GMG Classical Music Forum

This is only for statistics purpose only. Pick your choice without any comment whatsoever. Thanks for participating.

May you be touched by his noodly appendage.

Quote from: Daverz on April 23, 2021, 10:01:26 PM
May you be touched by his noodly appendage.

I (really) don't get it but many thanks for posting / voting, anyway. Also, many thanks to all those who cared to vote, much appreciated, guys.

What would be really interesting is to see how the voting relates to where people are from. I have a theory: that religion has almost completely receded in Europe but in America it is still booming.

Mandryka, you're breaking 2 rules there, old fellow: the OP said "no comments" and your Wittgensteinian strapline also forbids you to talk about religion  ;)

I would also be interested to know how responses relate to musical tastes.  Just take the three Bs: Byrd, Bach - you're probably a believer, Boulez: you're probably not.  Or that's my theory.  Of course, you (M) like very old and very new stuff...

Quote from: DaveF on April 24, 2021, 05:06:14 AM
I would also be interested to know how responses relate to musical tastes.  Just take the three Bs: Byrd, Bach - you're probably a believer, Boulez: you're probably not.  Or that's my theory.  Of course, you (M) like very old and very new stuff...

Interesting theory... :D

As a Bach-loving nation, the Netherlands is one of the least religious countries in the world.

And as a Early Music & Baroque fan I spend a lot of time listening to what my wife calls "your church music", while I'm a lifetime atheist.

Answer: a somewhat qualified no (qualified because we can't know there isn't a God any more than we can know there is - but I strongly suspect there isn't :D).

I would like to know, out of the ones that believe that God exists, what percentage are chosing to say they believe just to cover their asses so that they ensure they go to heaven (if it exists)?  As in, I better believe in God just in case.

Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 24, 2021, 06:56:06 AM
I would like to know, out of the ones that believe that God exists, what percentage are chosing to say they believe just to cover their asses so that they ensure they go to heaven (if it exists)?  As in, I better believe in God just in case.

These are the majority of people that go to church every Sunday. For many of them, they believe in God because 1. it just looks good on them, because it's what their church-going friends believe and 2. they assume that by believing in God and being a 'good person' that will ensure their place in heaven. The reality is that most of these 'Holy rollers' as I call them wouldn't even spit on people like me and their whole attitude is, which is actually a superiority complex masquerading as 'genuine concern', to use Hilary Clinton's favorite word, deplorable.

I put I don't know although the more I learn about the evolution of the universe and life the more I think that if I were God I'd love nothing more than to set up a relatively limited set of laws and initial conditions with such genius that it'd develop itself over incredible spans of time into something infinitely diverse and fascinating.🪐

Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 24, 2021, 06:56:06 AM
I would like to know, out of the ones that believe that God exists, what percentage are chosing to say they believe just to cover their asses so that they ensure they go to heaven (if it exists)?  As in, I better believe in God just in case.

There's something reassuring about seeing yourself as a believer, it's like a link with the past, a way of forging an identity for yourself. In a way, when white Brits say they believe in God it's the same sort of thing as when they say they believe in The Queen. They aren't saying anything more than it's comforting to see yourself as part of a tradition.

The Pascal's wager thing that you allude to seems to me totally anachronistic, no one believes in judgement after death or heaven and hell for fks sake!

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQHONYROpJKmnPDutbEOGYhA5W61awvqu-adA&usqp=CAU)

I think believing in God is becoming increasingly more irrelevant with each successive generation.

Within another three or four generations, it will literally be a thing of the past.

That's my thought, but I could be mistaken.

Quote from: Mandryka on April 24, 2021, 04:16:21 AM
What would be really interesting is to see how the voting relates to where people are from. I have a theory: that religion has almost completely receded in Europe

Western Europe, maybe --- just maybe. Eastern Europe, no --- at least Romania and Poland (the two most populous countries of the region) identify themselves as strongly religious (Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic respectively).

Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 24, 2021, 07:28:10 AM
I think believing in God is becoming increasingly more irrelevant with each successive generation.

Within another three or four generations, it will literally be a thing of the past.

What country are you talking about?

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:34:37 AM
Western Europe, maybe --- just maybe. Eastern Europe, no --- at least Romania and Poland (the two most populous countries of the region) identify themselves as strongly religious (Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic respectively).

Yes, I'm sure your right about that. I was planning on editing my post in fact to reflect it.

Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 24, 2021, 06:56:06 AM
I would like to know, out of the ones that believe that God exists, what percentage are chosing to say they believe just to cover their asses so that they ensure they go to heaven (if it exists)?  As in, I better believe in God just in case.

I have often questioned God's justice, but never His existence.

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:38:24 AM
I have often questioned God's justice, but never His existence.

If he isn't just, why does the ontological question matter? Because he's powerful?

Quote from: Mandryka on April 24, 2021, 07:40:03 AM
If he isn't just, why does the ontological question matter? Because he's powerful?

I don't say He isn't just. I do believe He is. It's only that His justice is far and above our human one.

Quote from: Mandryka on April 24, 2021, 07:20:55 AM
There's something reassuring about seeing yourself as a believer

Ummm, no... There's nothing reassuring about it. Actually, Christianity proper is risk, wager and adventure.

Once saved, always saved is an absurdity, an absolutely non-Christian notion.

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:36:38 AM
What country are you talking about?

Canada. I'm sure there are others.

Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 24, 2021, 08:00:22 AM
Canada. I'm sure there are others.

Agreed.

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:59:07 AM
Ummm, no... There's nothing reassuring about it. Actually, Christianity proper is risk, wager and adventure.

Once saved, always saved is an absurdity, an absolutely non-Christian notion.

I'm sure you're right -- I just think that what you call "Christianity proper" is not very common where I am.

Quote from: DaveF on April 24, 2021, 05:06:14 AM
Mandryka, you're breaking 2 rules there, old fellow: the OP said "no comments" and your Wittgensteinian strapline also forbids you to talk about religion  ;)

I would also be interested to know how responses relate to musical tastes.  Just take the three Bs: Byrd, Bach - you're probably a believer, Boulez: you're probably not.  Or that's my theory.  Of course, you (M) like very old and very new stuff...

