, because there's
no yardstick to tell you when you're near an extreme.

OK, then the statement "logic is broken" is not a good one. I'm not
saying that logic doesn't work in our universe - only outside of it.
But for a moment, you seemed to be saying something that I could
relate to, so I latched onto it. Too soon, it seems.

The logic of theodicy exists inside our universe. If logic is broken, it's
broken inside our universe. You can't just punt.

But you weren't claiming this revelation was historical - you were
claiming it was personal experience.

What?! When did I ever do that?

On Oct 2nd - "E.g., even assuming a Sinai Revelation, how are we to know
that the entity that appeared to us was indeed who He said He was, and not
some lesser supernatural power?"

I was going on the "appeared to us" - but perhaps I missed the "even
assuming." If so, sorry.

I have to ask again - are you sure you know me/my views that well?

That's why I asked who was standing
to your left. Not only do I not have any evidence of your personal
experience, but neither do you.

No argument. That's why I was so puzzled by your question - it was
like you were talking to someone else.

I think I read too quickly over your "even assuming," sorry again. That's
that's the answer I generally hear from O folk here - that they "know"
because of the revelation at Sinai, hence my question about who was
standing next to you. If you're not asserting that, then I withdraw the
question.

--s
--

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A crisis in prayer
    ... I guess I'm not being clear - I'm saying that, ... single contradiction in logic itself, then all of logic must be discarded ... we're not even applying logic to God - we're ... The logic of theodicy exists inside our universe. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: Evolution and faith in God: is there any contradiction?
    ... believe in God. ... I don't see any contradiction. ... as I can tell the universe can be explained without one. ... being is contrary to an accepted law of physics, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Some Serious Holes In Atheism
    ... There is no contradiction in saying God has always existed. ... there a contradiction in saying the universe has always ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Mr Dawkins new book?
    ... The psalmist is saying that God is present everywhere. ... conditions of the universe, ... Marcus's original statement wasn't that God "sustains the ...
    (uk.religion.christian)
  • Re: Darwin was a Theist!
    ... that one can deny knowledge and admit faith. ... Saying one has faith there ... You say there is a God, and the atheist says there is none. ... outside the universe, with unspecified qualities, that humans ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading