| This might look a bit straightforward to many, but I've been thinking about this in the last years, and I gotta say, this anime is what I can use as an example to finally explain my point. Let's start by reminding everyone that what the creations in Re:Creators perceive and live as in their stories is all defined by one specific thing: information. Anything that isn't described in their story, does not exist and can not be perceived by them in any way. It's simply impossible, and that's because they live in a world that contains less informations and therefore less dimensions than the one of their creators. On the other hand, Re:Creators is a creation as well, and has to follow the same logic, which means that anything in their anime has a certain amount of information and the world works around of those. Now, if you're still with me, in our world we are able to create such stories by methods like writing, drawing, or even coding, and as much as these are very good ways to deliver a story to your public (since that's their purpose), they still are going to deal with an unavoidable lack of information. There's only so much information we can "create" in the worlds we write about, and that's because we're limited as well. As such, the worlds we create are going to be, of course, less defined than ours, but may still exist on a different existential plane. If that's really how things are, then this is where it gets tricky for my view on religion, because as an atheist I always believed it was way too "convenient" and unlikely that a God existed and created the universe and everything, but having this as a point of view means that, on a multilayered world existence, it shouldn't even be that surprising if it was actually true. Our world may very well just be an amount of limited information by itself if compared to a potential world that created us. That world may have much more information than we do and perceive things in a very different way, and could actually create worlds through different methods than ours, which means making it feel real to us, exactly like we may make it feel real for our creations. Of course, this would mean that even that world may be created by someone even higher and higher and that our reality is just a fragment of what the "real" reality truly is, if there even is one. What does this mean to me as a person and individual? My destiny may as well be already written, my decisions might really be already decided beforehand, but since the information that was used to create me is as such, I'm still gonna just be me, and perceive things as if it's me deciding to do so. On the other hand, I feel far more powerful after these considerations, because this means in a way or another, we're all gods, no different than those who may have created us. Be it a good or a bad thing is for everyone to decide as conscious beings, I personally think of it in a positive light. I'll also use another example to describe this, by mentioning the 1884 novel (and 2007 movie) Flatland. Flatland is the story of a square living in a two dimensional world with other two dimensional figures such as triangles and circles and so on. The square one night has a dream about a one dimensional world, and he sees it as... well, as lines, and he talks to the lines, and they can't see him because they only perceive their surroundings through the very limited senses that a line would have. To the lines, the square is a god. But they don't believe in his existence, because they have no way to prove it, nor to perceive it. The square later in the story starts hearing a sphere, that looks at the square's world like we look at a piece of paper. He can see all the 2D city, inside every house, inside every inhabitant of the place, and all at the same time. He's a creature that litterally is a completely other dimensional being, and since the square can't see him or perceive him, he doesn't believe it, exactly as the lines didn't perceive him. Flatland is a very interesting novel / movie, although the "subplot" going in the 2D world may be a bit confusing, the concept is one of those that make you think. Because if the lines don't perceive the squares, the squares don't perceive the spheres, I'm sure there must be something that even the sphere doesn't perceive, even though they wouldn't believe it, because to them they're the world with the most "information" and "dimensions". I'm sorry if I bored you, I'm glad and thankful if you were interested enough to arrive to the end of my post. This is the reason I think I'm not atheist anymore and how Re:Creators relates to it. |
| Ruka desu. |
| Possibly in support of the idea that our current world lacks information: If you try thinking about certain subjects or try to take your line of thinking is certain directions. You hit a wall where it's basically literally impossible to continue. Our selves on this plane of existence find certain topics or aspects completely incomprehensible. Meaning that, that information simply doesn't exist. |