This fascinates me as well, though like Que, it wouldn't apply to me.  I suspect, however, that the theory applies more aptly to politics.  A very wealthy board member of our institution looked at some of my CDs on my desk and announced himself a "big fan of classical music."  He asked me who my favorite composers were:  Brahms, Prokofiev, Poulenc, I said just off the top o' my head.  "Oh, he said you're a left-winger." He wasn't wrong. 

Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on April 24, 2021, 08:34:01 AM
This fascinates me as well, though like Que, it wouldn't apply to me.  I suspect, however, that the theory applies more aptly to politics.  A very wealthy board member of our institution looked at some of my CDs on my desk and announced himself a "big fan of classical music."  He asked me who my favorite composers were:  Brahms, Prokofiev, Poulenc, I said just off the top o' my head.  "Oh, he said you're a left-winger." He wasn't wrong.

I am not wealthy.

I am (relatively) poor.

I am not a left-winger, though.

Quote from: Mandryka on April 24, 2021, 08:28:48 AM
I'm sure you're right -- I just think that what you call "Christianity proper" is not very common where I am.

Yes, agreed.

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:36:38 AM
What country are you talking about?

Globally, it is certainly an untenable hypothesis.

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:34:37 AM
Western Europe, maybe --- just maybe. Eastern Europe, no --- at least Romania and Poland (the two most populous countries of the region) identify themselves as strongly religious (Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic respectively).

Why is religion so location based? Why are Poland and Romania so religious while France isn't? Why do people's beliefs rely so heavily on where they were born and to what kind of parents? Isn't God supposed to be "everywhere?" If you are "everywhere" you are close to everyone from Indians to Canadians and South-Africans. So why do people in the places have so different ideas about religion and God?

The ONLY explanation that makes sense to me is religions are cultural constructions. Culture differs from place to place and so does religion. Religion has been forced (crusades/missionaries) on other cultures not sharing it! Culture is human creation so if religions are just part of our culture, God is simply a creation of human mind. God didn't create us. We created God, or more precisely about 4000 of them when all Gods in every religion ever are summed.

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:59:07 AM
Ummm, no... There's nothing reassuring about it. Actually, Christianity proper is risk, wager and adventure.

Once saved, always saved is an absurdity, an absolutely non-Christian notion.

And one which pervades American Protestantism of the more populist sort. The Faustian bargain which American Evangelicals very publicly sealed these past six years is one reason why more and more Americans respond with: If this is Christianity, what morally responsible adult needs it?!

I certainly hope there is no God, considering pretty much any deity and especially Christian God is a cruel, murderous, power hungry tyrant.

Awful though the writer's intense racial prejudices are, I do most strongly identify with with the following statement by H.P. Lovecraft regarding his religious views (or absence of them):

"In theory I am an agnostic, but pending the appearance of rational evidence, I must be classed, practically and provisionally, as an atheist."

Like VW I'd describe myself as a 'cheerful agnostic'. You can guess how I voted. I strongly believe that there is a spiritual side to human existence, but that is not necessarily the same as believing in God.

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:59:07 AM
Ummm, no... There's nothing reassuring about it. Actually, Christianity proper is risk, wager and adventure.

Living morally is a risk, wager and adventure. And you may well think that religion has some teachings which are a good guide to living well. Let's agree that for the sake of argument.

What I don't see is why you need the ontological claim. I mean someone could agree with you about the rightness and wrongness of actions, agree with you about how to live, but be an atheist.

This thread is a thread about ontology. And the discussion has slipped into one about ethics. The two are, IMO, independent.  I want to question your ontology not your ethics.

There's a thing that Kant says along the lines that if God says "Thou shall do X" the rational moral agent  has to always ask "why?"  "Is it right to do X?"

Speaking for myself, I believe that it's generally a good idea to love my neighbour as I love my self, but not because God said so! Nothing to do with it.

Since the rules have been broken, here's my unsolicited comment to add to the mix.

I am not religious and I do not believe in any god or God, but, perhaps out of vanity, I do not wish to associate myself with contemporary popular atheism. I accept that it cannot be known one way or the other, but I strongly doubt that the various gods and Gods that have been worshipped throughout history are anything other than man made. However, I don't conceive of them as having been created out of ignorance (the oft-mocked "god of the gaps") but rather a genuine need we have to know something higher than ourselves.

Quote from: Ganondorf on April 24, 2021, 10:01:21 AM
I certainly hope there is no God, considering pretty much any deity and especially Christian God is a cruel, murderous, power hungry tyrant.

Why would it only have to be a Christian God that is a part of these cruelties? The thread starter makes no distinction; the discussion just seems to have flowed that way. In Hinduism for instance if the Vedas or Gita is anything to go by (and all texts do originate from there, even if certain sects worship other deities) then God is Krishna and like other religions he is God in the sense that he oversess all of humanity regardless of your faith. I don't think a Hindu god should be excluded from horrors such as the Holocaust or slavery.

Quote from: hvbias on April 24, 2021, 12:37:55 PM
Why would it only have to be a Christian God that is a part of these cruelties? The thread starter makes no distinction; the discussion just seems to have flowed that way. In Hinduism for instance if the Vedas or Gita is anything to go by (and all texts do originate from there, even if certain sects worship other deities) then God is Krishna and like other religions he is God in the sense that he oversess all of humanity regardless of your faith. I don't think a Hindu god should be excluded from horrors such as the Holocaust or slavery.

Fair enough.

I think there's an old poem, possible by Pope though I can't find it right now, that says human's ability to conceive of any creator that may exist is like bugs in a block of butter being able to imagine the cow.

Somewhat like HP Lovecraft and 71 dB, I live and act as if the answer were "absolutely not," but there is no way to honestly rule out the possibility, however unlikely it may be. So: probably not.

