Horses and unicorns

[KCfromNC]

It is not just semantics. That which we can perceive , can exist in reality, but we can know the distinction between unicorns and God. What have unicorns wrought? Apparently some ill gotten gains. God , on the other hand, has changed lives for all of human existence.

Belief in gods has certainly had an effect. Gods themselves have been conspicuously absent.

The logic of those who only find rhetoric in the Anselm quote has simply assumed that reality is only that which can be seen and touched. In science however, even reality sometimes cannot be seen or touched, but rather only the evidence of the impact of a reality can be seen. For example, a black hole is only observed by what is absent around it, and quantum physics relies only on mathematical equations, without physical evidence in certain areas.

Please explain which parts of QM you are talking about here. Let's see if you actually understand the science or not.

But more importantly you're confusing things which produce effects outside of our direct senses that can be reliably and consistently measured with things which don't produce any measurable evidence at all. The latter we tend to call imaginary, but for various cultural reasons god(s) - or at least popular gods - tend to get special treatment.

The impact of God for the good of the human being, in terms of love, compassion, grace, and even orderliness of thought, can be observed and measured.

Not according to that god's user manual : Deut 6:16 for example.

Because our minds have grasped and observed His presence, we can know and experience the impact of His reality in our lives, share the experience between one another.

Again, belief in god being behind actions isn't the same as that belief being true.

If Gods presence and impact on our lives is something that we experience and share, it is far more than simply an idea, such as a unicorn.

And if a frog had wings...

So next time your baby girl comes running to you screaming "Daddy" wrapping her arms around you, just sit her down and explain that her love for you isn't real, but rather simply so many synapses snapping in response to a chain of evolutionary and environmental triggers.

Why do you believe explanations render the things being explained unreal? I'd love to see the logic behind that.

I will take my God of truth, beauty and love and His "semantic-only" reality over the "reality" of scientism any day.

I imagine you'd change your tune if you needed medical treatment. God(s) seem to be a lot less effective than science-based medicine these days. I wonder why.

 

[Resha Caner]

Anselm of Canterbury thought that existence was a greater state of being than non-existence. That was the basis for his ontological argument for God's existence. Which goes that if God is the greatest thing that can be conceived, then God must exist in reality and not just in the imagination. But as anyone can see, this argument is just one of semantics and definitions.

Was this his argument? I've always felt I must be missing something about the ontological argument because it always seemed the conclusion didn't follow from the premise. It never made sense to me.

If this was his argument, you're the first to phrase it in a way I can grasp. So, thanks.

I'm not saying I think it's a convincing argument, but at least now I get it.

 

[durangodawood]

Is something that exists more valuable than something that does not exist?

For example, are horses better than unicorns?

You can eat a horse, because it exists.

 

[Lollerskates]

To mortals, objects that are tangible are probably more important than intangibles. I am not including inherent abstractions like happiness or love. So, the horse will have more value...


...mainly because anyone who even entertains the idea of a unicorn will be having a theist/atheist battle royale in Creation and Evolution. As a matter of fact, someone should make a thread... by the time it gets closed maybe a real unicorn will appear.

 

[bhsmte]

Why bother to love the child at all? Its only a chemical reaction to some firing neurons?

That is the physiology of it, but it still comes out as love on the other end and that is the end game.

 

[bhsmte]

Why bother to love the child at all? Its only a chemical reaction to some firing neurons?

When you believe in things based on faith, that is also a chemical reaction.

 

[bhsmte]

How does brain function explained with science make what I feel for my child not real?

Sounds just like justlookinla in the other thread.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The biblical unicorn was bovine, while the unicorn of myth is equine. Which one are we talking about?

 

[jayem]

"
I'm not sure those things can be measured. Also, all those things can be attributed to the mere "idea" of god just as easily (probably more easily) as they could be attributed to god itself.

Of course. Ideas can have definite physical effects. Just look at the placebo effect. In most all placebo-controlled drug studies, maybe 5-10% of the control group will report benefit, and an equal number will have side effects.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Is something that exists more valuable than something that does not exist?

For example, are horses better than unicorns?

To whom and for what purpose?

A horse is much more valuable than a unicorn if you know how to ride horses and need that mode of transportation. Try riding on a unicorn.

A unicorn exists in fairy tales and art, and may be more entertaining than a horse if one likes that genre.

