Why can`t one sense god?

[iNow]

13 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

I imagine that if I believed in god then to me god would be unimaginable in my mind.

As this is not possible and is logically inconsistent, we instead describe god using an ego-centric view... We make god(s) look more like ourselves, made as a reflection of our self-image and personal hopes and desires. 

[Dis n Dat]

29 minutes ago, iNow said:

As this is not possible and is logically inconsistent, we instead describe god using an ego-centric view... We make god(s) look more like ourselves, made as a reflection of our self-image and personal hopes and desires. 

That's applied in a sociological study, not to God but to humans. I don't think you have even understood what you yourself are saying. 

Imagining an unimaginable God is an objective statement, not a subjective perspective of God. And this comes from natural theology applied through thousands of years. You are just not aware of it. Even if human beings have their subjective interpretations of God, that does not mean God cannot exist as unimaginable. These two are two separate subjects altogether. One is based on study of sociology, and the other is philosophical. So you have to separate the two. Or at least know it. 

[zapatos]

Since I grew up Catholic I've been around a lot of believers throughout my life. I've yet to encounter a theist who didn't tweak the 'official' version of god to accommodate their own personal beliefs. "Well, god would make an exception if I was suffering." "I don't believe god would oppose contraception if wearing a condom prevents AIDS." "There is no way god would make someone doing a mercy killing go to the same hell as Hitler."

And without fail the change a person finds in god from the 'official' version just happens to be in line with the thoughts of the person suggesting the change. Either an amazing coincidence, or people are making god in their own self image.

I've never seen a person change religion from a god whose rules aligned with their own world view to a religion/god whose rules did not match their world view. But I've seen plenty of people move in the opposite direction.

 

[iNow]

Yeah but that’s just sociology!! Facepalm 

[TheVat]

This thread is hobbled a bit by the incoherence of the OP question. It's not only a leading question (presuming an inability that isn't established in the OP) but it doesn't define "sense" or "god."

Which is understandable given how vague those words are.  Plenty of people report sensing god, in either a western guise (a personal presence) or a more Buddhist way (transcendence of personal ego, loss of boundaries between self and universe, cessation of ordinary passage of time ).  These are experiences that, by their very nature, cannot be objectively verified or induced in someone else (like, say, showing them a bowling ball or a cordless drill).  Some, as others note, are powerfully influenced by culture and folk tales and aspects of our personality, some not so much.  Guess I'd trust the latter more, if I were experiencing such a state.  

[Intoscience]

18 hours ago, iNow said:

As this is not possible and is logically inconsistent, we instead describe god using an ego-centric view... We make god(s) look more like ourselves, made as a reflection of our self-image and personal hopes and desires. 

I'm just saying that if I believed god was real then I couldn't imagine what god was or looked like. So yeah, to fill the gaps I may consider god as a reflection of human self image. But then I can't imagine how such a "being" could be god. 

In a sense its a bit like trying to imagine what was before the big bang, what is at the edge of the universe what exists beyond space & time... Asking such questions may in themselves be nonsensical but they also might be quite valid.  So I imagine god to be the same - beyond our imagination but not beyond existence (in some form). 

If you think about such things more closely you begin to realise that even our language may lack the ability to describe these things. If so then how can one begin to for an image? 

Our imagination is limited really to our experiences, our sensory inputs. I image god to be outside of this.   

[Dis n Dat]

59 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

I'm just saying that if I believed god was real then I couldn't imagine what god was or looked like. So yeah, to fill the gaps I may consider god as a reflection of human self image. But then I can't imagine how such a "being" could be god. 

In a sense its a bit like trying to imagine what was before the big bang, what is at the edge of the universe what exists beyond space & time... Asking such questions may in themselves be nonsensical but they also might be quite valid.  So I imagine god to be the same - beyond our imagination but not beyond existence (in some form). 

If you think about such things more closely you begin to realise that even our language may lack the ability to describe these things. If so then how can one begin to for an image? 