neonie said: Possibly in support of the idea that our current world lacks information: If you try thinking about certain subjects or try to take your line of thinking is certain directions. You hit a wall where it's basically literally impossible to continue. Our selves on this plane of existence find certain topics or aspects completely incomprehensible. Meaning that, that information simply doesn't exist. A very specific and actually simple example of this is the fact that we can't imagine new colors. There no way to do so. |
| Ruka desu. |
Lucky96u said: neonie said: Possibly in support of the idea that our current world lacks information: If you try thinking about certain subjects or try to take your line of thinking is certain directions. You hit a wall where it's basically literally impossible to continue. Our selves on this plane of existence find certain topics or aspects completely incomprehensible. Meaning that, that information simply doesn't exist. A very specific and actually simple example of this is the fact that we can't imagine new colors. There no way to do so. Yet, funnily, we know there are Animals that can see more colors than us, because they have more cones than us. Meaning more colors than the ones we know obviously exist, but we not only can't see them, we're also not allowed the information to process them. |
| Believe whatever you want. No, seriously! It doesn't matter. Not a damn bit. Do you have any clue how many different ways religion and "god" can be interpreted? Apparently, there are over 40,000 denominations of Christianity alone! And in Japan alone, there are *millions* of "gods" being worshiped over there. Now you're a "god" believer, right? Well, which "god" do you believe in? Again, it doesn't matter. And the main reason why it doesn't matter is because no matter what you do, no matter how much you study religion, no matter how spiritual you are ... when it comes to god-belief, almost everyone can be considered "right" or "correct" depending on subjective opinions alone. In other words, someone can believe there is a "god" (theist) but believe them to be evil (maltheist) or believe that said deity exists but has no religion (deist) or that Nature is "god" and vice versa (pantheist), or one can take the position that no one can ever really know if a god does or did really exist because of the ever so persistent problem of lack of enough knowledge surrounding the topic (agnostic) or one could be the type that demands people define "god" first before starting arguments, debates or discussions about the topic (ignostic) and of course, for whatever reason one can be convinced to a varying degree that there is no "god" (atheist); but regardless of what one believes or doesn't believe, technically all of these viewpoints and approaches and stances to and on god-belief can be defended and supported rationally and logically. It is all a matter of perspective. ^_^ Honestly, I think the apatheists do it best. Because apatheists do not care whether a "god" exists or not. They are more concerned with living out their lives peacefully, joyfully and happily. If they die and find out there is a "god" who will judge them, so be it. If there is no "god" then at least they enjoyed themselves on Earth and left with few to no regrets. Believe what you want dude. :P If believing in a "god" helps you in some way, more power to you. If not, then change it accordingly. Thanks for reading this. :-) |
TheDissonantSoul said: Believe whatever you want. No, seriously! It doesn't matter. Not a damn bit. Do you have any clue how many different ways religion and "god" can be interpreted? Apparently, there are over 40,000 denominations of Christianity alone! And in Japan alone, there are *millions* of "gods" being worshiped over there. Now you're a "god" believer, right? Well, which "god" do you believe in? Again, it doesn't matter. And the main reason why it doesn't matter is because no matter what you do, no matter how much you study religion, no matter how spiritual you are ... when it comes to god-belief, almost everyone can be considered "right" or "correct" depending on subjective opinions alone. In other words, someone can believe there is a "god" (theist) but believe them to be evil (maltheist) or believe that said deity exists but has no religion (deist) or that Nature is "god" and vice versa (pantheist), or one can take the position that no one can ever really know if a god does or did really exist because of the ever so persistent problem of lack of enough knowledge surrounding the topic (agnostic) or one could be the type that demands people define "god" first before starting arguments, debates or discussions about the topic (ignostic) and of course, for whatever reason one can be convinced to a varying degree that there is no "god" (atheist); but regardless of what one believes or doesn't believe, technically all of these viewpoints and approaches and stances to and on god-belief can be defended and supported rationally and logically. It is all a matter of perspective. ^_^ Honestly, I think the apatheists do it best. Because apatheists do not care whether a "god" exists or not. They are more concerned with living out their lives peacefully, joyfully and happily. If they die and find out there is a "god" who will judge them, so be it. If there is no "god" then at least they enjoyed themselves on Earth and left with few to no regrets. Believe what you want dude. :P If believing in a "god" helps you in some way, more power to you. If not, then change it accordingly. Thanks for reading this. :-) I don't believe in God right now, I'm agnostic. |
