What do you REALLY believe?

[Precious Moments Zalgo]

I put atheist, even though that label says nothing about what I believe.  That label only tells you that there's at least one thing I don't believe.

While I don't pretend to know why there's a universe with us in it, instead of no universe and/or no us, I think that invoking the concept of god to explain it raises more questions than it answers.  I find the spontaneous existence of an unintelligent and purposeless universe much more credible than I find the spontaneous existence of a being capable of purposefully designing and creating a universe.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I put atheist, even though that label says nothing about what I believe.  That label only tells you that there's at least one thing I don't believe.

While I don't pretend to know why there's a universe with us in it, instead of no universe and/or no us, I think that invoking the concept of god to explain it raises more questions than it answers.  I find the spontaneous existence of an unintelligent and purposeless universe much more credible than I find the spontaneous existence of a being capable of purposefully designing and creating a universe.

I'm not sure how credible I find either of those arguments. Either may be possible, but both require a lot of 'human reasoning' which I don't trust for shit.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

I don't pretend to know why there's a universe with us in it, instead of no universe and/or no us,

So you believe that you exist and the universe exists. That's a lot of very unfounded faith right there. I don't think I can really be 100% sure that either exists until I get some cold hard evidence.

[LMNO]

INCOMING!!!!

[Precious Moments Zalgo]

So you believe that you exist and the universe exists. That's a lot of very unfounded faith right there. I don't think I can really be 100% sure that either exists until I get some cold hard evidence.

Heh.  I believe that it's beyond reasonable doubt that I exist and the universe exists, but I'm aware that isn't foolproof.

At any rate, it seems that things usually go better for me if I behave as if the objects and people around me are real and that my actions have consequences.  Whether the barstool is real or not is moot -- I just don't want to be hit over the head with it.

I'm not sure how credible I find either of those arguments. Either may be possible, but both require a lot of 'human reasoning' which I don't trust for shit.

Me neither.  I don't consider either to be particularly compelling.  I was speaking of their credibility relative to each other, in my own judgment.  I don't need either to be true or false, and if I were to become convinced that Deism is true, I don't think it would really make a difference as to how I live my life.

If, on the other hand, I were to become convinced that one of the more vengeful gods were actually behind it, then I probably would change my life to avoid his or her wrath, because I'm a pussy like that.

PMZ,
is praying it's not Cthulhu.

[Aufenthatt]

I believe that at one point I had some great ideas about reality and had a freeing enlightenment.
Unfortunatly I forgot them, because part of them was not writing things down.
I do remember how I could act, even if I can't remember why, so untill I remember again i'll just act in a way that I thought was good while I could remember the thing that I can no longer remember, to the best of my ability, while at the same time questioning as much as I can, so long as I remember to do so.

Or not.

Its up to me.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

So you believe that you exist and the universe exists. That's a lot of very unfounded faith right there. I don't think I can really be 100% sure that either exists until I get some cold hard evidence.

Heh.  I believe that it's beyond reasonable doubt that I exist and the universe exists, but I'm aware that isn't foolproof.

At any rate, it seems that things usually go better for me if I behave as if the objects and people around me are real and that my actions have consequences.  Whether the barstool is real or not is moot -- I just don't want to be hit over the head with it.

I'm not sure how credible I find either of those arguments. Either may be possible, but both require a lot of 'human reasoning' which I don't trust for shit.

Me neither.  I don't consider either to be particularly compelling.  I was speaking of their credibility relative to each other, in my own judgment.  I don't need either to be true or false, and if I were to become convinced that Deism is true, I don't think it would really make a difference as to how I live my life.

If, on the other hand, I were to become convinced that one of the more vengeful gods were actually behind it, then I probably would change my life to avoid his or her wrath, because I'm a pussy like that.

PMZ,
is praying it's not Cthulhu.

Hear Hear

[Cain]

I believe, I believe
With every breath that I breathe
You and me can turn a whisper to a scream
I believe, I believe
\


You'd be horrified how many bad bands and acts have the words "I believe" as part of their lyrics.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

It's an autosuggestion trigger for influencing the method of dealing with cognitive dissonance. "I believe that this band doesn't suck nearly as much as they seem to, and that my money was therefore not wasted on this damned 'i believe' song."

[Kai]

You mean, sort of like how in Discordianism, chaos encompasses everything, and within chaos is order and disorder?

Kind of, except that entropy and negentropy don't cleanly correlate to order and chaos any more than good and evil do. But it's the same kind of balance; mostly just that the active domains are separated from the passive domains. Negentropy is close to what McKenna called 'novelty' -- it is basically new and interesting ideas, and the level of negentropy is determined by how difficult it is to predict by referring to existing order, while meanwhile negentropy adds to the existing order, while entropy breaks down order into disorder and adds stuff back into the pool of 'stuff' that negentropy draws from. Sort of like cutting the individual words out of a book and sticking them in a hat: cutting them up is entropy, and picking them out and making sentences out of them that weren't in the original book is negentropy, and it's entropy again when you get bored and stick them back in the hat.

Your example reminded me of Mal-2's statement:

He becomes free to play order games and change them at will. He becomes free to play disorder games just for the hell of it. He becomes free to play neither or both. And as the master of his own games, he plays without fear, and therefore without frustration, and therefore with good will in his soul and love in his being.

And that there reminds me of a passage from The Process of Sustaining.

[Soul Sojourner]

Hmm, I put atheist simply because I believe in no gods, but I do have beliefs.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Hmm, I put atheist simply because I believe in no gods,

Optimist.

[Telarus]

Hmm, I put atheist simply because I believe in no gods, but I do have beliefs.

Mammon still jacks your paycheck, just the same.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Hmm, I put atheist simply because I believe in no gods, but I do have beliefs.

Mammon still jacks you paycheck, just the same.

FORUM ORVER.

TELARUS WINS.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Hmm, I put atheist simply because I believe in no gods,

Optimist.

An optimist believes that this is the best of all potential worlds. A pessimist fears that the optimist may be right.