Our imagination is limited really to our experiences, our sensory inputs. I image god to be outside of this.   

Your philosophy sounds just like Anselm and Juwaini. They are basically from two different world but have very similar philosophies, much like yours. It is also very similar to very traditional metaphysics like natural theology which is adopted by all kinds of people from the Hellenistic tradition, Christian tradition, Turkish tradition to middle eastern tradition. It also the foundational philosophy of Hindu thought. 

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Intoscience said:

If so then how can one begin to for an image?

All excellent points with which I tend to agree, but the answer here IMO is quite simple and straight forward. When we lack the ability to clearly form an image, we substitute features and insert concepts based on our own personal experiences and thoughts. The parts of our brain that form narratives and attempt to make sense of the stimuli we receive will fill in the gaps with fictions that eliminate feelings of uncertainty, dissonance, and all the rest. 

[Intoscience]

27 minutes ago, iNow said:

All excellent points with which I tend to agree, but the answer here IMO is quite simple and straight forward. When we lack the ability to clearly form an image, we substitute features and insert concepts based on our own personal experiences and thoughts. The parts of our brain that form narratives and attempt to make sense of the stimuli we receive will fill in the gaps with fictions that eliminate feelings of uncertainty, dissonance, and all the rest. 

Yes, I can understand this and agree. Really it's the only way we can form an image, and certainly one that would make any sense to us, or at least resemble something familiar to some degree. 

[Crocduck]

On 11/4/2022 at 8:36 AM, iNow said:

All excellent points with which I tend to agree, but the answer here IMO is quite simple and straight forward. When we lack the ability to clearly form an image, we substitute features and insert concepts based on our own personal experiences and thoughts. The parts of our brain that form narratives and attempt to make sense of the stimuli we receive will fill in the gaps with fictions that eliminate feelings of uncertainty, dissonance, and all the rest. 

Let's say you believe in a personal God.  One that communicates with you on a personal level.  Can those who do talk to God not just ask where He is or what he looks like?  Are you that guy in the white beard or not?  My book tells me you are a He.  What's with all the imagining what God looks like...just ask?

From where did you spake the universe?  Was it audible?  Could anyone else hear it or were you the only one there?  Was that another universe on a planet like ours where sound travels?  Why am I asking these questions?  Will I find this answer on a piece of toast or an audible message to me that is inaudible to everyone else?  Why must it work this way?  

[iNow]

3 hours ago, Crocduck said:

Let's say you believe in a personal God.  One that communicates with you on a personal level.  Can those who do talk to God not just ask where He is or what he looks like?

It wouldn’t be a valid test or set of questions since there’s no second party involved in the exchange. They’d just be talking to / asking themselves. 

When “god” answers, it’s still that same narrative creating set of brain regions. 

[Crocduck]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

It wouldn’t be a valid test or set of questions since there’s no second party involved in the exchange. They’d just be talking to / asking themselves. 

When “god” answers, it’s still that same narrative creating set of brain regions. 

Well sure.  But if you did ask all people who claim to have a personal relationship with God (a survey) and have them give specific answers to these questions (but not consult one another on the answers)...I would guess you would get the same amount of different answers as respondents as well some wildly different and contradictory answers.  At some point one would realize they are all just talking to themselves...they are all their own God

[iNow]

5 hours ago, Crocduck said:

At some point one would realize they are all just talking to themselves

It’s been thousands and thousands of years yet religion remains prevalent, and even dominant, culturally.

You sure do have a lot of faith making claims like those. 

Edited December 16, 2022 by iNow

[Intoscience]

8 hours ago, Crocduck said:

Well sure.  But if you did ask all people who claim to have a personal relationship with God (a survey) and have them give specific answers to these questions (but not consult one another on the answers)...I would guess you would get the same amount of different answers as respondents as well some wildly different and contradictory answers.  At some point one would realize they are all just talking to themselves...they are all their own God

I would imagine that as you said there would be some consistent results influenced on what each religion prescribes god to be and also load of random made up answers that were influenced by personal experience. In which case the survey would be quite pointless. 

