God and philosophy

[BH]

People throughout history have tried to defend the existence of their god or gods using philosophy. but in the end does it really matter? any god or gods that exist have no obligation to confirm to our philosophical stipulations.

please critique this idea for me.

 

[abaddon]

Philosophy isn't stipulations, it's the rational thinking we do with people's "stipulations" about their god.

Finding how well or poorly anyone's conception of a god conforms to reason and experience is what humans must do for ourselves -- to sort our thoughts about the god. It's not that the 'almighty' god must answer to merely human expectations, but that our thoughts should be consistent with experience. If the god doesn't fit our experience of the world, then that's a problem for that conception of the god.

 

[steve_bank]

People throughout history have tried to defend the existence of their god or gods using philosophy. but in the end does it really matter? any god or gods that exist have no obligation to confirm to our philosophical stipulations.

please critique this idea for me.

Being atheist I'd say ot all depends on how you imagine a particular god.

Christians vary in thir images, from angry and vengeful hating gays to loving and inclusive of all including gays.

As atheist philosophically I believe throughout history people make gods into their own images.

So when religious conflict and viol;ence occurs, maybe it is due not to the gods, but people confcting over their own self images.

Images of Buddha in Asia vary. Local images tend to reflect the local racial characteristics.

Wen I was a kid in the home of a black kid I knew in the 60s I saw a painting of a black Jesus on the wall, not the Euro-centric porcelain white blond haired version.

Christians, Jews, and Muslims supposedly all believe in e same god, yet historically have had comfcts often bloddy wars.

From a book I read on Islam during the first European Catholic Crusade Jews and Muslims were fighting side by side against te Christians. Now there is bitter conflict between Jes and Muslims

I read a book Guide For The Perpexed by Moses Maimonides a Jewsih rabbi and scholar in the 12th century. In his day he was known for trying to reconcile philosophy, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

In all 3three taditions today such brdge buiders do not dare well.

Gandhi tried to bridge Hindus and Muslims knowing he'd probably get assassinated for it. Which he did.

Who was responsible for Gandhi death?


Nathuram Vinayak Godse

Nathuram Vinayak Godse (19 May 1910 – 15 November 1949) was the assassin of Mahatma Gandhi. He was a Hindu nationalist from Maharashtra who shot Gandhi in the chest three times at point blank range at a multi-faith prayer meeting in Birla House in New Delhi on 30 January 1948.

Not all. but as groups the three Abrmic traditions are phillisohaccly opposed to each other.

Israeli nationalists opposed any compromises with Muslim states. Still do. As does Mulsim Iran with Israel.

The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the fifth prime minister of Israel, took place on 4 November 1995 (12 Marcheshvan 5756 on the Hebrew calendar) at 21:30, at the end of a rally in support of the Oslo Accords at the Kings of Israel Square in Tel Aviv.

Good topic.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

People throughout history have tried to defend the existence of their god or gods using philosophy...

And people throughout history have responded by attempting to falsify the Gods using philosophy.

...but in the end does it really matter?

Does what matter to whom? I assume you're asking if philosophy is important to religious believers and skeptics in making a case against the opposing side. For me, the answer is yes. I use sound logic in everything I do including finding evidence for Gods. So far I know of no such evidence.

...any god or gods that exist have no obligation to confirm to our philosophical stipulations.

I think any real Gods do need to conform to our standards of evidence if they want rational people to believe in them.

 

[DBT]

If faith is to believe, and philosophy is to inquire, it seems the two shall aways be in conflict.

 

[Jarhyn]

People throughout history have tried to defend the existence of their god or gods using philosophy. but in the end does it really matter? any god or gods that exist have no obligation to confirm to our philosophical stipulations.

please critique this idea for me.

I think largely religion fails to understand that God is not a thing one should be believing exists or not.

It's not that kind of idea.

"God" is like a character in a story, one where it can be postulated to exist or not.

In philosophy, this makes of the idea of 'god' a sort of lever that can be used to prove useful math.

One could stipulate for example that one has problems relating to the nature of mathematical systems in general. One could for the sake of exploring the nature of such systems a "God" character who makes such systems and by exploring the sorts of things that would be true about this system, come to conclusions of systems in general, and about people, namely the kinds of people who make such systems!

As such, the existence of this "god" character in our own story of reality is unimportant.

Its about using whare ever ideas we encounter, even the idea of a creative "god" character, to live better lives here, for the sake of each other. Believe in, or against, such characters spoils the usefulness of the character itself in narrative explorations.

If you believe it can't exist, you turn away from using it in building understanding about systems. If you believe it must exist through revelation or other logical necessity, you turn away from any of the actual useful conclusions it can lead you to: you lose touch with doubt.

Neither outcome is good.

Belief, for or against, is simply not wise.

 

[SIB]

People throughout history have tried to defend the existence of their god or gods using philosophy. but in the end does it really matter? any god or gods that exist have no obligation to confirm to our philosophical stipulations.

please critique this idea for me.

you are kind of right to me. The base line line is that the belief in some thing more is so far more reliable than th reverse that only only personal need counters that position. Almost, but not quite as much, as a deity thing.

 

[SIB]

People throughout history have tried to defend the existence of their god or gods using philosophy. but in the end does it really matter? any god or gods that exist have no obligation to confirm to our philosophical stipulations.

please critique this idea for me.

I think largely religion fails to understand that God is not a thing one should be believing exists or not.

It's not that kind of idea.

"God" is like a character in a story, one where it can be postulated to exist or not.

In philosophy, this makes of the idea of 'god' a sort of lever that can be used to prove useful math.

One could stipulate for example that one has problems relating to the nature of mathematical systems in general. One could for the sake of exploring the nature of such systems a "God" character who makes such systems and by exploring the sorts of things that would be true about this system, come to conclusions of systems in general, and about people, namely the kinds of people who make such systems!

As such, the existence of this "god" character in our own story of reality is unimportant.

Its about using whare ever ideas we encounter, even the idea of a creative "god" character, to live better lives here, for the sake of each other. Believe in, or against, such characters spoils the usefulness of the character itself in narrative explorations.

If you believe it can't exist, you turn away from using it in building understanding about systems. If you believe it must exist through revelation or other logical necessity, you turn away from any of the actual useful conclusions it can lead you to: you lose touch with doubt.

Neither outcome is good.

Belief, for or against, is simply not wise.

everybody makes up a philosophy to help our selves get through pie hole we call life. I am ignoring metal illness or personality disorders.
We can make up a story based on what we do know or we can make up a story that self justifies ourselves. Weather we are atheist or theist is kind of secondary to that to me.