Definitely in the "absolutely not" camp, though I've mellowed over the years.  I was raised in a non-religious household (Nominally Jewish mother and Protestant father.  I remember my parents sent us to -- I suppose you might call it Saturday school -- to learn about Judaism, but I think they gave up pretty quickly on that.)  However, I grew up in an area with a lot of Evangelicals and Mormons, so had a lot of exposure to that as an outsider.  I retain a fascination for the history of early Christianity.  I've been watching a lot of Robert M. Price videos recently.

Anyway, here is physicist Sean Carroll explaining why God is not a good theory:

https://www.youtube.com/v/ew_cNONhhKI

Oh, yeah, I also became less enthusiastic about identifying as an atheist when the "New Atheists" moved to the Right.  I have a lot more admiration for someone like the Reverend William Barber than I do assholes like Sam Harris or a prat like Richard Dawkins (he's a fine naturalist, though).

I grew up going to church every Sunday from when I was about 4-5 yrs. old all the through my late teens, but I became disinterested in the idea of organized religion and more importantly, the people who I was being subjected to. I'm certainly a believer in there being a higher entity of some kind, but this belief doesn't mean that I don't question the terrible events that have lead us all to our current path. But I believe it isn't my place nor anyone else's to tell someone who and what to believe in and this is my biggest problem with Christianity as a whole. The idea that you'll go to 'Hell' if you act this way or that, but, honestly, I believe we're all of three minds: there's the mind that wants to do good and actually be of help and then there's other mind where we ignore people who need help, say terrible things about people we know nothing about, etc. but then there's the mind that doesn't think and is without a conscious and those are your murderers, rapists, et. al. Human nature has produced all of these things, but it is ultimately up to us to find out who we are and what kind of life we want to live. So, while I do believe that some higher entity is out there, I disagree with cramming one's beliefs down someone else's throat, especially if they're not receptive or, better yet, ask for it in the first-place.

Quote from: SimonNZ on April 24, 2021, 04:09:31 PM
I think there's an old poem, possible by Pope though I can't find it right now, that says human's ability to conceive of any creator that may exist is like bugs in a block of butter being able to imagine the cow.

I like that thought although I'm also very impressed that the structure of this universe contains so much information that humans are able to interpret, things record their history.

Quote from: Daverz on April 24, 2021, 07:38:38 PM
Oh, yeah, I also became less enthusiastic about identifying as an atheist when the "New Atheists" moved to the Right.  I have a lot more admiration for someone like the Reverend William Barber than I do assholes like Sam Harris or a prat like Richard Dawkins (he's a fine naturalist, though).

I don't let new or old atheists define my atheism. How many ways is there not to believe in God? I have never been insterested of Sam Harris. Richard Dawkins I do like, but no matter how big of assholes they are I still call myself an atheist for a very simple reason: I don't believe in God. I didn't need people like Sean Carroll to explain to me why God is not a good theory. I didn't really think about God before I was about 10 years old and when I started thinking all I saw was logical problems for the religious claims. Later the "silliness" of religious claims came only more apparent thanks to growing up, maturing in logical thinking skills and getting highly educated.

What I didn't understand well was how it is so difficult for many people to recognize these logical problems, but then I heard about Asperger and understood that I am not like "normal" people and so many questions got answered. I am in a small minority of people who have specific strengths and weaknesses compared to other people. One of those strengths is system thinking skills which must have contributed my thinking of religious claims from early age. Most people do not share this skill and I better be aware of that. I understand and even accept religious people more than I used to because of this, but my tolerance has it's limits: Some religious people use their religion as an justification for hate and oppression. That's something I can't accept, but if you act out your religious beliefs in positive ways then good for you!

Anyway, by the time I heard about people like Richard Dawkins, I had been calling myself an atheist for 20 years or so.

Quote from: 71 dB on April 25, 2021, 01:31:24 AM
I didn't need people like Sean Carroll to explain to me why God is not a good theory.

That's rather anti-intellectual.  The Sean Carroll talk is an interesting take I have not heard elsewhere, or at least put together the way he does. 

I'm curious to know what Florestan makes of the results.

I can't participate in the poll because there is no "I don't know/but I do care" choice.

Sarge

Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2021, 07:38:24 AM
I have often questioned God's justice, but never His existence.

Why is everyone so sure that God is a HE?
I won't even considering believing in God unless or until I am assured that God is or may be a SHE. I find female far more reliable and trustworthy than the lying cheating and generally deplorable men...  :P

Quote from: springrite on April 25, 2021, 05:08:56 PM
Why is everyone so sure that God is a HE?
I won't even considering believing in God unless or until I am assured that God is or may be a SHE. I find female far more reliable and trustworthy than the lying cheating and generally deplorable men...  :P

You need to read this book

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41UiiTRGQCL._SX311_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

Quote from: Daverz on April 25, 2021, 04:08:31 PM
That's rather anti-intellectual.  The Sean Carroll talk is an interesting take I have not heard elsewhere, or at least put together the way he does.

I think you misunderstood me. Pretty much everything Sean Carroll says is interesting (and smart), but 40 years ago I didn't need his teenager views of the World in order to form my own views about religion and God.

Btw, I have watched that video maybe 2 years ago.  ;)

Quote from: SimonNZ on April 25, 2021, 04:13:24 PM
I'm curious to know what Florestan makes of the results.

Well, I expected cummulative atheism (absolutely no and probably no) to be in the lead --- and it is. What I didn't expect was theism (absolutely yes) to be a majority of options. That's really a surprise to me.

I said no comments because I didn't want this to degenerate into yet another pointless kerfuffle about religion --- but thanks God (  ;) ) all comments yet have been decent and civil.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 25, 2021, 04:33:12 PM
I can't participate in the poll because there is no "I don't know/but I do care" choice.

Sarge

Fixed.

Quote from: springrite on April 25, 2021, 05:08:56 PM
Why is everyone so sure that God is a HE?
I won't even considering believing in God unless or until I am assured that God is or may be a SHE. I find female far more reliable and trustworthy than the lying cheating and generally deplorable men...  :P

Your quarrel is just.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 25, 2021, 04:33:12 PM
I can't participate in the poll because there is no "I don't know/but I do care" choice.

