Question:

Author: EtrnlVw

Posts

Total: 13
Topic's author
#1
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
Does Human experience (related to Theism) account for the existence of God?

I'm not asking if you think it is good enough to prove to you the existence of God, but if you think human experience throughout history accounts for God's spiritual presence. By answering yes to this question, it does not mean you believe God exists but it does mean you would concede that the full scope of spiritual experience indicates God exists in some way, perhaps.
After all, if God did not exist how could there be any experience of that nature? if no transcendent reality exists, how could there be any knowledge of it?

If you answer no, without speculating, please explain why human experience can't be attributed to the existence of a Creator.

#2
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,832
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
No, brain-injury research from the University of Missouri provides evidence that feelings of spiritual transcendence are the product of specific brain activity.
Two University of Missouri psychologists are proposing"a neurophysiological model of spiritual experience" that explains what is happening inside the brain when people experience feelings of selflessness and transcendence.
The model “suggests that all individuals, regardless of cultural background or religion, experience the same neurophysiological / neuropsychological functions during spiritual experiences,” according to co-authors Brick Johnstone and Bret A. Glass. It also attempts to explain why these brain activities are interpreted in such different ways by people from different religious traditions and culture.
“People with injuries to the right parietal lobe of the brain reported higher levels of spiritual experiences, such as transcendence,” said Johnstone .
Hence we can see why religion is called the opiate of the people.
#3
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
I'm not sure I understand the question.

I'm sure spiritual experience indicates some type of divine power, an I usually call this God. But is this what you are asking?


#4
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,364
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@EtrnlVw
If you answer no, without speculating, please explain why human experience can't be attributed to the existence of a Creator.
Things that do not exist cannot be the cause of other things, therefore you need to prove that something exists *before* you can put it forward as a candidate explanation.

After all, if God did not exist how could there be any experience of that nature?
Confirmation bias. How many times has personal experience revealed someone else's God?

#5
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
I take pause at the very notion of god, that it should be a word on my lips at all. All the rest can be all mechanics, it doesn't matter, the universe gives itself a name. I'm not sure how religious I am, or what I believe in exactly, but there's that. There's wonder in it and there's hope in it, and I don't know how you could deny it. 
Topic's author
#6
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Double_R
Things that do not exist

Speculation

therefore you need to prove that something exists *before* you can put it forward as a candidate explanation.

I don't need to prove anything, the question was do you think human experience can account for the existence of God. The existence of God is well established for me, that's not the issue at hand, human experience is just a bonus. If you don't think human experience accounts for anything, just say no and perhaps why you think it does not.

Confirmation bias. How many times has personal experience revealed someone else's God?

Confirmation bias lol? I'm asking what YOU think, not what I think. But just so you are well informed I am an Omnist, meaning I consider spiritual experience as a whole so it doesn't matter about varying experiences. Actually in my worldview, it is the variations that make such a reality beautiful and worthwhile. Of course, if you're interested I can show you how that works.


Topic's author
#7
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@janesix
I'm sure spiritual experience indicates some type of divine power, an I usually call this God. But is this what you are asking?

Yes. 

Topic's author
#8
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@badger
I take pause at the very notion of god, that it should be a word on my lips at all. All the rest can be all mechanics, it doesn't matter, the universe gives itself a name. I'm not sure how religious I am, or what I believe in exactly, but there's that. There's wonder in it and there's hope in it, and I don't know how you could deny it. 

I'm glad to read this, although don't worry about how religious you are that's not the objective.  I'm sure I know what you mean though, just don't think you have to devote yourself to any religious organizations to believe in God. I'd love to discuss with you the dynamics of God's existence and we can leave out religion altogether.  The beauty is that you are very much apart of a much greater transcendent Reality and the more you know the more fun you will have. 
#9
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@EtrnlVw
We had a few chats on DDO back in the day, I was probably under a different name. I thought you were a cool guy then and I think you're a cool guy now tbh, just so you know. 

I'm gonna skip the god talk though, it's embarrassing for me lol. 
Topic's author
#10
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@badger
We had a few chats on DDO back in the day, I was probably under a different name. I thought you were a cool guy then and I think you're a cool guy now tbh, just so you know.

