HOME | DD
AlmudenaDoncelArt — Existence
Published: 2012-01-15 16:47:28 +0000 UTC; Views: 10974; Favourites: 858; Downloads: 94
Redirect to original
Description
1) Sorry I can't reply to all, but thank you everybody for all your favs and comments! I'm so glad you like my work
2) You can give your own opinion, but please, be respectful with the others. Free insulting won't give more power to your arguments.
Thanks
Related content
Comments: 375
Your signature is going to make a lot of people happy
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
it made ME smile, at least.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Actually it does matter.
Lets say you don't believe in bears. So you go into the woods all carefree. Then BAM a bear comes out of the blue and mauls your face. Sucks for you right? If you had believed in bears, you would have probably brought a shotgun, and when the bear came you could have shot it. Either that or you would have avoided the woods entirely.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Well i guess it doesn't matter cuz no matter what, the consequences are the same. If i choose to believe in the bear i will get mauled and if i don't i get mauled.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Did you read my whole comment?
If you choose to believe in the bear, you will take the necessary precautions. Like I said, you would take a shotgun with you, so that if you do run into the bear you can shoot it and prevent it from mauling your face. Either that, or you would avoid the forest entirely, which would also prevent you from being mauled by the bear.
But if you don't believe in the bear, you have no reason to fear it and bring a shotgun to fend it off. You also don't have a reason to be scared and avoid the forest. Thus you end up walking into the forest and getting mauled.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Um, i was not disagreeing with you. Also, i'm pretty sure you are unable to judge the degree of cleverness of someone else by a single reply on da.
Anyway, i'm more interested in your last statement.
Take a prank for example. Lets say someone fell for one, whose fault is it?
I always thought that it would be equally the fault of the person who did not take precautions and the oter person for being mean.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think that it is the fault of everyone who is involved. Although, it doesn't have to equally be everyone's fault. It may be one person's fault more so than another's, depending on the situation. =^.^=
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Only if you're dumb enough to behave the same way.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Exactly. What a conundrum, does it matter or not?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes. It does. You're not as clever as you think.
If you don't believe in the bear, you will get mauled.
If you do believe in it, you can take counter measures. You're stupid enough not to take counter measures, you deserve to be mauled.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Um, i was not disagreeing with you. Also, i'm pretty sure you are unable to judge the degree of cleverness of someone else by a single reply on da.
Anyway, i'm more interested in your last statement.
Take a prank for example. Lets say someone fell for one, whose fault is it?
I always thought that it would be equally the fault of the person who did not take precautions and the oter person for being mean.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Not exactly true. It really depends on how you view things. If you put it in a religious perspective then most people would say yes it does matter if you believe or no because that would then determine (or at least influence) your fate after death (depending on your religion.)
Also, in a more scientific view, Global Warming (Climate Change) matters if you believe in it or not, if you do you will try to stop/slow it down/reverse it if not then you will continue as you are/make it worse.
Belief and our perception mold our reality and our world view, I think it matters very deeply what we believe.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I would say I have to accept the truth of this, since if something didn't exist and yet someone believed in it, that would matter to the doctors in the psychiatric ward.
But of course it's never that simple. So instead I'll say pondering complicated things like existence makes your own existence all the more complicated.
...Or do you even exist? Does this world exist? Does the remote lying on your couch exist or is it really some disguised, devilish device put there by aliens and not a remote at all? (Are aliens even real? Because people say there is evidence that validates their existence but I guess that would depend on whether or not you believe if that evidence points to aliens or something else altogether...so does that evidence exist? HUH?) Whether you believe it's a remote or not, it definitely exists.
Are you seeing what I'm saying?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You've just put into words what I've been thinking for years...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It can exist without you even knowing it exists. The things you don't know you don't know...fun thoughts eh?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is the rule for normality. It doesn't really exist, yet some people think that there is a normal. The only normal I believe in is the one used in science.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
unless its like the fairies in peter pan where they die if you don't believe in them....