Sarge

(* chortle *)

I cast my vote for I don't know / I don't care.

As to "I don't know," I recently watched Great Expectations, and Jaggers advises Pip (who was misled in part by his wishes) "Take nothing on its looks, take everything on evidence. There is no better rule." In the case of God, it isn't so much the chance of being misled by "looks," but by what one is accustomed to suppose/think/feel.

As to "I don't care," this is as much practical consideration as anything. My life's journey has brought me to a Zen-ish place: my feeling is that, if there is a God, she is (I feel) well-disposed towards me, and is not going to play "gotcha!" in my failings. I have learnt that doing right, because it is right, and in spite of whatever inconvenience to me, is how I should act and train my mind. If I am a Christian, it is not any matter of wearing a "Christian name-tag," but of obeying the commandment to love my neighbor, of walking in humility and peace.

There, I've blabbed enow.

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 01:41:08 AM
Fixed.

Thanks.

Sarge

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 26, 2021, 08:14:14 AM
Thanks.

Sarge

I am interpreting "probably yes" and "probably no" as being "I don't know but here's my hunch" - do you describe yourself as "I don't know and it's a tossup/total mystery to me"  ;D or something like that?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 26, 2021, 02:46:15 AM
(* chortle *)

I cast my vote for I don't know / I don't care.

As to "I don't know," I recently watched Great Expectations, and Jaggers advises Pip (who was misled in part by his wishes) "Take nothing on its looks, take everything on evidence. There is no better rule." In the case of God, it isn't so much the chance of being misled by "looks," but by what one is accustomed to suppose/think/feel.

As to "I don't care," this is as much practical consideration as anything. My life's journey has brought me to a Zen-ish place: my feeling is that, if there is a God, she is (I feel) well-disposed towards me, and is not going to play "gotcha!" in my failings. I have learnt that doing right, because it is right, and in spite of whatever inconvenience to me, is how I should act and train my mind. If I am a Christian, it is not any matter of wearing a "Christian name-tag," but of obeying the commandment to love my neighbor, of walking in humility and peace.

There, I've blabbed enow.

Your thoughts mirror my own to a large extent. The reason I say I care about knowing if there is a god is not because I want instruction and rules on how to live my life (or because I fear the afterlife) but to get to the answers of the great questions: What is the purpose of the universe, its meaning, and how did it come into existence. Since I don't believe something comes from nothing, there must have been a creator. something that caused the universe to be. Basically I want to know the how and why concerning the mechanics of creation and the who or whatever that was behind it. "Let there be light" is a good description of the Big Bang but I want to know what or who caused the explosive material to exist in the first place.

I grew up surrounded by an extended family of Christians: Friends (a Quaker offshoot) on one side of my family, Zion Lutheran on the other. I was a believer until I read the whole Bible for the first time at age 19. Agnostic since then.

Sarge

Quote from: Brian on April 26, 2021, 08:22:47 AM
I am interpreting "probably yes" and "probably no" as being "I don't know but here's my hunch" -

Correct. That is my idea about this option.

Quote
"I don't know and it's a tossup/total mystery to me"

AFAIC, that is covered simply by "I don't know / I don't care".

If you need a specific option which is not listed, please let me know, I'll add it.

Quote from: Brian on April 26, 2021, 08:22:47 AM
I am interpreting "probably yes" and "probably no" as being "I don't know but here's my hunch" - do you describe yourself as "I don't know and it's a tossup/total mystery to me"  ;D or something like that?

Well, I do believe something created the universe. I just don't believe humanity has created a religion or god or even a scientific theory that explains it to my satisfaction.

Sarge

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 26, 2021, 02:46:15 AM
(* chortle *)

I cast my vote for I don't know / I don't care.

As to "I don't know," I recently watched Great Expectations, and Jaggers advises Pip (who was misled in part by his wishes) "Take nothing on its looks, take everything on evidence. There is no better rule." In the case of God, it isn't so much the chance of being misled by "looks," but by what one is accustomed to suppose/think/feel.

As to "I don't care," this is as much practical consideration as anything. My life's journey has brought me to a Zen-ish place: my feeling is that, if there is a God, she is (I feel) well-disposed towards me, and is not going to play "gotcha!" in my failings. I have learnt that doing right, because it is right, and in spite of whatever inconvenience to me, is how I should act and train my mind. If I am a Christian, it is not any matter of wearing a "Christian name-tag," but of obeying the commandment to love my neighbor, of walking in humility and peace.

There, I've blabbed enow.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 26, 2021, 08:48:06 AM
Your thoughts mirror my own to a large extent. The reason I say I care about knowing if there is a god is not because I want instruction and rules on how to live my life (or because I fear the afterlife) but to get to the answers of the great questions: What is the purpose of the universe, its meaning, and how did it come into existence. Since I don't believe something comes from nothing, there must have been a creator. something that caused the universe to be. Basically I want to know the how and why concerning the mechanics of creation and the who or whatever that was behind it. "Let there be light" is a good description of the Big Bang but I want to know what or who caused the explosive material to exist in the first place.

I grew up surrounded by an extended family of Christians: Friends (a Quaker offshoot) on one side of my family, Zion Lutheran on the other. I was a believer until I read the whole Bible for the first time at age 19. Agnostic since then.

Sarge

Most interesting thoughts, gentlemen, thanks for posting.

Karl: is it correct that for you being a Christian is more about living the right life rather than about believing the right things?

Sarge: is it correct that for you there is a difference between agnostic and atheist?

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 26, 2021, 08:57:23 AM
Well, I do believe something created the universe. I just don't believe humanity has created a religion or god or even a scientific theory that explains it to my satisfaction.

Sarge

Thank you. :)

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 26, 2021, 02:46:15 AM
My life's journey has brought me to a Zen-ish place: my feeling is that, if there is a God, she is (I feel) well-disposed towards me, and is not going to play "gotcha!" in my failings. I have learnt that doing right, because it is right, and in spite of whatever inconvenience to me, is how I should act and train my mind. If I am a Christian, it is not any matter of wearing a "Christian name-tag," but of obeying the commandment to love my neighbor, of walking in humility and peace.

