philosophy of science: meaning and functions (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Thursday, September 27, 2018, 19:37 (2031 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Quibbling: God is not human. Of course He has our thoughts, but with His degree of creation powers He is thinking at a level we cannot reach. Again, you can't seem to leave your humanizing view of Him, probably ground in your inability to accept His existence at His level of power.

dhw: I agree that God is not human, thank you for agreeing that he has our thoughts, but no thanks for not explaining what you mean by those thoughts being “at a level we cannot reach”. Tony agreed that he may have experienced boredom. So since he is God, his boredom would be at a level of boredom that we cannot reach. So what? Boredom is boredom.

David: You and Tony can believe He was bored. I don't. I envision God as eternal and with the purpose of creating thinking humans, which I suspect He has done many times in he past. I'm happy Tony supported you but as a committee of three our discussions don't prove any truths, just opinions. Since I am not God. His level of thought is something I imagine as beyond any thinking we can do. As God is imagined, we humans can only guess what He is exactly like.

And even that agreement is limited. For some reason, no matter how many times I say I disagree with that particular word because of the connotations, it keeps getting implied that I am in full agreement. My limited agreement is that as a single entity, God, eternal or not, would have reached a point beyond which it was impossible to grow without the presence of another entity. DHW reworded it as boredom, and I got tired of arguing the point. He can call it what he likes. However, I still think boredom is the wrong word.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.