God has never spoken to me in any form, so until he/she/it does then I will remain skeptical at best. Then even then, if i started to hear voices other than my own, I would be looking to seek some psychological help to begin with.  

[Genady]

27 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

I would imagine that as you said there would be some consistent results influenced on what each religion prescribes god to be and also load of random made up answers that were influenced by personal experience. In which case the survey would be quite pointless. 

God has never spoken to me in any form, so until he/she/it does then I will remain skeptical at best. Then even then, if i started to hear voices other than my own, I would be looking to seek some psychological help to begin with.  

Since you are not a believer, the voices in your head would not be those of God but rather of your neighbors, FBI, maybe aliens (if you believe in them), etc.

[Intoscience]

1 hour ago, Genady said:

Since you are not a believer, the voices in your head would not be those of God but rather of your neighbors, FBI, maybe aliens (if you believe in them), etc.

The only voice I hear in my head is my own. If I found that another voice was present then I would seek medical help as I would most certainly be going insane or suffering with some form of mental illness. In fact I would sooner believe in telepathy over god as a more plausible supernatural explanation. 

If god exists and wishes to reveal him/her/itself to prove me wrong then fine I'm ok with that.    

Edited December 16, 2022 by Intoscience

[Genady]

42 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

The only voice I hear in my head is my own. If I found that another voice was present then I would seek medical help as I would most certainly be going insane or suffering with some form of mental illness. In fact I would sooner believe in telepathy over god as a more plausible supernatural explanation. 

If god exists and wishes to reveal him/her/itself to prove me wrong then fine I'm ok with that.    

What I tried to point out was that AFAIK people don't hallucinate about things in which they don't believe.

[Intoscience]

7 minutes ago, Genady said:

What I tried to point out was that AFAIK people don't hallucinate about things in which they don't believe.

Yes,

Sorry, I was reinforcing your point but didn't make that clear. 

[dimreepr]

49 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

The only voice I hear in my head is my own. If I found that another voice was present then I would seek medical help as I would most certainly be going insane or suffering with some form of mental illness.

Really? You've never had an earworm?

So are you trying to tell me that, "your voice" has never been influenced by anything or that when you think of a phrase like "are you talking to me" you don't hear a New York cabbie looking in a mirror?

1 hour ago, Intoscience said:

In fact I would sooner believe in telepathy over god as a more plausible supernatural explanation.

That's your personal bias Angel, whispering in your ear.

[Intoscience]

17 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

So are you trying to tell me that, "your voice" has never been influenced by anything or that when you think of a phrase like "are you talking to me" you don't hear a New York cabbie looking in a mirror?

Lol, yes of course I have reconstructed a persons voice when thinking of a phrase or other they have said which I have previously heard. But I have never had another voice conversing independently within my own mind.  

17 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That's your personal bias Angel, whispering in your ear.

No, I just think it would be more plausible that a form of telepathy could be conducted between separate minds based something on the lines of em waves or similar since neurons in the brain fire electrical impulses.

This seems much more plausible than the fantasy of an all powerful omnipotent being. 

My personal angel would be cool though. 

Edited December 16, 2022 by Intoscience

[dimreepr]

12 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

No, I just think it would be more plausible that a form of telepathy could be conducted between separate minds based something on the lines of em waves or similar since neurons in the brain fire electrical impulses.

How is that not your personal bias?

You just prefer to be labelled a Jedi... 🤞

[Intoscience]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

How is that not your personal bias?

You just prefer to be labelled a Jedi... 🤞

Well we can test to see if telepathy is a thing or not. How do you test for a god? 

Now being a Jedi is definitely cool, where do I sign up? 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Intoscience said:

Well we can test to see if telepathy is a thing or not. How do you test for a god? 

In much the same way... 😉

[Intoscience]

Just now, dimreepr said:

In much the same way... 😉

Good luck with that young padawan

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

Good luck with that young padawan

How would the test be different?