Quote:
|
There is already a word for existence. It is existence. Why drop mysticism into the mix? It is unnecessary.
|
I drop no mysticism into the mix, as I see nothing mystical about God.
There is a word for the human brain, and yet we also often use the word 'mind', and some even use 'soul'.
In Yoga, we talk about the Shakras. I am certain that you could describe them biologically, but for the purpose of achieving inner peace and mind-body balance it is convenient to think about them differently.
In computer science, we talk about integers and characters, whereas in subassembly we talk about 8-bit blocks of binary.
Read some poetry... You will find very strange uses for words indeed.
Why do we use the word 'love'? Wouldn't it be easier to talk about the biology of attachment?
Why do we do this? I would say it's because people sometimes find it easier to understand certain aspects of a thing by viewing it differently. I know for certain that many people have great difficulty understanding existence but are capable of understanding God, to an extent.
Quote:
|
I'm not. I know there are lots of people with sketchy philosophical bases for the definition of god. So what?
|
So nothing. You are free do disagree with my definition, but I believe I have showed that God, as defined by many, necessarily exists and that was my only goal. I do think that it somewhat arrogant of you to say that individuals who devote their entire lives to thinking about an idea have 'sketchy' views about it. It's somewhat analogous to a creationalist telling scientists that their science is sketchy.