| Ruka desu. |
| Well, wherever your journey regarding "god" takes you, just be yourself and try not to be too afraid of asking the hard questions. What matters more than being a "god" believer or someone who doesn't believe - religious or non-religious or spiritual or what have you - is being a good person who doesn't succomb to the irrationality and dishonesty of anyone else's bullshit or excuses. If you already know this, then please forgive my being redundant. ^_^ |
| its a very interesting read but I still don't believe in gods regardless but it is an interesting thought like in Shakugan no Shana with how existence works in that universe but I don't like the god of the gaps argument honestly which just boils down to I don't know how this works so it must be god |
 |
Lucky96u said: neonie said: Possibly in support of the idea that our current world lacks information: If you try thinking about certain subjects or try to take your line of thinking is certain directions. You hit a wall where it's basically literally impossible to continue. Our selves on this plane of existence find certain topics or aspects completely incomprehensible. Meaning that, that information simply doesn't exist. A very specific and actually simple example of this is the fact that we can't imagine new colors. There no way to do so. on the topic of colors, just because we can not visually imagine what it would be like to see non visible light, and it reflecting off of things, does not mean it does not exist. the idea that colors outside of the small list of ones humans can perceive don't exist is not only wrong but idiotic. now, if you mean light PERIOD, which means any electromagnetic radiation, then yeah, of course we can't imagine any /color/ that isn't part of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, because that wouldn't be color, even if it's something similar. (ie, an animal that can only "see" in sound waves) |
 |
TrueUchiha said: Lucky96u said: A very specific and actually simple example of this is the fact that we can't imagine new colors. There no way to do so. on the topic of colors, just because we can not visually imagine what it would be like to see non visible light, and it reflecting off of things, does not mean it does not exist. the idea that colors outside of the small list of ones humans can perceive don't exist is not only wrong but idiotic. now, if you mean light PERIOD, which means any electromagnetic radiation, then yeah, of course we can't imagine any /color/ that isn't part of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, because that wouldn't be color, even if it's something similar. (ie, an animal that can only "see" in sound waves) I just meant that we as human beings are not able to do so because of lack of information (that in our world would simply be evolution related), not that the colors are only limited to what we see. Sorry for the confusion ^^ |
| Ruka desu. |
TrueUchiha said: Lucky96u said: A very specific and actually simple example of this is the fact that we can't imagine new colors. There no way to do so. on the topic of colors, just because we can not visually imagine what it would be like to see non visible light, and it reflecting off of things, does not mean it does not exist. the idea that colors outside of the small list of ones humans can perceive don't exist is not only wrong but idiotic. now, if you mean light PERIOD, which means any electromagnetic radiation, then yeah, of course we can't imagine any /color/ that isn't part of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, because that wouldn't be color, even if it's something similar. (ie, an animal that can only "see" in sound waves) I just meant that we as human beings are not able to do so because of lack of information (that in our world would simply be evolution related), not that the colors are only limited to what we see. Sorry for the confusion ^^ |
| Ruka desu. |
| that in itself isn't necessarily true either, since the information is there, it is just that we humans currently cannot read said data. I can see what you're trying to say, but no matter how you word it, it's still there, it's something we can observe, just not first hand. |
|
Veneficia said: http://www.animemaru.com/umaru-chan-season-2-announcement-definitively-proves-there-is-no-god/ This article proves you wrong. Animaru continues to write painfully unfunny stories regarding a medium in which satire style humor doesn't work at all, I see. |
| ? So where's the evidence of God? All you're saying is "stories are limited by imagination, therefore jesus.... or something" |
 |
Red_Keys said: ? So where's the evidence of God? All you're saying is "stories are limited by imagination, therefore jesus.... or something" I wasn't trying to prove God's existence, I was explaining why I personally stopped thinking it was unlikely. Plus, I never mentioned Jesus nor the God christianity describes, I don't care about that. If I had to write of a world and made some characters religious, then I'd surely create a God, or an idea of it, for them to worship. Doesn't mean God as christians know it exists, and even if it did, it would still be a creation itself if you follow my argument. |