This is wonderful, thank you also. :)

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 09:09:01 AM
Most interesting thoughts, gentlemen, thanks for posting.
Sarge: is it correct that for you there is a difference between agnostic and atheist?

Yes. I don't deny the possibility that a creator exists. In fact it seems probable. I just have no idea what that "god" is or means to humanity.

Sarge

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 09:09:01 AM
Most interesting thoughts, gentlemen, thanks for posting.

Karl: is it correct that for you being a Christian is more about living the right life rather than about believing the right things?

Aye, one of the petitions in the Anglican Evening Prayer service reads in part, "And, we beseech thee, give us that due sense of all thy mercies, that our hearts may he unfeignedly thankful: and that we show forth thy praise, not only with our lips, but in our lives, by giving up our selves to thy service, and by walking before thee in holiness and righteousness all our days." How we act demonstrates what we believe ... and every act should be a prayer.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 26, 2021, 08:57:23 AM
Well, I do believe something created the universe. I just don't believe humanity has created a religion or god or even a scientific theory that explains it to my satisfaction.

I can certainly see where you're coming from. Been there, done that myself. My only quibble is that no religion, god or scientific theory is under any obligation to give you, or me, or anyone else a satisfactory explanation. I see it this way: rationally speaking, there is both enough evidence for God and enough evidence for atheism --- reason by itself is unable to give the ultimate answer. That's why religion is a matter of belief, not of reason. Given the unconclusive evidence, some people choose theism (of whatever persuasion, I don't limit it to Christianity although I'm a Christian myself), some other choose atheism, probably most people choose agnosticism. The keyword is choice, free choice.

I freely (ie, after rationally, volitionally and sentimentally considering all pros and cons to the best of my knowledge, volition and sentiment) made the choice of being a convinced-yet-not-devout Eastern Orthodox Christian, ie keeping, and upholding, the faith I was baptized in. I say keeping because in my 20s I seriously considered converting to Roman Catholicism. Eventually I gave up any such notion and I'm only too glad I did: the Romanian Orthodox Church (and Eastern Orthodoxy in general) might lack some of the positives of the Roman Catholic Church but it certainly lacks all its negatives --- and besides, it's not a matter of positives and negatives, but of truth. Once again, my mind, soul and heart all tell me that Eastern Orthodox Christianity is true.

Note to Poju (71dB) and to anyone else whom it may concern: apart from being baptized I had no particularly religious upbringing. My parents, while not being atheists, were not very devout either. We have always had icons in our home, we went to baptisms, weddings and funerals --- just like everybody else. Yet they never inculcated in my mind any notion of God, religion, faith etc. In my early teens I even went through a rationalist / scientist phase when I thought everything can be explained rationally and science is the ultimate answer to all mankind's questions. Yet even then I was no atheist proper. But I discovered God, religion and faith completely on my own, helped by four seminal events / books: (1) watching Zefirelli's Jesus of Nazareth when I was 16; (2) reading Pascal's Meditations when I was 16; (3) reading The New Testament when I was 17 (and during high-school classes no less ); and last but not least, reading Nicolae Steinhardt's Diary of Happiness when I was 18-19-20 (he was a Romanian-born Jewish writer and essayst who was a political prisoner in Communist Romania, converted to Eastern Orthodoxy while in prison and died as a monk just months before the Communist regime was toppled --- while imprisoned he wrote in his mind a splendid, erudite and moving diary which he transcribed by memory after release --- see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Steinhardt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Steinhardt)). So you see, my story is not that of a convert from Christianity to atheism but that of a transition from mild agnosticism to convinced Christianity ---- in which reason played a major role.

Anyway and bottom line, we shall die and we shall see.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 26, 2021, 09:28:15 AM
Yes. I don't deny the possibility that a creator exists. In fact it seems probable. I just have no idea what that "god" is or means to humanity.

Thanks. If you could only read that Steinhardt's splendid book...

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 10:08:22 AM
I can certainly see where you're coming from. Been there, done that myself. My only quibble is that no religion, god or scientific theory is under any obligation to give you, or me, or anyone else a satisfactory explanation. I see it this way: rationally speaking, there is both enough evidence for God and enough evidence for atheism --- reason by itself is unable to give the ultimate answer. That's why religion is a matter of belief, not of reason. Given the unconclusive evidence, some people choose theism (of whatever persuasion, I don't limit it to Christianity although I'm a Christian myself), some other choose atheism, probably most people choose agnosticism. The keyword is choice, free choice.

I freely (ie, after rationally, volitionally and sentimentally considering all pros and cons to the best of my knowledge, volition and sentiment) made the choice of being a convinced-yet-not-devout Eastern Orthodox Christian, ie keeping, and upholding, the faith I was baptized in. I say keeping because in my 20s I seriously considered converting to Roman Catholicism. Eventually I gave up any such notion and I'm only too glad I did: the Romanian Orthodox Church (and Eastern Orthodoxy in general) might lack some of the positives of the Roman Catholic Church but it certainly lacks all its negatives --- and besides, it's not a matter of positives and negatives, but of truth. Once again, my mind, soul and heart all tell me that Eastern Orthodox Christianity is true.

Note to Poju (71dB) and to anyone else whom it may concern: apart from being baptized I had no particularly religious upbringing. My parents, while not being atheists, were not very devout either. We have always had icons in our home, we went to baptisms, weddings and funerals --- just like everybody else. Yet they never inculcated in my mind any notion of God, religion, faith etc. In my early teens I even went through a rationalist / scientist phase when I thought everything can be explained rationally and science is the ultimate answer to all mankind's questions. Yet even then I was no atheist proper. But I discovered God, religion and faith completely on my own, helped by four seminal events / books: (1) watching Zefirelli's Jesus of Nazareth when I was 16; (2) reading Pascal's Meditations when I was 16; (3) reading The New Testament when I was 17 (and during high-school classes no less ); and last but not least, reading Nicolae Steinhardt's Diary of Happiness when I was 18-19-20 (he was a Romanian-born Jewish writer and essayst who was a political prisoner in Communist Romania, converted to Eastern Orthodoxy while in prison and died as a monk just months before the Communist regime was toppled --- while imprisoned he wrote in his mind a splendid, erudite and moving diary which he transcribed by memory after release --- see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Steinhardt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Steinhardt)). So you see, my story is not that of a convert from Christianity to atheism but that of a transition from mild agnosticism to convinced Christianity ---- in which reason played a major role.

