-L. Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology
Too often I'll ask people to define their god for me, and they answer with something like, "God is energy!" or, "God is love!" What is that even supposed to mean? Unless they are referring to either the thermodynamic quantity equivalent to the capacity of a physical system to do work or the Taiwanese hip-hop boy-band from 2002, I do not know what they mean by their claim. I love Taiwanese guys singing as much as the next guy, but I simply do not believe that Milk, Ady, Toro, Penny, and Joe could be responsible for all of the actions attributed to God. Words have baggage. When you say something is God, you are changing the understood definition of God. If you tell me that a coffee cup is God, I will fully admit to being a gnostic polytheist.
Similarly, people often can be heard saying, "God lives in another dimension." This demonstrates something very clear about that person; they have never actually thought about what they were told, they simply repeated it (or they came up with it on their own and are simply stupid). Again, unless you mean something like length, width, height, or the 2005 song by the Australian band Wolfmother, this claim is meaningless to me. You would be confused if I told you that my friend Pete lived in the dimension "depth;" likewise, I can gleam no meaning from the statement that God lives in another dimension. The word dimension has baggage. Science fiction movies seem so enjoy using that phrase, and many people, theists and atheists, seem to repeat this without actually thinking about what it means. Isn't it scary how many people can claim to believe something they've never thought about?
Finally, I will discuss the words "mind" and "intelligence." To shorten the typing of all of this, let us say that intelligence is the ability to comprehend information, and a mind is the entity which has intelligence and is responsible for thoughts and feelings (this way I only have to type "mind" instead of both, seeing as they are both used in the same contexts). A mind is a product of a brain. To say that one just exists, not stemming from a brain, is quite a hefty assumption. Nowhere in the universe has a mind been demonstrably shown to exist without a brain (or, arguably, a computer, though artificial intelligence is iffy; even if artificial intelligence counted, it wouldn't change anything).
In summation, to say that your god is energy, a mind in another dimension, or any other misuse of words and concepts, is completely fallacious. It accomplishes absolutely nothing in an argument because it does not in any way make a point, let alone justify one. If someone is unable to even tell you what their god is without using words that essentially tell you absolutely nothing, should you be inclined to accept their claim?
 |
| toothpastefordinner.com |
Ryan, these aren't really fallacies. However, if they were to be used in an argument, they would be false premises. Also, it can be debated that a mind can be the product of something besides a brain. For an intriguing book about this, read Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by Douglas Hofstadter.
ReplyDeleteI agree about the fallacies thing...I was thinking about it as I typed it...probably going to change it to "Argumentation:" And I'm sure it can be debated to be such (I even mentioned that this can be argued from an AI standpoint, though that does not help in any way unless God is a computer); the point here is that when used in conversation there is no meaning to be gleamed from the statement.
ReplyDeleteThere is no information to be gained. However, my point with GEB still stands. One of the things that Hofstadter discusses is how a mind can arise from things such as the interactions of all the ants in a colony.
ReplyDelete"God lives in another dimension" means that in addition to length, width, and depth, God somehow has moved in another dimension perpendicular to all these, which we cannot perceive, which is why we cannot perceive him.
ReplyDeleteAlternatively, it could mean God is simply not constrained by the dimension of time.
Neither of these definitions are supported by religion, but at least they are a better way to interpret words than "God is depth."
...Which itself stems from the collection of many ant brains. Again, no minds without a physical base :)
ReplyDeleteThat is not living in another dimension, jacob. That is being in a different parallel space to ours, but it is not being IN another dimension. It's like if you hold two pieces of paper over each other and draw dots on each; they aren't in different dimensions, they just happen to have different coordinates along one particular dimensional axis. You cannot live IN a dimension.
ReplyDelete(As a side note, I do intend to add that book to my ever-growing reading list xD)
ReplyDeleteThat is what is meant by "in another dimension". It is an acceptable use of the word I believe, and if not, you should now consider it to be for the sake of interpreting things as easily as possible. When someone makes a comment, you should always interpret it in the most logical way possible, instead of the least. I recommend you try to pull as much meaning out of even a seemingly nonsensical comment as you can for the sake of communication - it just may be that they have a good point and don't completely understand how to express it.
ReplyDeleteI can personally guarantee you that at least 90% of the people who say "God lives in another dimension" are not referring to a fifth dimension perpendicular to the three axes of Cartesian coordinates and the timeline. Most of the times I have seen this used it is referring to some kind of alternate universe, and if that is what they want to say, that is what they should say. I understand what you're saying, but I am not going to debate a topic with someone who uses terms that have no clear meaning. It's the same thing when people say that their god exists. It is important that all aspects of words used in arguments are defined beforehand, otherwise you run into the issue of people saying "No, that's not what I meant" and it is just a waste of time that I do not wish to deal with. It should not be much to ask of someone to speak with English words and their definitions, not with big words that sound nice but have no meaning for the purposes of the argument being discussed. Surely you can see my point in this?
ReplyDeleteI love words. I love wordplay. Words come with literal meanings, and then they come with the meanings imposed upon them by society, context, and ignorance. I don't really agree with your point here. I think intent is important.
ReplyDeleteAnd you are entirely entitled to that opinion. When people use words to say things they don't mean, however, it inaccurately portrays their beliefs, and this has led to many-a-debate ending up at "well that's not my god." When someone says something like their god being energy, which I have heard many times before, there is no response I can possibly give other than, "What are you trying to say?" If words come with an explanation or a context that implies a meaning, that is one thing. When someone says God lives in another dimension, I instantly have three possibilities for what this person believes, and I'm not going to debate all three. All I'm saying is don't use a word unless it's meaning is clear. Why should I be expected to read someone's mind to determine their beliefs when their ignorance led them to say something entirely different from what they meant?
ReplyDeleteIgnorance is tricky though. You don't always know why someone is ignorant.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of a part of Catch 22 that greatly entertains me. Yossarian is talking to a woman about God. Neither of them believe in a god but the woman gets upset at the god Yossarian describes. She says she doesn't believe in God but the God she doesn't believe in is a much nicer God than the one Yossarian doesn't believe in. It's interesting and semi-relevant.
Also: I have an idea. You could talk about the capitalization of God in English.
That sounds absolutely hilarious to listen to xD
ReplyDeleteAnd you're right, that's a great idea :D
Ryan, I would suggest you add Catch-22 to your reading list as well. It is hilarious and sadly very relevant to the world we live in.
ReplyDelete