| Ruka desu. |
| Magi main plot in a nutshell, multi layered worlds and dimensions and gods and whatever the fuck I also... believe in god but think religion is bullshit, like this universe is way too convenient to 'just exist' deep |
Cross  AngeHey guys check my profile for current airing season anime recommendation (guaranteed best taste) |
| Information has always been all around us, not being able to understand all of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The information in the story is defined by it's lenght. You could hypotetically write 10000000000000000000000 pages story that explains every little detail and world interaction. We already create AI/procedural virtual worlds and simulations, when computing became even more advanced we could create worlds that are even closer to reality. Is our world one such simulation as well? :))) Btw, Annonymous;Code is an upcomming VN with similar themes. We already created artificial life and all kinds of technology from nothing, so you could say we really are gods. But the whole concept of God is very vague, as in most religions people imagine God as being some human-like being guiding them from above, but you could say anything to be God and that would be equally vague and meaningless. If some event/process/mechanism or whatever dictates your individual life, it seems too naive to think it is specially created for you, the more logical truth reveals nature of coincidence and the grand motion of things happen just because. You are just one tiny of billion millions parts that go with the flow of chaotic time. Believing in some kind of divine entity and praying to it as if expecting response doesn't make sense and 'feeling' there's God is equally meaningless are 'feeling' there's no God at all. Lucky96u said: TrueUchiha said: on the topic of colors, just because we can not visually imagine what it would be like to see non visible light, and it reflecting off of things, does not mean it does not exist. the idea that colors outside of the small list of ones humans can perceive don't exist is not only wrong but idiotic. now, if you mean light PERIOD, which means any electromagnetic radiation, then yeah, of course we can't imagine any /color/ that isn't part of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, because that wouldn't be color, even if it's something similar. (ie, an animal that can only "see" in sound waves) I just meant that we as human beings are not able to do so because of lack of information (that in our world would simply be evolution related), not that the colors are only limited to what we see. Sorry for the confusion ^^ But we have the technology to "see" them. They aren't really colors, you can't expand the color wheel because it represents colors which are only the "visible" light spectrum, we gave similar names like "ultraviolet" and "infrared" but they are just analogies, animals don't really perceive them as normal colors but more like just bright light or whatever similar color is there. |
 |
| lol someone's been watching mothers basemen... believe whatever you want OP. Might I advice not to change your outlook on life based on a show you haven't finish,and in general if a show has the ability to make you question your religious ideals or lack their of then how strong could such ideals truly be? |
Kurtvonschroeder said: lol someone's been watching mothers basemen... believe whatever you want OP. Might I advice not to change your outlook on life based on a show you haven't finish,and in general if a show has the ability to make you question your religious ideals or lack their of then how strong could such ideals truly be? I never said the show made me change my point of view, I said it helps me describe what I think. Also no, I don't watch Mother's Basement, I mostly watch italian youtubers and don't change my opinion basing it on someone else's |
| Ruka desu. |
Lucky96u said: Ok.... so where's the evidence? What led you to believe that?I wasn't trying to prove God's existence, I was explaining why I personally stopped thinking it was unlikely. I could take exactly what you said and reach the conclusion: "therefore fairies". You obviously are basing your idea of "god" on some sort of pre-established religion, otherwise you wouldn't be using the word "god" in the first place. |
|
Red_Keys said: Lucky96u said: Ok.... so where's the evidence? What led you to believe that?I wasn't trying to prove God's existence, I was explaining why I personally stopped thinking it was unlikely. I could take exactly what you said and reach the conclusion: "therefore fairies". You obviously are basing your idea of "god" on some sort of pre-established religion, otherwise you wouldn't be using the word "god" in the first place. I don't think you understand the point of my post if you think I'm basing my idea of god on pre-estaablished religions, mostly because there is not a pre-established religion. I use the world god intended as creator and extradimensional being, not some sort of mythology we built up in our world. As I already said, this post didn't intend to prove anything more than showing a point of view that might turn the theory that we've been "created" as less unlikely. |
| Ruka desu. |
