|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:58 pm
|
|
|
|
You know, I've been thinking, a lot, lately, about what God means to me. I've defined God to be "something we attempt to achieve, but never will." It is an asymptote to balance, in my mind. I think that God is infinite, and, thus, God is both positive and negative, but the sum of these things is not zero, it is Justice. God is the Justice that we wish to bring forth, but are incapable. Justice, I define, as giving each her due, by which I think is greatly related to Newton's third law, "every action has an equal and opposite reaction." The reason that I believe that God/Justice is unattainable is because those equal, opposite reactions do not come in immediacy, and without encompassing infinity. In response to the idea that infinity is merely a concept to explain things, this mustn't be. (I hitherto have only heard opposition expressed as in reference to the universe, forgive me if there is something overlooked.) If one says that the universe is not infinite because of its constant expansion, one is then faced with their own definition. Anything that grows without ever stopping (forever, that is) is going to continue to press on, yes? That is, by definition, what it means to constantly expand. If this is so, there are two things: If it continually expands, there is something infinitely large into which it does so, and, if it never stops, time, then, regardless of perception, must, also, be infinite. b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:05 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 8:21 pm
|
|
|
|
Ah, dear friend, but by my definition, people do not get what they deserve, at all. It is a general movement towards a balance. There starts as one negative, so a positive comes, but of different proportions which allows there to remain an imbalance. The universe is not infinite, at any one moment, it is agreed that the universe is constantly expanding which means that, at each time, there are boundaries. I don't believe in an afterlife, that requires a direct outcome. As mentioned, above, the balance is an asymptote because there will always be a hairsbreadth imbalance, unless everything is included. Everything summed together equals Justice, and, by my definition, God. b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:23 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:30 am
|
|
|
|
Bellabie Justice, I define, as giving each her due, by which I think is greatly related to Newton's third law, "every action has an equal and opposite reaction."
Whilst I do see the merits of hoping that societal ideals and physics having the same alignment, I think that you're trying to oversimplify the human mind and the inherant issues of trying to get a tiered, pack animal mentality to actually work without childhood indoctrination and ignorance of the outside world... Besides, the "evils" of the world are what create progress. War is technology's biggest contributor. If it weren't for the atomic bomb, we might not even be sitting here having this conversation. (wondering how I mean that? Computers haven't changed conceptually since the development of the UNIVAC and ENIAC computers, used to run the original complex calculations required for the manhattan project... seriously, check it out.)
Quote: In response to the idea that infinity is merely a concept to explain things, this mustn't be. (I hitherto have only heard opposition expressed as in reference to the universe, forgive me if there is something overlooked.) If one says that the universe is not infinite because of its constant expansion, one is then faced with their own definition.
Your definition of infinity is close, but not quite on the mark. Infinity is a mathematical means of expression for explaining a variable value that doesn't have a maximum value. The universe is finite, and, from recent observations, actually SLOWING in it's growth. It's far larger than our minds can truly comprehend, but isn't that why man created G*d to begin with, to explain what we con't concievably prove or don't have the information to explain something at the moment? Every culture throughout human history has had some kind of creation myth, and they can't ALL be right, if any of them even are.
One can say the the nihlist (sp?)/athiest point of view leads to a lack of morality and ethics because the view is that if there is nothing after we die, then what does right now matter? The logical response to that argument is that right now is all that matters, and being a decent human being for the sake of being a decent human being is far nobler than doing good for others for a gold star and a room in the clouds amongst the angels with a pile of virgins. That's like me saying you can either be a good person of your own accord, or you can be a good person because I'm offering you a wheelbarrow full of money... which person is truly worthy of admiration?
Though I think I may have gotten off track... Justice, in a capitalist sense of the term, means that you deserve everything you work for, positive or negative... the only difference here is that people are willing to stab other people over a pair of shoes or a woman, and the consequences of that are, indeed, justice, as twisted and screwed up as that may seem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:56 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 1:06 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|