Sikh Philosophy Network - View Single Post

curious seeker · #90 (**permalink**) 24-Mar-2010, 10:16 AM

[quote=Confused;123031]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atheist

...............I am merely trying to figure out why people on this forum believe in god for my own curiosity and education. And if in the process I find god, all the better, because I get closer to the truth (let us recall, everyone on this forum has the same goal - to find truth, whatever it may be). I prefer if people on here speak their mind so I know what you're thinking, as that also helps me get closer to the truth, yes?

Atheist ji.

You say, “Everyone on this forum has the same goal - to find truth, whatever it may be”.

I’d like to respond to the above, which is tangential to what you are asking, but I hope no one minds that I go into this a bit. It is about what I consider truth and reality.

As I write this, I am aware of some preconceptions influencing my thoughts. These thoughts pertain to the matter of what is truth / reality and what is not. If I wasn’t aware of this and instead went on to simply express whatever that came to mind, could I then be said to ‘know’ the truth? Or would it be an instance at best, of putting forward some concepts and expecting to influence others?

The point I am trying to make is this:

If there is no understanding of what is really going on when thinking about what we think, one can’t be said to ‘know’ the truth. And when there isn’t even an interest in this, how can one ever consider oneself to be ‘seeking’ truth?

In short, truth is either known or it isn’t. Yes, there are degrees of this understanding which can be gradually developed to ever deeper levels. However if one has no inclination to acknowledge even in principle, that the truth pertains to the experience “now”, then one is likely going along with some illusion and not touching upon the matter of truth.

Religion in general encourages people to *believe* in what it puts forward as truth. The result is that some people end up mindlessly following some rite and ritual (including the seemingly useful activity known as ‘meditation’), or else they are involved in projecting into their experiences what they like to see. However religion also talks about the value of such things as kindness, truthfulness, morality, generosity etc. and the harm in greed, pride, envy, hatred and so on. A person sincerely following his religion, who on one hand remains ignorant as to what the truth is, may in spite of this, still on occasion act rightly and therefore said to have gained some good out of his religion.

But can the same be said about science? Science is equally lost with regard to what the ‘truth’ is. It starts with concepts and ends with concepts and its means of investigation involve not one instance of having recognized the truth. But the science person believes otherwise, indeed most of those who believe in religion are also drawn in by the arguments and explanations offered. However when it comes to that which religion correctly teaches about, the person of science who is moral and kind, would have been so not due to his education in science, but in fact any ‘religious’ inclinations that he might have.

In other words, although religion largely misses the point with regard to truth, it however does point out rightly, about the value of good and disadvantages of evil. Science would likely dismiss these as being only relative, having flitted off to pre-conceived ideas one or the other. But for the one who walks the path of goodness, there is no doubt for example, that kindness, morality, compassion and so on are intrinsically valuable and that greed, pride, jealousy, miserliness, aversion etc. are intrinsically undesirable. In this regard hence, the man of religion is on firmer ground and is likely more stable. The person of science in trying to explain consciousness and such things as will, perception, feeling, moral restraint, kindness, generosity, greed, hatred and so on in terms of his acquired knowledge, must necessarily face inner conflict when doing this.

One question for both theist and atheist, ideas about creation, origination of the universe and such, why are these ever important?

Confused ji

Creation is central to theism and its validity. If there is a creator, then the whole ethical situation changes radically, we are placed in subordinate position to an entity that must be greater than us, and that, clearly, its greater in power and and knowledge. In fact man is faced with two undeniable and self evident everyday realities about his material surroundings and his own self. One everything is temporal, unlasting, ever changing and involves both plain and pleasure. Two, man lacks knowledge and is mired in ignorance and must accumulate knowledge, both individually and as a race.

These, above, are self evident truths, what are not so quite as clear are other things that we consider true, such as, self, free choice, conscience and predispositions. These might or might not be phenomena that are true or not true. They are basically semantic and mental constructs that we create which many or may not reflect a deeper reality that we have no complete and exact knowledge of.

If there is creator then ethics has an objective and absolute aspect and life would have some sort of ultimate purpose, independent of our will and our desires. Also if there is a Creator, then our logic and common sense are validated, since it is clear that all that we can observe has an origin and a cause. Moreover if there is a creator then atheism and agnosticicim have no validity.

On the other hand if there is no creator we are simply the products of an intelligence that is infused in the very fabric of reality and that just simply IS, taking different forms for unknown reasons. OR there is nothing but chemical, biological and physical interactions that through time and chance have produced what is. Both these poissibilities give no Objective purpose and grounding to ethics which then becomes strictly situational; and subjective.

That is the importance of a Creator in my opinion. As an aside from our present, and foreseeable positions, as a race we lack enough knowledge to prove or disprove the Atheist or the Theist, on strictly logical and empirical grounds. However, the Theist can attain intimate and undeniable proof and knowledge of a Creator through a personal experience with Deity. An experiemce so powerful and overwhelming that it cannot be denied. (For the one who is experiencing it of course)

Divine Light for Us
Curious