One cannot believe in something that does not exist.

Ya'll are giving this guy way more attention then he deserves...

Even in his example (and his Santa Claus Argument'), it's not really a question of believing in something that doesn't exist, it's whether you can believe in something you've never heard of - or never imagined (obviously not)

I mean, technically, he's right: How could anyone believe in a thing if they've never even had opportunity to 'consider' whether or not they believe in it (i.e. if they never heard of or imagined it).

The problem is, he has presented this as a profound existencial concept, which it's not...
....because there's no question about it...you can't even think about whether you believe in something unless you are aware of it...

....And, no matter what example you come up with, he can argue (technically) that he is right -
- because the very fact that you 'know' about something means that in some form or another it has an 'existence' - even if it's an example you just now made up in your head, it can only be considered for belief or disbelief now that you thought it up (just like the OP's imaginary 'God')...

FYI - "One cannot" dis-believe "in something that does not exist" either...

a reply to: butcherguy

The idea of 9 relates to objects. the symbol '9' and the word, which is also symbol 'nine', are symbols of the potential physical representation of '9/nine' objects. Numbers can be correlated to pure metaphysical objects, or even 1 object that is equal to itself, that there are infinite of in a 'theoretical mind space', that can be added together so that if 1 of those objects and another 1 were placed together it would be exactly 1 and 1 occupying the same space as the same object, which is then called 2, or 1 of those objects another 1 and another 1, which is called 3.

I dont know if a pure eternal infinite system of mathematics 'actually physically exists somewhere', but reality is quantity and quality (is there anything else it could be?) and so it can be symbolized as such. So physical reality is not a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to infinity and then all the sums and products and divisions of possible numbers, its not a base pure frame work of total math, but it is an exact sort of complex math, that is to say, the pure number 5 may not exist, but in reality there is a difference between a group of 5 apples and a group of 6 apples and that difference is 1 apple, and so quantity physically exists, as a aesthetic contextual quality or analysis of reality.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

So you don't really believe in Pluto, only the idea of it, am I getting this right? You only believe in the idea of black holes but not the actual black holes themselves. Even if they are actually real, you can't believe in them because you have never seen them.

Is this line of thinking correct? If so, it's kind of pointless, no offense.

Anything you can think of exists. A pink unicorn riding a rainbow over Chinese dictators holding American flags? That exists now that I have thought of it. It only exists in the form of a thought but it still exists nonetheless, so your premise doesn't really hold up.

No offence taken.

Let’s assume everything exists. The question isn’t whether something exists or not, but what something exists as. A black hole exists as what? God exists as what?

Observation shows that they exist as theories, and until they appear as something more, it is the theories, not the Gods, we believe in.

a reply to: butcherguy

You can't hold a nine in your hand.
You can hold ink on a piece of paper in your hand.
You can hold a piece of wood that has a shape that you relate to 'nine' in your hand.

You can't hold a nine in your hand.
'Nine' is nothing other than thought.

If you think about it, the word “tree” signifies no particular tree, but the idea of what constitutes a tree. You cannot hold the notion of a tree in your hand yet the general idea of a tree does exist, and we can look at that idea in the dictionary. We can hold the dictionary in our hands.

Numbers are not that different. They correspond to an idea as it has been expressed and agreed upon. We can find that idea in anything relating to mathematics. We can hold those ideas in our hand by picking up any mathematics textbook. We are taught them. We learn them. Though they are not found anywhere outside of human language, they nonetheless exist as something to talk about and use.

You would never have a thought of a number unless you first saw, read and understood what a number is, what value it corresponds to, and how to use it. How can you do that if number is just a thought?

a reply to: lostgirl

Ya'll are giving this guy way more attention then he deserves...

Even in his example (and his Santa Claus Argument'), it's not really a question of believing in something that doesn't exist, it's whether you can believe in something you've never heard of - or never imagined (obviously not)

I mean, technically, he's right: How could anyone believe in a thing if they've never even had opportunity to 'consider' whether or not they believe in it (i.e. if they never heard of or imagined it).

The problem is, he has presented this as a profound existencial concept, which it's not...
....because there's no question about it...you can't even think about whether you believe in something unless you are aware of it...