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That would be a pretty big problem for those fairies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
WELL I DON'T BELIEVE IN EXISTENCE OR BELIEVING! >:U
Warning: this post may contain 100% silliness and a warning of such silliness.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It does matter in some ways. Certain things we know to be fact, but much trouble comes from people who actively deny those facts, either because they try to discredit those who teach something like, say, evolution, or they deny and therefore don't do anything about things like pollution and climate change.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You know what, after seeing that all the comments that are about atheism/religion because you used the words "exist" and "believe", I'm just going to have my two cents about what I think the stamp's meaning is about:
The duck-billed platypus
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Win comment is win.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You are a wise person. I really like your point of view. Peace.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I like this message.
I don't think it's trying to offend anyone, to me the message is saying "Stop freaking out about people who don't share your beliefs", and that is a perfectly good message.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Ehm, I don't completely agree with this. There have been given several reasons from the point of view of the 'believer', but let's look at it from the point of view of the 'something that exists'. You exist, don't you? If people didn't believe that, how would that be for you? Probably pretty cool up to a certain point, but I do think it's nice to have others recognizing your existence.
Of course, if it's about scientific theories like gravity and evolution it's a different story, so this mostly applies to religion.
I don't mind you believing in unicorns though, they're pretty cool actually.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm pretty sure the stamp itself kind of answers your first problem. If people don't believe you exist... so what? You -do- exist, so it doesn't matter whether they believe you do or not.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, you don't understand. When people don't believe you exist you still exist, but you'll probably be depressed. For example, it's not like religious people think G'd will stop existing if they don't believe in Him, they just think it pleases Him if they do.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Realistically, no one is going to "not believe" that you exist. Some people might try to PRETEND you don't exist (aka IGNORE you), but that has nothing to do with actually doubting whether someone exists or not. So that's a moot point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
If you read carefully I do state that my point mainly applies to religion aka if G'd exists.In this case there are people that believe He exist and people that don't.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If you read carefully I do state that my point mainly applies to religion aka if G'd exists.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, one would hope that god would be immune to such petty things as "getting depressed" over people not believing in him.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Maybe, but you'd better please a being that powerful, I think.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Now you're straying into "Does god exist?" territory. To which I will say that if you're only believing in god on the off-chance that he *does* exist and is powerful enough to do bad things to you if you don't believe in him...
Life. You're doing it wrong.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sorry, but I thought that was one of the main points this discussion was about.
And why exactly do you say that? I'd love to counter your point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That wasn't an insult to anyone who believes in god, that was questioning the sanity of someone who believes in one for THAT particular reasoning.
You made the comment that we "should please a being that powerful" as a response to my statement that an all-powerful god should be immune to such human-ish things as "getting depressed", especially over such a trivial thing as whether a mortal being believes in him or not.
I said what I did because that is simply a very dangerous (and rather block-headed) mindset. If you believe in a god for that reason, you're basically saying, "I believe in god because he MIGHT exist, and if he DOES exist, he MIGHT be upset that I DON'T believe in him." Do you not see anything wrong with that? Honestly?
If you'd like to attempt to "counter my point"... by all means. Gimme your best shot.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sure I will! But please remember that saying your opponent is insane is not considered a valid argument in debate
First of all, I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. I was not defending my own believe in god, because I have honestly no idea if an upper being exists.
I was simply saying this stamp isn't right. The stamp says "If it really exists, it doesn't matter if you believe in it or not." So my statement is:"If it really exists, it DOES matter if you believe in it or not.
I am not giving a reason for believig in god, I am giving a reason for why it could matter to believe in it. Let's apply my statement to religion, and more specifically, god: "If god really exists, it DOES matter if you believe in him/her or not." So in my statement it wasn't important to prove the existance of an upper being or give reasons to believe in the existence of an upperbeing. The importance of believing in god should, according to my statement, be important only upon condition that god really exists.
For this statement I provided one argument, saying that not believing in god could displease this god, and therefore believing in god would be of significance if he really existed.
This argument doesn't only apply to god, it applies to everything with a level of theory of mind of two or higher. Things that it doesn't apply to are for example scientifical theories or lifeless objects.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Okay, I did misunderstand you before. But you actually have to assume far more than that in order for that statement to work.