Cour_Victor said: Red_Keys said: Ok.... so where's the evidence? What led you to believe that? I could take exactly what you said and reach the conclusion: "therefore fairies". You obviously are basing your idea of "god" on some sort of pre-established religion, otherwise you wouldn't be using the word "god" in the first place. I think spiritual matters start and end at one's heart, since nobody really gets a sign from a divine existence. These thoughts are developed from the medium you consume, the people you talk to and the things you read and the events you experience. That's a conclusion you make for yourself. If Re:Creators was a vessel for you to reach a resolution then it's something personal between you and what you see when you look at a certain something the show attempts to tell or not. There are many existential questions you can drive just from the characters ascending to a higher plane of being where those who write the creations thoughts and their past are there for them to interact with. From the little knowledge that I have the religions are mainly deterministic so you can infer parallels between the way you think about the conventional religion and what these characters go through. I think I'm responding to the thread in general. I wanted to get some of the stuff I've been thinking about things parallel to agnosticism and this show in the past few weeks out there while I was at it. See, I don't think my post can be refered to as spiritual, since I'm not trying to describe my "faith" more than a logical thought, this doesn't start from my heart rather than my mind, and even now I personally don't believe a god, whatever or whoever that is, exists. There's never been a way to "prove" that God doesn't exist, but I never had a point of view that gave me enough of a logical sense to it, which is why I've always been atheist. In the recent years though, things like Tolkien's books, Dark Souls' games or even Oda's One Piece made me think more deeply about the worlds we as humans are able to create, and how much the informations we insert in them may make the world itself more likely to be coherent. And if those characters we write about were able to rationalize and realize our existence, we would be gods for them. There's no other way to put it, that's all I need to stop believing that there is absolutely no chance that some other entity created us. I hope I made myself clear enough about the fact that I'm not trying to talk about "religions" and "spiritual beliefs". Thank you for sharing your thoughts. |
LucDiswayMay 28, 2017 7:43 PM
| Ruka desu. |
| i do believe in a possibility of a higher existence , but i dont believe that "the god" gives a shit about what we do. He might as well put some stuff in a blander , mixed it with the laws of psychics and is keeping it in a fish bowl where he/she/it/whatever checks it from time to time to see how it developed so far. |
| @Lucky96u Just a protip: you don't want to be agnostic. prefix a- meant "not", gnosis "knowing/knowable" Generally agnosticism is a belief of the inability to know. We're more than capable of knowing, however we cannot know via existential evidence any better than we can know via emotional opinionation or speculative nonsense. The people who talk of spirit or god are equally as foolish as those who believe they cannot exist. The path of the wiseperson leads to truth: all such categorized perspectives are irrelevant. |
GenesisAriaMay 28, 2017 9:44 PM
❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
| So fiction convinced you to believe in pseudoscience. Naisu. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
firemagnet said: GenesisAria said: I'm still an atheist, even after watching this show. The reason why has more to do with concepts of religion, particularly surrounding abrahamic lore.@Lucky96u Just a protip: you don't want to be agnostic. prefix a- meant "not", gnosis "knowing/knowable" Generally agnosticism is a belief of the inability to know. We're more than capable of knowing, however we cannot know via existential evidence any better than we can know via emotional opinionation or speculative nonsense. The people who talk of spirit or god are equally as foolish as those who believe they cannot exist. The path of the wiseperson leads to truth: all such categorized perspectives are irrelevant. God--and deities in general--are defined in explicitly human terms. There are so many contradictions that it is simply impossible to support the idea that a diety or even some mythic force created all that we see before us or even "flicked the switch" as it were. Put more simply: if a deity or force existed, why would it think--much less look--like us? Why would it constantly demand praise, order, and model itself on the political structures of the day? No. Religion and deities were--and are--simply ways for men to control others, legitimize cruelty, and entrench their own wealth and power. Learn of field theory, by that i mean not the mathematical, i mean principle. Dielectric fields, incommensurability: as is the future of science... Then read Taoist texts (you might need to learn ti translate it), though even the summaries might suffice. They are literally identical. Get out of all of the allegorical mumbo jumbo (and