This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Welcome to Our Community

Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

Meaning

Discussion in 'The Philosopher' started by Jimmy... Dead., Mar 7, 2011.

  1. Jimmy... Dead.

    Jimmy... Dead. contemplative curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    489
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Planet Bullshit
    Man is God. We are the given, the evident. What you see as a flaw another sees as basic axioms of the metaphysical absolute. God exist only as an abstraction, man giving this idea an identity and consciously pursuing it doesn't make it real. A mans mind as the producer of such mysticism is man as God.

    Intrinsicism and subjectivism rejects reality.
     
  2. Dak

    Dak mentat

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    24,341
    Likes Received:
    2,807
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Among the Horrors
    So if I think about Fords does that make me a car?
     
  3. Jimmy... Dead.

    Jimmy... Dead. contemplative curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    489
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Planet Bullshit
    Don't be a fool! A Ford is a car, an inanimate object. God is an idea, human conception.

    A car is an object in reality. We know it exist perceptually, conceptually it has identity. It is self evident.

    Abstractions do not exist.
     
  4. crimsonfloyd

    crimsonfloyd Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,021
    Likes Received:
    1,869
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    You just said subjectivism rejects reality. If so, what is the difference between an imaginary idea and a real (and therefore rejected) object? Please explain.
     
  5. Dak

    Dak mentat

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    24,341
    Likes Received:
    2,807
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Among the Horrors
    A car is also an idea, or was at one point a concept with no physical representation. If you went to one of the tribes in South America that had never met civilization, and described a car, they would probably laugh at the possibility, or lack there-of in their eyes.

    The problem with modern civilization is we have grown "too big for our britches" to borrow an old southernism. Even the smartest human among us is still woefully ignorant of so very much. We are a far cry from gods.
     
  6. Jimmy... Dead.

    Jimmy... Dead. contemplative curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    489
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Planet Bullshit
    True, but I can still prove that the car exist. You can't do that with "god" because it is an idea. With the car I have physical perceptual proof and conceptual knowledge.

    I agree, not as a defeatist but as an inspiration to become better. God? never, but a human to envision ultimate individuality.
     
  7. Cythraul

    Cythraul Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    6,755
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I don't understand your line of reasoning here. I'm thinking you must mean "man is God" in a metaphorical sense. I can't see what compelling reason you give for taking that literally. The last line of your post there is suggestive: Man creates things with the use of its mind, and so man is godlike. Is that the reasoning? But then what about the following argument:

    1. Humans take shits.
    2. Dogs take shits.
    --------------------
    Therefore, dogs are humanlike.

    Ok, yes, dogs are humanlike in that particular respect, but if somebody came and told me dogs were humanlike to such a degree that they are humans, I would laugh in their face. But isn't that the sort of reasoning you're putting forward if I'm interpreting you correctly? If not, is your claim not meant to be taken literally? If so, then why even make the claim at all? What particularly interesting issue hangs on the truth or falsity of that claim?
     
  8. Jimmy... Dead.

    Jimmy... Dead. contemplative curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    489
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Planet Bullshit
    Yes.

    This is literal.



    As an abstraction I am giving a new definition to God; interpreted by reality. That's the point.
     

Share This Page