If a god really exists, it only matters whether you believe in him IF you assume further that that god actually CARES. And, further still, IF he cares, is there actually going to be a consequence for it?
Those are two reeeeeaaally big 'if's, so it's honestly a pretty trivial thing to actually oppose the entire stamp (which covers a VERY broad spectrum of things) on those grounds alone.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Now we're talking.
That's right. BUT that still proves that the stamp would be wrong in at least one point, that being the point of a being with level of theory of mind of two or higher that cares and that can make one feel the concequences for believing in it or not.
Of course there are things for which the stamp would be right, but I realize that for most people god is an important issue here, unlike the toothpaste that was earlier used by people that wanted to prove the stamp right.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Alright, it took a lot of clarification, but I do see your point now.
From a strictly religious standpoint (those who have already made the assumptions that if a god exists, he/she/it will have certain, specific attributes such that disbelief could and -would- have a negative impact on both the god itself and the people who choose not to believe in it), I can see how the stamp could be seen as an "attack" or "low-blow".
I also think that making those assumptions is a potentially dangerous (not to mention unnecessarily arrogant) thing and should be avoided, but I suppose that's not my place to say.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You've mentioned before that you consider that assumption dangerous, may I ask you why?
And please let me clarify that I do not make those assumptions, I just used them to show the stamp isn't right in all cases.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, for one thing, it leaves you open to believing just about anything. Not to say that everyone who makes those assumptions WILL believe just about anything; as a matter of fact, most seem to actively choose to make those assumptions STRICTLY in reference to their own personal religion/belief system.
Which, at best, still makes them dictionary definition hypocrites.
People spend thousands of dollars a year (often money they don't really have) "giving back to god". And for what? So their pastor/peers can give them a pat on the back for being "good" people? Yeah, sometimes those funds end up going to some charity or other, but sometimes all it really goes for is to help the person in charge to save up for a new TV for their home, or a bigger home.
Beyond that, it seems pretty self-explanatory. In doing so, they completely defy the basic human logic which they regularly apply in every other facet of their lives.
Making assumptions without very good reason is in itself INHERENTLY dangerous. There's a reason people made up the phrase, "Assume makes an 'ass' of 'u' and 'me'." It's just not a good thing to do. Assumptions keep people from the truth of a situation because they're content to simply assume that they've already got it right, and no one can tell them otherwise.
I'm rambling, but I hope I've at least gotten my point across. If not, feel free to ask me for clarification; I'm the greatest at explaining things. x_x
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Nice rant ^^
But no, I still don't think that explains why assuming god exists is dangerous. It could be, of course, when you make that assumption and then stop using your brain. Then the the things you describe will happen. But most religions say that their god wants them to be nice, give to charity, don't kill, don't steal, respect others etc.
So I think that if you keep being critical and use your brain there's no problem with that assumption. What is dangerous is when you assume that someone other than yourself knows what this god wants. Then there will be problems.
But if I missed something please tell me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"most religions say that their god wants them to be nice, give to charity, don't kill, don't steal, respect others etc."
Yeah... but most religions ALSO say that killing certain people is okay, and that killing certain people is a GOOD thing to do. People are getting to the point where most seem to reject the more grotesque and morally ridiculous parts of their religions, which is good, but there are still those out there with that "kill the infidels" mindset.
You might have a point with the "if you keep being critical... then there's no problem" if this world were an ideal one and people WEREN'T so easily corrupted by nature. However, as this world is FAR from ideal, you can be relatively certain (as certain as one can be), if history is any indicator, that among those who are willing to make such assumptions are also people who are willing to put their trust in the heads of their religion. And as we also know: power corrupts.
And I believe my wording was actually "potentially dangerous" (I could be wrong, and I don't feel like looking through all of the comments on that pic to find our conversation again), so even if what you say were entirely true (that as long as people stay critical, it isn't a problem), it's still a potential danger.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh yeah, I might have overlooked that.
But I think that even without religion people would find a reason to kill and discriminate others. That's what people are like. In-group out-group principle, it's seen even in chimps.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>