out of the thousands of years of horrid mistranslations and inability to read the meanings - ie god never meant a personified magical super-entity, it's the same as the concept of oneness in old Buddhism), and you're left with naught but truth in science and natural philosophy (from which science was born). The yin-yang maps out the field strengths and crossover of the magnetic field - see this video demonstrating it mapped to a torus (magnetic fields are the formation of inertial fields into toroids, this is fundamentalmechanics of the universe type stuff), explaining the significance of every detail, including the inversely coloured dots on the opposing sides would take a long time, in proper terms it's self-reciprocation. Someone at some point in our pre-history figured out way more than we know now, and attempted to apply the principles into rules to live by so as to encounter the least resistance. Atheism is the polar opposite of Theism. One believes deity(ies) exist, the other believes they do not or cannot exist. Both are baseless, and both take oppositional sides arguing against eachother about something which is existentially irrelevant and inconsequential, and almost always misinformed. I'll put it bluntly: stop being atheist, theist, gnostic, agnostic.... don't subscribe to any narrow minded foolhardiness that makes baseless assumptions from emotional standpoint. |
GenesisAriaMay 28, 2017 10:34 PM
| ❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
GenesisAria said: I'll put it bluntly: stop being atheist, theist, gnostic, agnostic.... don't subscribe to any narrow minded foolhardiness that makes baseless assumptions from emotional standpoint. you don't really have any idea of what you're talking about, do you? :D |
 |
GenesisAria said: @Lucky96u Just a protip: you don't want to be agnostic. prefix a- meant "not", gnosis "knowing/knowable" Generally agnosticism is a belief of the inability to know. We're more than capable of knowing, however we cannot know via existential evidence any better than we can know via emotional opinionation or speculative nonsense. The people who talk of spirit or god are equally as foolish as those who believe they cannot exist. The path of the wiseperson leads to truth: all such categorized perspectives are irrelevant. The definition of agnostic is exactly what I am now though. I accept that I have no knowledge on what would prove either side and that's it. firemagnet said: I'm still an atheist, even after watching this show. The reason why has more to do with concepts of religion, particularly surrounding abrahamic lore. God--and deities in general--are defined in explicitly human terms. There are so many contradictions that it is simply impossible to support the idea that a diety or even some mythic force created all that we see before us or even "flicked the switch" as it were. Put more simply: if a deity or force existed, why would it think--much less look--like us? Why would it constantly demand praise, order, and model itself on the political structures of the day? No. Religion and deities were--and are--simply ways for men to control others, legitimize cruelty, and entrench their own wealth and power. Religion created by men is the least interesting or valuable thing to me when talking about this. I do agree that there's always someone taking advantage of people's doubts. |
| Ruka desu. |
firemagnet said: I was more getting at the point of truth mattering above all else, arguing that a misinterpretation of something exists vs assuming it doesn't exists based also on misinterpretations which are equally baseless is dumb. Some aspects of the god hypothesis are based in fact, others are imaginative anthropomorphism and wishful thinking.If the thrust of your argument here is that theism and atheism aren't worth arguing because the subject as a whole is essentially useless navelgazing when more time ought to be devoted to studying the sciences and pushing back the veil of ignorance, then I wholly agree. Lucky96u said: Agnosticism is a belief system which subscribes to believing humanity does not know (which is actually notably false), and/or that we cannot know (which is blatantly false in my field of study, where the unified field is actually understood). Agnosticism is not good, it's morally equivalent to ignorance. As i said: a-gnosis.GenesisAria said: The definition of agnostic is exactly what I am now though. I accept that I have no knowledge on what would prove either side and that's it.@Lucky96u Just a protip: you don't want to be agnostic. prefix a- meant "not", gnosis "knowing/knowable" Generally agnosticism is a belief of the inability to know. We're more than capable of knowing, however we cannot know via existential evidence any better than we can know via emotional opinionation or speculative nonsense. The people who talk of spirit or god are equally as foolish as those who believe they cannot exist. The path of the wiseperson leads to truth: all such categorized perspectives are irrelevant. Just as atheism is the antithesis of theism, agnosticism is the antithesis of gnosticism. Regardless of all other ridiculousness, you should always be gnostic, or seek gnosis (knowledge/understanding). Agnosticism is NOT the 3rd neutral option between theism and atheism, it is the counterpart of a whole different ball of wax. |
