Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post - How do you ascertain the worth in a worldview?

Yorick · 09-04-2001, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown:
What makes you so certain that your way of viewing is the only way to see and appreciate deeper, into the spiritual realm? To suppose so strikes me as approaching a sort of spiritual arrogance.

Did I say that I did? I used the words "spiritual" and "belief in a Creator". Islamic Suffis or Jews or anyone else that percieves an independant creator could have the same appreciation of Artist/Art. You are again presuming a mindset that does not exist. Read what I say and take the words as they are.

Even an Atheist may perceive deeply into the nature of meaning. Who are you to say that you value a leaf more? Or life more? Or the universe more? Or all of existence? Presumptuous indeed.

Could they indeed? By way of logic an athiest would see the physical, a spiritualist would see the physical and the metaphysical. Even if they are wrong (this is not about who's right or wrong) The person that percieves a creator is seeing TWO THINGS in the one object, whereas one who sees only the physical sees just one. This is logic. If you see two things you are seeing one thing more than the person who sees one.

Furthermore I made no judgement on how much someone values something. I actually clarified it if you would have read it. I distanced the amount seen from the amount valued. Again, read what I write Dio. Please!

The Law requires a Maker argument is based on a logical fallacy, btw. It confuses different meanings of the word "Law." Man-made "law" is Prescriptive -- it is a command ordering either to do an act refrain from an act. "Law" in this sense does require a lawgiver. A command implies a commander.

The laws of Nature, on the other hand, are merely Descriptive -- they are descriptive models which humans have formulated from observation which describe how nature and the universe does in fact behave, not orders or commands for it to behave a certain way.

Dio with either descriptive or prescriptive, something needs to exist for those "laws" to be enabled and work. Law is the word we have chosen to use to describe both, but this doesn't change the fact that without this particular earth or universe those "laws" would not exist. In that case the universe or planet itself is the "lawmaker", as a creator would be.

------------------
I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on....

A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!

[This message has been edited by Yorick (edited 09-04-2001).]

09-04-2001, 12:10 PM	#26
Yorick Very Mad Bird Join Date: January 7, 2001 Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam) Age: 53 Posts: 9,246	Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown: What makes you so certain that your way of viewing is the only way to see and appreciate deeper, into the spiritual realm? To suppose so strikes me as approaching a sort of spiritual arrogance. Did I say that I did? I used the words "spiritual" and "belief in a Creator". Islamic Suffis or Jews or anyone else that percieves an independant creator could have the same appreciation of Artist/Art. You are again presuming a mindset that does not exist. Read what I say and take the words as they are. Even an Atheist may perceive deeply into the nature of meaning. Who are you to say that you value a leaf more? Or life more? Or the universe more? Or all of existence? Presumptuous indeed. Could they indeed? By way of logic an athiest would see the physical, a spiritualist would see the physical and the metaphysical. Even if they are wrong (this is not about who's right or wrong) The person that percieves a creator is seeing TWO THINGS in the one object, whereas one who sees only the physical sees just one. This is logic. If you see two things you are seeing one thing more than the person who sees one. Furthermore I made no judgement on how much someone values something. I actually clarified it if you would have read it. I distanced the amount seen from the amount valued. Again, read what I write Dio. Please! The Law requires a Maker argument is based on a logical fallacy, btw. It confuses different meanings of the word "Law." Man-made "law" is Prescriptive -- it is a command ordering either to do an act refrain from an act. "Law" in this sense does require a lawgiver. A command implies a commander. The laws of Nature, on the other hand, are merely Descriptive -- they are descriptive models which humans have formulated from observation which describe how nature and the universe does in fact behave, not orders or commands for it to behave a certain way. Dio with either descriptive or prescriptive, something needs to exist for those "laws" to be enabled and work. Law is the word we have chosen to use to describe both, but this doesn't change the fact that without this particular earth or universe those "laws" would not exist. In that case the universe or planet itself is the "lawmaker", as a creator would be. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! [This message has been edited by Yorick (edited 09-04-2001).]