Oh sweet, yeah that was back in the day lol.

I'm gonna skip the god talk though, it's embarrassing for me lol.

It's a part of life, I mean you can express that Reality anyway you want to. It doesn't have to be embarrassing at all, or even religious. I get though, I've been around a lot of whacky religious people in my time and it can get pretty weird. But honestly, it would help if people like you would pitch in and just share what you feel and what you want out of it, and people like me who are not oppressed by religious thinking and who are experienced can expand and work with you. I mean when it's all said and done it's just you, you come into this world alone and you leave this world alone and nothing else matters, there isn't really anything about God that is embarrassing. Hit me up in a message if you want to.

#11
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,364
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@EtrnlVw
If you don't think human experience accounts for anything, just say no and perhaps why you think it does not.
I just did. You paid no attention to the message and instead focused on trigger words.

"Things that do not exist cannot be the cause of other things" is not speculation, it's logic 101. It follows from the definition of "not exist".

Because something that does not exist cannot cause other things, logically, the only *candidate* explanations are those which exist.

Because a candidate explanation must first exist before it can cause anything, you cannot use something as an explanation if its existence has yet to be demonstrated.

God's existence has yet to be demonstrated, therefore human experiences cannot be attributed to him.

Note that everything I just said is generalized. I'm not referring to you specifically.

Confirmation bias lol? I'm asking what YOU think, not what I think.
You asked how spiritual experiences could occur if there were no God so I gave you my answer... Confirmation bias. Calling something a spiritual experience does not mean it was the product of the spiritual.

Topic's author
#12
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Double_R
"Things that do not exist cannot be the cause of other things" is not speculation, it's logic 101. It follows from the definition of "not exist".

Because something that does not exist cannot cause other things, logically, the only *candidate* explanations are those which exist.

Because a candidate explanation must first exist before it can cause anything, you cannot use something as an explanation if its existence has yet to be demonstrated.

God's existence has yet to be demonstrated, therefore human experiences cannot be attributed to him.

Note that everything I just said is generalized. I'm not referring to you specifically.


We're not making any assumptions that God exists or that God does not exist. We're just looking at experiences of that nature that may reflect the reality of that somethings existence. The point of course is that the fact they occur could be because it exists. God's existence doesn't need to be demonstrated for experiences to be a product of that Reality. They could simply be a product of that Reality because in fact God exists. Demonstrating God's existence to prove God exists is another thing altogether. Now don't get me wrong, I believe you have reason to believe that spiritual experiences don't reflect God's existence, I just disagree with that assertion.

You asked how spiritual experiences could occur if there were no God so I gave you my answer... Confirmation bias. Calling something a spiritual experience does not mean it was the product of the spiritual.

I'm just trying to get you to look at the phenomenon as a whole without bias because if God exists or some type or types of transcendent reality exist then we would expect to see a lot of observation, experiences, testimonies of that nature. Since in fact there is an overwhelming data base to pull from what are the chances it reflects the truth of the proposition? calling spiritual experiences confirmation bias is speculation and while you're welcome to that belief I don't think it is justified. Not with the amount we have to look into, it's not a good fit IMO.
I had no preconceived thoughts or ideas about the experiences I've had and so I know first hand what we're dealing with.

#13
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,364
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
We're just looking at experiences of that nature that may reflect the reality of that somethings existence. The point of course is that the fact they occur could be because it exists.
And it could also be the product of our own imaginations. So how would we tell the difference? And if we can't then what is the point of all of this? Why attribute what is inside our heads to something whose existence we have no demonstration of?

if God exists or some type or types of transcendent reality exist then we would expect to see a lot of observation, experiences, testimonies of that nature. Since in fact there is an overwhelming data base to pull from what are the chances it reflects the truth of the proposition?
We have no idea, because we have no access to a transcendent reality so we couldn't possibly know what we would experience if one existed or what the probability of anything involving it would be.

calling spiritual experiences confirmation bias is speculation
It's a lot more than speculation. The claim that an experience was spiritual is an unfalsifiable proposition, thus anyone who holds it to be true is biased almost by definition.