One can't really say that one is more valuable than the other. I've ridden horses before long ago at summer camp, but I've never needed to ride one since. Perhaps the occasional story or painting of a unicorn is more valuable to me for most purposes during my life. Then again, I like the taste of horse meat, and that is more nutritious than unicorns.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Davian]

You can eat a horse, because it exists.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Of course. Ideas can have definite physical effects. Just look at the placebo effect. In most all placebo-controlled drug studies, maybe 5-10% of the control group will report benefit, and an equal number will have side effects.

Well...that's certainly true. I was just getting at the point that we know the "idea of god" exists, therefore it's easier to attribute things to that idea than it is to actually attribute them to "god".

 

[pyramid33]

Beautiful rhino one corn.

 

[durangodawood]

Nice one.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

In the normal course of events - at my current place in the space-time continuum - 'real' items have greater value than 'imaginary' items. For instance, one can purchase a horse at almost any moment if one has the value to trade for it. One would be hard pressed to purchase a unicorn, presuming one expected to find a living quadruped naturally sprouting a horn from its forehead. I would expect to realize more profit from selling a horse I own than a non-existent unicorn. A good con-man would probably realize more profit from selling a horse he didn't own than a non-existent unicorn, but that's another matter.

I cannot prove unicorns (in the above sense) do not exist, but I can honestly say I've never seen one for sale.

Presumably, one could purchase an asteroid or planet. Taking possession might prove problematic. I understand people purchase meteorites all the time. (They aren't on my list.) There is - was, at any rate - a company that sold the 'rights' to name a star. I wonder if the potential sentient beings on planets around the star in question are bound by the contract?

Other 'things' are also somewhat ephemeral. A friend once noted that 'beer' is not really purchased, just rented.

In any event, no one will own anything (of a physical nature) past the moment of their death. One does not retain title to property when dead. At least not in my portion of space-time.

However, there are things of an intangible nature that some find quite valuable. I think rather highly of freedom and honor, for instance. Some will argue that freedom and honor do not really exist; they are merely 'constructs' of thought and are illusion. I disagree, but I doubt either of us will convince the other.

This train of thought obvious leads to other intangibles. I'll leave it for the nonce.

 

[durangodawood]

In the normal course of events - at my current place in the space-time continuum - 'real' items have greater value than 'imaginary' items. For instance, one can purchase a horse at almost any moment if one has the value to trade for it. One would be hard pressed to purchase a unicorn, presuming one expected to find a living quadruped naturally sprouting a horn from its forehead. I would expect to realize more profit from selling a horse I own than a non-existent unicorn. A good con-man would probably realize more profit from selling a horse he didn't own than a non-existent unicorn, but that's another matter.

I cannot prove unicorns (in the above sense) do not exist, but I can honestly say I've never seen one for sale.

Presumably, one could purchase an asteroid or planet. Taking possession might prove problematic. I understand people purchase meteorites all the time. (They aren't on my list.) There is - was, at any rate - a company that sold the 'rights' to name a star. I wonder if the potential sentient beings on planets around the star in question are bound by the contract?

Other 'things' are also somewhat ephemeral. A friend once noted that 'beer' is not really purchased, just rented.

In any event, no one will own anything (of a physical nature) past the moment of their death. One does not retain title to property when dead. At least not in my portion of space-time.

However, there are things of an intangible nature that some find quite valuable. I think rather highly of freedom and honor, for instance. Some will argue that freedom and honor do not really exist; they are merely 'constructs' of thought and are illusion. I disagree, but I doubt either of us will convince the other.

This train of thought obvious leads to other intangibles. I'll leave it for the nonce.

Freedom and honor are states of mind. That doesnt diminish them at all. But its what they are.

As for beer. If youre going to rent it, at least know who the previous renters were.

 

[lost999]

The unicorn mentioned in the bible is the one horned rhinoceros.

 

[durangodawood]

The unicorn mentioned in the bible is the one horned rhinoceros.

Then why does it say "unicorn" and not "rhinoceros"?

 

[lost999]

Then why does it say "unicorn" and not "rhinoceros"?

YouTube:

Why does the bible mention unicorns?

I'd embed the video, but I don't have enough posts yet.

 

[JustMeSee]

I think pegasi are more valuable.