GenesisAriaMay 29, 2017 5:07 AM
| ❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
Lucky96u said: The existence of a conscious creator of the universe, the existence of "extradimensional beings" (whatever that is), and whatever else idea you have about what "god" is, is based on already existing mythology.I use the world god intended as creator and extradimensional being, not some sort of mythology we built up in our world. The fact that you turn to "god" is really indicative that you haven't thought this through. What you're basically saying is that it's possible there exists plains of being, if you will, that are physically outside of our perception, like a cube to a square. But say that were the case (which there's no evidence for), "therefore GOD!" makes no sense to draw as a conclusion. "Therefore CREATOR!!" makes no sense. If our reality is part of a larger existence (that we have no way of ever percieving or looking at or feeling or anything), the possibilities of what's "out there" would be infinite. It's like you're saying "there's an equation that MIGHT exist. We can't see it, and we can't solve it. BUT, I know the answer is 2." How did you reach that conclusion? It's a stab in the dark based on nothing. "Yeah but it could be 2!". Sure.... but if you don't even know the variables of an equation that may or may not exist, that you haven't seen any demonstrable evidence for existing, trying to "guess" the "answer" is less than meaningless. You're just fantasizing based on a premise that doesn't exist in reality. That's called being delusional. Lucky96u said: It also makes the theory that the universe is a microscopic ecosystem living inside a fart released in a busy porta-potty less unlikely.As I already said, this post didn't intend to prove anything more than showing a point of view that might turn the theory that we've been "created" as less unlikely. Oh wait, no, it doesn't. Because there's no evidence to suggest that's at all the case. Cour_Victor said: doki dokiI think spiritual matters start and end at one's heart Your heart pumps blood dude. |
Red_KeysMay 29, 2017 7:20 AM
|
Red_Keys said: Lucky96u said: The existence of a conscious creator of the universe, the existence of "extradimensional beings" (whatever that is), and whatever else idea you have about what "god" is, is based on already existing mythology.I use the world god intended as creator and extradimensional being, not some sort of mythology we built up in our world. The fact that you turn to "god" is really indicative that you haven't thought this through. What you're basically saying is that it's possible there exists plains of being, if you will, that are physically outside of our perception, like a cube to a square. But say that were the case (which there's no evidence for), "therefore GOD!" makes no sense to draw as a conclusion. "Therefore CREATOR!!" makes no sense. If our reality is part of a larger existence (that we have no way of ever percieving or looking at or feeling or anything), the possibilities of what's "out there" would be infinite. It's like you're saying "there's an equation that MIGHT exist. We can't see it, and we can't solve it. BUT, I know the answer is 2." How did you reach that conclusion? It's a stab in the dark based on nothing. "Yeah but it could be 2!". Sure.... but if you don't even know the variables of an equation that may or may not exist, that you haven't seen any demonstrable evidence for existing, trying to "guess" the "answer" is less than meaningless. You're just fantasizing based on a premise that doesn't exist in reality. That's called being delusional. Lucky96u said: It also makes the theory that the universe is a microscopic ecosystem living inside a fart released in a busy porta-potty less unlikely.As I already said, this post didn't intend to prove anything more than showing a point of view that might turn the theory that we've been "created" as less unlikely. Oh wait, no, it doesn't. Because there's no evidence to suggest that's at all the case. You seem to still be thinking that I'm drawing conclusions or saying that it must be a God, when I already told you this is just my point of view on the matter. I also already told you that you could easily swap the word "god" with "alien" for all I care, because I'm not trying to talk about religion. "Therefore God" is an assumption I never made and please stop saying I'm talking about stuff basing on mythology when I clearly said that isn't the case. I didn't try to "guess" an answer, I left a spot open in my mind to "wonder" the answer. And yes, you may very well say that the fact that we have an idea of what a fart is and how it's produced helps us recognizes a lot of similarities with how our universe works and therefore make our point of view on it different. |
| Ruka desu. |
Lucky96u said: ???You seem to still be thinking that I'm drawing conclusions or saying that it must be a God, when I already told you this is just my point of view on the matter. Yes your point of view makes no sense and is confusing. That is what we are talking about. If believing in god has nothing to do with this thread maybe you shouldn't have titled it "the reason I'm not atheist any more". |