Anyway and bottom line, we shall die and we shall see.

Interesting, and I see it. Thanks for the post.

no religion, god or scientific theory is under any obligation to give you, or me, or anyone else a satisfactory explanation is certainly a reasonable position, and yet, if God made us, she seems to have made us with a keen curiosity for satisfactory explanations. It were cruel to create people like that, only to frustrate that thirst.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 26, 2021, 10:03:55 AM
How we act demonstrates what we believe ... and every act should be a prayer.

Absolutely.

Cf.  James 2: 14-17

What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

I don't want to go controversial but I can't help it: as time goes by, more and more, I am more firmly convinced that sola fide, especially in the extreme Calvinist version, is possibly, nay, probably, nay, certainly the main culprit for the bad rap Christianity has, especially in the Anglophone Western world.

I can only say that according to my reason and belief this sola fide thing --- and to a lesser yet no less grave extent, sola Scriptura --- are non-Christian, absurd, irrational notions for which there is no basis either in Jesus Christ's own teachings and deeds, or in The New Testament taken as a whole or in the Early Apostolic Church's tradition (ie the Church before 1054). Besides my personal position, both sola fide and sola Scriptura have been repeatedly condemned as heretical by both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church --- the difference being that in the EOC the gravest punishment for unrepentant heretics has always been simply to exclude them from the Church's service and the Holy Communion.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 26, 2021, 10:14:13 AM
no religion, god or scientific theory is under any obligation to give you, or me, or anyone else a satisfactory explanation is certainly a reasonable position, and yet, if God made us, she seems to have made us with a keen curiosity for satisfactory explanations. It were cruel to create people like that, only to frustrate that thirst.

Sure, Karl, sure. But I'm sure (pun) that if all satisfactory explanations were available, then there would be no more room for belief --- and reasonable person as I (hope I really) am, I still think (informed) belief is the essence of (true) religion.

As Kierkegaard (a philosophical Protestant no less, and generally I have little sympathy for philosophical Protestants) put it (I quote from memory): If God were to descend from Heaven as a giant multicolored parrot and disclose Himself, everybody would acknowledge Him. But that would be a matter of reason, not belief.

Cf. John 20: 26-29

26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."


What I agree with is that many who believe without seeing think they are above those who don't (yet) believe and think that "once saved, always saved" --- but once again, this is an absurd, non-Christian notion that Jesus Christ never taught, the apostles never taught, the Early Church never taught, The Roman Catholic Church and The Eastern Orthodox Church never taught.

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 10:08:22 AM
My only quibble is that no religion, god or scientific theory is under any obligation to give you, or me, or anyone else a satisfactory explanation.

Yeah, my viewpoint is basically scientific but I'm actually scientific enough to notice and not ignore very many meaningful but highly unlikely personal experiences even though I haven't the faintest idea how they came about.

The first random old sci-fi story I've read has given me the valuable ideas that I might just not have the intelligence to put all the pieces together and understand what's going on, although paying more attention to seeing through mental delusions would certainly help matters. :-\

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 09:09:01 AM
Sarge: is it correct that for you there is a difference between agnostic and atheist?

You didn't ask me, but I'll give my view of this. The difference between agnostic and atheist is in how strong your lack of belief in God is. Some people who I think are clearly atheists call themselves agnostics. I also believe most people are actually agnostics, but many of them claim to be religious. That's because most societies are constructed so that it is "safer" to claim to be religious while atheism is stigmatized althou things are getting better.

------

I have questions for you: What is your justification for your own beliefs? Why are your beliefs better than the beliefs of other people? Have you ever thought about the reasons for your beliefs? Do you think you have your beliefs because the belief are the truth or because of other reasons such as the cultural environment you were born into? Do you think we are born religious or do you think we are indoctrinated into religions?

As an atheist I have my own "secular" beliefs. My justification for those beliefs is what I know and what makes sense to me. That's all I have got, so I know I might need to adjust my beliefs if there is new knowledge that is in contradiction with my current beliefs. To me the idea that we can have beliefs that can never be proven wrong is ridiculous and even dangerous (fanatism). Belief are beliefs because we only believe they are true, but we lack the proof. When we have the proof a belief becomes a fact. Beliefs are by definition things not proven. Doubting beliefs is healthy. That way bad beliefs can be removed for better ones. I don't mind if my beliefs are challenged. If I can't defend my beliefs I better do something about it! You do a service to me if you expose the weaknesses of my beliefs.

Interesting. Thanks for posting.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 30, 2021, 06:49:10 AM
Interesting. Thanks for posting.

+1.

Quote from: amw on April 30, 2021, 06:11:06 AM
Do I think the six hundred and thirteen mitzvot are a good moral basis on which to fix the world? No, as a general rule, although I'd agree with some of them.

Wow, I had to look those up. Unfortunately I failed at

598. Blot out the memory of Amalek.
(Deuteronomy 25:19)

as I couldn't resist googling it. :-[

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 30, 2021, 06:49:10 AM
Interesting. Thanks for posting.

+2 (from memory). Actually amw's long recent post has disappeared.

Quote from: Daverz on April 23, 2021, 10:01:26 PM
May you be touched by his noodly appendage.

In the interest of preventing further theological suspense and unease, I'll point discreetly to the following (presumably) relevant text:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster)

Quote from: j winter on April 30, 2021, 10:48:09 AM
In the interest of preventing further theological suspense and unease, I'll point discreetly to the following (presumably) relevant text:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster)

:D

There are several branches that I follow within pastafarianism that I am devoted to religiously, pardon the pun.

