Yes, this sort of thinking is ineffably embedded in a brain that can precipitate a mind and that can precipitate an “I” able to think this.
And, here and now, I can’t even begin to explain that myself. It might be traced back to a God, the God, my God…or to the God of Spinioza…or to a wholly determined universe in which all of this is only ever as it ever could have been. And that’s before we get to simulated worlds, and dream worlds and Matrix/Inception realities.
That’s why I can only come back to the part where whatever you have come to define God to be, you are able to demonstrate that it reflects the most rational definition of all.
Otherwise, in my view, it all becomes entangled in “I” as the embodiment of dasein.
But this sort of “general description” assessment [like mine above] still needs to be explored/encompassed existentially by focusing in on actual behaviors chosen by actual individuals in relationship to the manner in which they define God. Otherwise it all gets yanked up into the stratosphere of dueling definitions and deductions. Natural laws either explain all of our behaviors, or God is involved, or, sans God, we are able to choose freely to think, feel, say and do the things that we opt for.
But how then to actually prove that?
But existence itself [to most religious people] is synonymous with God. Just as [ultimately[ nature must be.
But: Gun control, immigration, the consumption of animals, gender roles, the role of government, immigration, war and peace, capital punishment, abortion, busing, separation of church and state, and on and on and on: With or without God, what constitutes a positive in life? Clearly, given particular political policies, what some see as overcoming suffering, others see as creating it.
And that’s when, in presuming a No God world, the components of my own philosophy kick in.
Which just brings me back to this:
1] someone defines God in a particular way
2] this definition then allows them to reflect on the relationship between God, nature, natural disasters and mere mortals coping with the terrible results of them
But: How does their definition of God account for the fact that mere mortals are left to cope with the consequences of disasters that can only be attributed to God Himself?
Yes, but we still need to bring less restrictive views down to earth and explore them in a particular context. And then connect the dots between that and Judgment Day. A cafeteria Christian gets to pick and choose the behaviors that he or she presumes is okay with God. But then any number of other far more orthodox denominations protest vigorously that this is not the case at all. So, how then ought God to be defined here in order to reconcile this? Again, with so much at stake throughout all of eternity: immortality, salvation, divine justice.
But then all societies have to deal with natural disasters. And millions upon millions have been forced to fight to survive regarding calamities that are anything but man-made.
With regard to man-made struggles, who gets to actually decide who is to blame for this or that experience going terribly wrong? Who gets to decide how individuals from the inside out can make things right? What things? In what contexts? Given whose rendition of rewards and punishment?
And are we to just dismiss altogether the part played by those struggling to upend the policies of the rich and powerful who own and operate the global economy. Hoping against hope that they have a “revolution of the soul” in sync with what you construe to be “the right thing to do”?
In other words, from my point of view this sort of assessment…
…is just another classic example of the “general description”. The mentality of those who do not construe human interaction as I do given the points raised in my signature threads.
Their own non-ideological “revolution of the soul” all comes together “in their head” to create this wonderful rendition of how the world could be: youtu.be/Nz9BNwbKM0M
Some with God, some without.
Well, until [like most things] it all becomes “politicized”: npr.org/2012/01/13/14505950 … -bad-thing
Or, rather, so it all seems to me.