....And, no matter what example you come up with, he can argue (technically) that he is right -
- because the very fact that you 'know' about something means that in some form or another it has an 'existence' - even if it's an example you just now made up in your head, it can only be considered for belief or disbelief now that you thought it up (just like the OP's imaginary 'God')...

FYI - "One cannot" dis-believe "in something that does not exist" either...

Thanks for giving me the attention I do not deserve.

originally posted by: ausername
How many of you here believe in time?

Does it exist?

How do you quantify it?

How and when did it begin?

When does it end?

I believe in time. I believe there are at least two existing today 1. A absolute constant timeline and 2. a expansion timeline. The thrid timeline the compression timeline that formed the singularity dont exist anymore.

Sinse i believe there exists a absolute constant timeline, a absolute infnite. I also believe God would be that timeline.
Because a absolute constant can not change randomly on its own and form finite. It must have a will to do so.

a reply to: TheSubversiveOne

When one says he believes in God, it is my belief that he doesn’t tell the truth. I will argue that believing involves believing in real things, and believing in things that have never been introduced to the senses, is impossible.

While that statement may be true for you that does not make it true for everyone else.

I believe in a creator, that there is more to this universe than we can touch or see and have faith in that. When looking around at all the plants, trees, animals and all of mother nature's majesty, that is all the proof that I need.

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

While that statement may be true for you that does not make it true for everyone else. I believe in a creator, that there is more to this universe than we can touch or see, I have faith in that and when I look around at all the plants, trees, animals and all of mother nature's majesty, that is all the proof that I need.

Where did you get this idea from?

a reply to: TheSubversiveOne

What idea? My idea of faith? It's internal.

a reply to: TheSubversiveOne

By most peoples definition, trees exist.

Go out and chop down a '7'.

I prefer to think that I can't believe in something that hasn't been reasonably defined, not whether or not it actually exists.

If somebody shows me a closed box and tells me there's a red rubber ball in it, then I can choose to believe a red rubber ball is in there or not, but it doesn't matter if it actually exists. That's where belief comes in.

However, if somebody shows me a box and tells me there may be something in it, but they can't tell me for sure that there is something there, or what exactly it might be, then I can't believe in that. I don't have enough information about it.

So unless somebody comes up with a good, clear, non-paradoxical definition of God, I'm afraid I just don't know that they're talking about, and I can't believe in it.

a reply to: butcherguy

By most peoples definition, trees exist.

Go out and chop down a '7'.

Perhaps philosophy is over your head.

'7' what...trees?

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

What idea? My idea of faith? It's internal.

So you came up with your ideas on your own?

a reply to: Blue Shift

This is a fine outlook.

and yet they do. ( see - all gods )

a reply to: RoScoLaz

and yet they do. ( see - all gods )

They say they do. In practice, it may prove to be more difficult.

a reply to: TheSubversiveOne

There really is no need to be condescending.

I didn't understand the question you asked as you weren't specific.

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

Condescending for asking a question...that's a new one. Perhaps it is you who is being condescending.

originally posted by: TheSubversiveOne
a reply to: lostgirl

Ya'll are giving this guy way more attention then he deserves...

Even in his example (and his Santa Claus Argument'), it's not really a question of believing in something that doesn't exist, it's whether you can believe in something you've never heard of - or never imagined (obviously not)

I mean, technically, he's right: How could anyone believe in a thing if they've never even had opportunity to 'consider' whether or not they believe in it (i.e. if they never heard of or imagined it).

The problem is, he has presented this as a profound existencial concept, which it's not...
....because there's no question about it...you can't even think about whether you believe in something unless you are aware of it...

....And, no matter what example you come up with, he can argue (technically) that he is right -
- because the very fact that you 'know' about something means that in some form or another it has an 'existence' - even if it's an example you just now made up in your head, it can only be considered for belief or disbelief now that you thought it up (just like the OP's imaginary 'God')...

FYI - "One cannot" dis-believe "in something that does not exist" either...

Thanks for giving me the attention I do not deserve.

Actually, I was hoping to get the attention for myself, by laying out a well-thought, logical counter point...

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: TheSubversiveOne

By most peoples definition, trees exist.

Go out and chop down a '7'.

In reality is there a difference between chopping down 14 trees and chopping down 7?