Quote from: (: premont :) on April 30, 2021, 07:50:56 AM
+2 (from memory). Actually amw's long recent post has disappeared.

I removed it to avoid breaking a personal resolution not to post about nonmusical topics on this board. Apologies for that.

About thirty years ago I suffered and almost died from pancreatitis.

In order to try to save me they place me into an induced comma.  It worked because I am still here.  I did not see any lights or anything like that.  All I remember is that I woke up as if nothing happened  :)

I was born in 1946.  Even though I used to pray to God, he has never spoken to me.  So he either does not exist or he does not like me.

Quote from: 71 dB on April 30, 2021, 04:17:56 AM
I have questions for you: What is your justification for your own beliefs?  Have you ever thought about the reasons for your beliefs? Do you think you have your beliefs because the belief are the truth or because of other reasons such as the cultural environment you were born into? Do you think we are born religious or do you think we are indoctrinated into religions?

Please read my reply #60.

QuoteWhy are your beliefs better than the beliefs of other people?

I don't believe (pun) I ever claimed that.

Reading your reply #60.  :)

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 10:08:22 AM
I can certainly see where you're coming from. Been there, done that myself. My only quibble is that no religion, god or scientific theory is under any obligation to give you, or me, or anyone else a satisfactory explanation. I see it this way: rationally speaking, there is both enough evidence for God and enough evidence for atheism --- reason by itself is unable to give the ultimate answer. That's why religion is a matter of belief, not of reason. Given the unconclusive evidence, some people choose theism (of whatever persuasion, I don't limit it to Christianity although I'm a Christian myself), some other choose atheism, probably most people choose agnosticism. The keyword is choice, free choice.

I don't think there is ANY evidence for God (any of the about 4000 Gods mankind has worshipped in history) or the lack of God. If there was, we wouldn't have to argue about these things. We don't debate over the claims that the Sun exists, do we? Sure, there are flat earthers, but they are a fringe group of weird people with mental issues believing in the craziest conspiracies ever.

Since we don't have evidence in either direction, we are forced to other kind of justification for our beliefs and that is what separates religious people from non-religious people. Because I am non-religious, I don't need to assume the religion I happened to born into happens to be the truth and therefore I have to think backwards from the (true) conclusions of that particular religion how the World must be. From intellectual point of view such method of forming my views of the World would be totally crazy. Instead I look at what religions say about the World and compare it with what science has to say and evaluate how well they describe the World. The result is I trust science so much that if science finds evidence for God I will become a believer. So far science has not seen God anywhere meaning I don't have any reason to believe in God meaning I am a atheist. Science hasn't seen the flying spagetti monster either anywhere so I don't believe in it either.

We can't assume reason has limits. We don't know. Human mind can have biological limits, but reasoning might not have limits. If it has limits we can keep reasoning until we reach those limits and then decide what next. What religions do should make alarm bells ring: It makes strong claims and then says you can't evaluate those claims with reason, because they are based on belief and are beyond reason! Anyone can create such belief system claiming ANYTHING! No wonder there has been so many religions in human history. Compare that to science which is about constantly testing if the claims are correct. Just recently tests with muon particles revealed that the standard model of particle physics might not be completely correct and there might be a fifth force of nature (maybe it is God?  ;D ).

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 10:08:22 AMI freely (ie, after rationally, volitionally and sentimentally considering all pros and cons to the best of my knowledge, volition and sentiment) made the choice of being a convinced-yet-not-devout Eastern Orthodox Christian, ie keeping, and upholding, the faith I was baptized in. I say keeping because in my 20s I seriously considered converting to Roman Catholicism. Eventually I gave up any such notion and I'm only too glad I did: the Romanian Orthodox Church (and Eastern Orthodoxy in general) might lack some of the positives of the Roman Catholic Church but it certainly lacks all its negatives --- and besides, it's not a matter of positives and negatives, but of truth. Once again, my mind, soul and heart all tell me that Eastern Orthodox Christianity is true.

You talk about positives and negatives and how that has affected your choice of your beliefs. It also seem like you have only compared positives and negatives between Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. What about other religions? In Finland the dominant religion is Evangelical Lutheran Christianity. How about its pros and cons? How about Protestant Christianity? How about Judaism? Or Islam? Or Hinduism? Are they just inferior to what Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism have to offer?

How convenient for you that Eastern Orthodox Christianity is true! Just imagine if you were born in UK! Not much Eastern Orthodox Christianity in there! Because of Russian influence we have many Orthodox churches in Finland and 58 000 members. The Uspenski Cathedral (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uspenski_Cathedral) in Helsinki is the largest Orthodox church in Western Europe.

For me this is easy: Science is just science. There is not choosing between Catholic science and Lutheran science. Scientists in Israel agree with scientist in Japan and Chile for the most part and disagreements tend to be temporal rather than persistent. By the way, if I had to choose a religion, I would probably choose Hinduism. What I know about religions, it seems most intellectual.

Quote from: Florestan on April 26, 2021, 10:08:22 AMNote to 71dB and to anyone else whom it may concern: apart from being baptized I had no particularly religious upbringing. My parents, while not being atheists, were not very devout either. We have always had icons in our home, we went to baptisms, weddings and funerals --- just like everybody else. Yet they never inculcated in my mind any notion of God, religion, faith etc. In my early teens I even went through a rationalist / scientist phase when I thought everything can be explained rationally and science is the ultimate answer to all mankind's questions. Yet even then I was no atheist proper. But I discovered God, religion and faith completely on my own, helped by four seminal events / books: (1) watching Zefirelli's Jesus of Nazareth when I was 16; (2) reading Pascal's Meditations when I was 16; (3) reading The New Testament when I was 17 (and during high-school classes no less ); and last but not least, reading Nicolae Steinhardt's Diary of Happiness when I was 18-19-20 (he was a Romanian-born Jewish writer and essayst who was a political prisoner in Communist Romania, converted to Eastern Orthodoxy while in prison and died as a monk just months before the Communist regime was toppled --- while imprisoned he wrote in his mind a splendid, erudite and moving diary which he transcribed by memory after release --- see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Steinhardt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Steinhardt)). So you see, my story is not that of a convert from Christianity to atheism but that of a transition from mild agnosticism to convinced Christianity ---- in which reason played a major role.