|
Red_Keys said: Lucky96u said: ???You seem to still be thinking that I'm drawing conclusions or saying that it must be a God, when I already told you this is just my point of view on the matter. Yes your point of view makes no sense and is confusing. That is what we are talking about. If believing in god has nothing to do with this thread maybe you shouldn't have titled it "the reason I'm not atheist any more". Maybe you shouldn't be so fixated on trying to explain that "God" has an exact definition, when the term itself has its roots in the beliefs and faiths of people. I can have my own definition of God without having to borrow it from religions. Daniel_Naumov said: Atheism is an ideology of not believing in any higher presence. Blunt reason and logic. But that is simply irresponsible. I am glad this series provided just some enlightenment. I believe the creators would rejoice as well. Thank you |
| Ruka desu. |
Lucky96u said: Red_Keys said: ??? Yes your point of view makes no sense and is confusing. That is what we are talking about. If believing in god has nothing to do with this thread maybe you shouldn't have titled it "the reason I'm not atheist any more". Maybe you shouldn't be so fixated on trying to explain that "God" has an exact definition, when the term itself has its roots in the beliefs and faiths of people. I can have my own definition of God without having to borrow it from religions. Especially when if you dig back to the ancient origins of religions, they never originally referred to god as a proper noun, it was always abstract and ontological. All of that mess came from poor translations. Referring to god as a being is inherently misguided. This show tackles "gods" more like the deities of ancient mythology, where there are many, and each has their own domain. There is far more distinction between monotheism and polytheism than just the number of gods. Singular god is born from apophatic esotericism on the ontological nature of relative existence. It's in line with stuff like taoism and ætherial concepts, whereas polytheism is personifications of particular aspects of nature, a categorization of behaviours and entities in mythic form. In short, Re:creators has nothing to do with monotheism (other than that it appears to be monotheistic until you leave your universe, in which you see monotheism as just a relative perspective). |
GenesisAriaMay 30, 2017 1:31 PM
| ❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
MortalMelancholy said: So fiction convinced you to believe in pseudoscience. Naisu. Fiction can be the most powerful soapbox if one knows how to utilize it correctly. Look at how many people clamor on about books, movie, and even some anime as 'changing their life'. I'd consider deciding to believe in a god, or at least some being well above what one can normally comprehend, as a significant life change. |
"I'd take rampant lesbianism over nuclear armageddon or a supervolcano any day." ~nikiforova |
InsaneLeader13 said: MortalMelancholy said: So fiction convinced you to believe in pseudoscience. Naisu. Fiction can be the most powerful soapbox if one knows how to utilize it correctly. Look at how many people clamor on about books, movie, and even some anime as 'changing their life'. I'd consider deciding to believe in a god, or at least some being well above what one can normally comprehend, as a significant life change. Fiction may have some philosophical merit; but to give it any logical or scientific consideration becomes a sort of escapism from reality. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
remechan said: MortalMelancholy said: Fiction may have some philosophical merit; but to give it any logical or scientific consideration becomes a sort of escapism from reality. And yet what counts as fiction and what doesn't? Escape from what reality? We once believed the world was flat. Sure, now we call it round and 3D. Is that reality? It's only what you believe in this moment. Who's to say that's not fiction either? Logic only applies based on your current perceived "knowledge" of the "fact". Well, that can be pretty easily answered with a dictionary. Or google. Logic: reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity. Science: intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. Aka a logical approach to ascertain facts Fiction: invention or fabrication as opposed to fact. Reality: the state or quality of having existence or substance. What humans may believe is irrelevant. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Re:Creators Episode 22 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Sep 16, 2017 |
400 |
by The_Wicker_Man
»»
Apr 7, 1:52 AM |
|
Poll: » Re:Creators Episode 9 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )Stark700 - Jun 3, 2017 |
236 |
by The_Wicker_Man
»»
Apr 4, 6:01 AM |
|
Poll: » Re:Creators Episode 7 Discussion ( 1 2 3 )Stark700 - May 20, 2017 |
122 |
by KirinMeta2
»»
Apr 3, 3:33 PM |
|
Poll: » Re:Creators Episode 2 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Apr 15, 2017 |
306 |
by AndrersVonPanda
»»
Mar 3, 3:10 PM |
|
Poll: » Is Altair the most powerful anime character we have seen yet in any anime? (spoiler) ( 1 2 3 4 )LelouchXLuluko - Sep 4, 2017 |
169 |
by Raptors0verlord
»»
Jan 28, 6:03 PM |