Once again you mock the distinction I make between an either/or world bursting at the seams with facts demonstrably applicable to all of us, and our subjective/subjunctive reactions – conflicted reactions – to those facts, insofar as we have pursued our basic needs historically embedded in one or another political economy.
Really, why on earth would you propose something so patently untrue?
Same here. As I noted recently to zero sum on the JSS thread:
[b]Like most of us, I am reasonably certain the empirical world around me is in fact applicable to all of us. 24/7 as it were. In fact, the overwhelming preponderance of our interactions with others [here or elsewhere] appear to clearly revolve around demonstrable truths.
After all, it would seem that since the Big Bang [whatever that means] a staggering proportion of material interactions happened only as they ever could have. Immutably some suggest.
Where things get mysterious however is when matter evolved into brains evolved into a consciousness able to grapple with the “philosophical” implications of it all.
Then the part where minds react to all the either/or stuff only to bump into other minds who react quite differently. Then what is the truth? Let’s call this the is/ought world.[/b]
Yet [no doubt] you will continue to level this absurd charge against me down the road.
Not really sure what your point is here, but I would never argue that all exchanges here should start with the assumption that we live in a No God world.
How on earth could I possibly know that?!!!
Instead, that just takes folks like me back to the gap between what I think I know/believe about God “in my head” here and now, and all that would need to be known about Existence itself to be sure.
Of course God is one possible explanation. Maybe even your own rendition of Him.
But: All any of us here can do is try to persuade others that our own frame of mind about these things may well reflect the optimal assessment. But I sure as shit am not arguing that I am able to demonstrate that it’s mine. I only note the manner in which I have come existentially to think myself into believing that we live in an essentially absurd and meaningless world that ends in oblivion for my own particular “I”.
And then to ask others who do not believe this is applicable to them to at least make an attempt to demonstrate to folks like me why they don’t.
No, I think that the existence of God is of fundamental importance in exploring human interactions that come into conflict over value judgments.
And in all the ways that I have noted.
But thanks for the advice.