I have not experienced any of those four events. When I was a teenager I read a lot of science fiction (Stanislaw Lem etc.) I guess that's why I have always been an atheist... ...looks like the communist regime in Romania has had crucial effect on your beliefs.

What I mean is I don't share many experiences with other people so I can't understand why reading a certain book or seeing a movie converts someone into a religion. These things are clearly meaningful for you, but that doesn't mean they are meaningful to others.

Very interesting thread. Probably I should have voted 'I don't know but I do care' - although I'll stick with 'probably yes'. One thing I do believe is that no one religion has unique access to God. My own background is Jewish (I had to secretly learn my barmitzvah passage in English phonetics  ::)). My wife is a church-going Christian. My daughter is very interested in her partly Jewish background - at primary school she was the, self-appointed' 'Jewish Expert'. She is getting married ( :)) in a couple of weeks and wants a Jewish blessing for her marriage. In liberal Judaism you can now be Jewish through your father, no doubt due to the large number of Jews (including myself and my brother) who have 'married out''. My family was never practising except that we observed fasting on Yom Kippur (as my daughter and I do now). One thing I do like about Judaism is that it does not claim unique access to God or deny other faiths a meaningful relationship with God. If anything, I see myself more at home, philosophically, with Taoism than with any organised religion.

Quote from: vandermolen on May 10, 2021, 01:22:01 AM
Very interesting thread. Probably I should have voted 'I don't know but I do care' - although I'll stick with 'probably yes'. One thing I do believe is that no one religion has unique access to God. My own background is Jewish (I had to secretly learn my barmitzvah passage in English phonetics  ::)). My wife is a church-going Christian. My daughter is very interested in her partly Jewish background - at primary school she was the, self-appointed' 'Jewish Expert'. She is getting married ( :)) in a couple of weeks and wants a Jewish blessing for her marriage. In liberal Judaism you can now be Jewish through your father, no doubt due to the large number of Jews (including myself and my brother) who have 'married out''. My family was never practising except that we observed fasting on Yom Kippur (as my daughter and I do now). One thing I do like about Judaism is that it does not claim unique access to God or deny other faiths a meaningful relationship with God. If anything, I see myself more at home, philosophically, with Taoism than with any organised religion.

Most interesting, thanks for posting.

Quote from: vandermolen on May 10, 2021, 01:22:01 AM
If anything, I see myself more at home, philosophically, with Taoism than with any organised religion.

Maybe I should look again at Taoism. I'm perhaps most influenced by disorganised Buddhism, Krishnamurti and maybe nature spirits but want to enjoy the world rather than escape from it.

Quote from: steve ridgway on May 10, 2021, 06:45:18 AM
... but want to enjoy the world rather than escape from it.

Aye.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 10, 2021, 06:16:54 AM
Most interesting, thanks for posting.

+1.

I chose:
I don't know but I do care

which surprisingly only 2 others selected.

No one knows, belief is not knowledge.
And it does matter, if God exists they can do anything they want to you, such as eternal torture. Unless people say they don't care in the sense of not caring to put in the effort to think about whether God exists or not, then that would be totally understandable.

I think I voted for the original I don't know before it got split into two so am wrongly counted as not caring.

Quote from: steve ridgway on May 16, 2021, 10:19:14 PM
I think I voted for the original I don't know before it got split into two so am wrongly counted as not caring.

I don't understand why agnosticism is lumped in with apathy.

Quote from: DavidW on May 17, 2021, 08:48:10 AM
I don't understand why agnosticism is lumped in with apathy.

Indeed. After all, the agnostic Vaughan Williams did excellent work refreshing the English Hymnal.

Quote from: DavidW on May 17, 2021, 08:48:10 AM
I don't understand why agnosticism is lumped in with apathy.

That was my vote: I don' know / I don't care - but I didn't think it was apathy as much as indifference over speculative questions with no answers.

Quote from: Old San Antone on May 17, 2021, 03:48:28 PM
That was my vote: I don' know / I don't care - but I didn't think it was apathy as much as indifference over speculative questions with no answers.

Ecellent point.

Quote from: Old San Antone on May 17, 2021, 03:48:28 PM
That was my vote: I don' know / I don't care - but I didn't think it was apathy as much as indifference over speculative questions with no answers.

I see your point --- but if mankind had been indifferent over "speculative questions with no answers" we'd have had no art, philosophy or science.  ;)

Quote from: Old San Antone on May 17, 2021, 03:48:28 PM
That was my vote: I don' know / I don't care - but I didn't think it was apathy as much as indifference over speculative questions with no answers.

It is NOT a question with no answer. It is an empirical question with an answer -- like the question "Are there fairies?" or "Are there unicorns?" And like those questions we can say with some confidence what the answer is.

Quote from: Mandryka on May 18, 2021, 01:24:36 AM
It is NOT a question with no answer. It is an empirical question with an answer -- like the question "Are there fairies?" or "Are there unicorns?" And like those questions we can say with some confidence what the answer is.

Excellent point.

Quote from: Mandryka on May 18, 2021, 01:24:36 AM
It is NOT a question with no answer. It is an empirical question with an answer -- like the question "Are there fairies?" or "Are there unicorns?" And like those questions we can say with some confidence what the answer is.

I'm working the other way round. What general properties can I identify in the universe and my experience, and can I form any personally convincing spirituality from these?

Quote from: Mandryka on May 18, 2021, 01:24:36 AM
It is NOT a question with no answer. It is an empirical question with an answer -- like the question "Are there fairies?" or "Are there unicorns?" And like those questions we can say with some confidence what the answer is.

Well, it really has has two answers, and I am indifferent to the debate.