Friday, February 25, 2005

The Story of the Atheist, Continued...


"...information is invisible."

"Yes, it is only a formation that is the visible manifestation of information. I think that is the difference between sight and insight as well. In some sense, it seems that some people have insight and others do not. The other day an agnostic sort of fellow who apparently could not refute a bit of something I wrote, wrote back to me, 'Just because you can put something together in a string of words does not make it true.' First thing, why did he bother to write that string of words? Are they untrue? I think that some people have a rebellious will, is all. And so the truth can be represented to them in something as plain as the schematics of mathematics and yet they would seek to deny it, even as they refute themselves in their own denials. As to that fellow, I doubt he would deny the important truths represented by strings of symbols, signs and code if his own genetic code was at issue. His own information that has to do with his own formation, DNA. Again, it is like any relativist who do not and cannot live by their own denials of basic self-evident truths, evident in the Self. That is why they keep refuting their Selves. Yet the denial itself is revealing."

"But....information isn't really invisible, as God supposedly is. I suppose you believe it exists when it is not manifested or information takes a 'formation' as you put it. But I think that formation, that we observe, is all that is. You see, it's simple, existence is. So I'll believe in God when he takes 'form' and comes to dinner."

"I suppose it is too bad you did not live at a certain times when the Bible says that God took form."

"I don't believe in the Bible...oh, right. Okay, so the Bible says it and you like to refer to the Bible as such, instead of our own beliefs about it. The text does say that, but that does not mean that it is true."

"I don't know that you ought to believe that any text or code at all is true to maintain a consistent existential philosophy. You see, text almost crosses the line with all its tittles and jots to being the nonphysical information. It's the same with the schematics of mathematics. I'm not saying that such code actually does cross that line, as obviously it still has its physical manifestation on paper, patterns of pixels on a screen and so on. Yet it is getting pretty close. And your sort of existential focus on our current existence in a denial of the essential seems to reduce libraries down to what is, a you put it. In other words, books are reduced to wood pulp with some markings on them. Unfortunately, there are not words to put into other words if that is the case. The pattern or design of the marks, what of it? The physical is existence..."

"I suppose I do believe in some of the 'essential,' as you put it. I'm not prepared to run off into some Platonic world of the Forms, though. Yet yes, I do believe that information is invisible and only formation the visible, as you have been arguing. So I agree with what some of what you would call the essential, a sort of unseen essence that is nonphysical. Am I supposed to call that God? Is that theism? That's not theism. Besides that, my empirically based criticism and demand for observation remains because we must use the visible formation to judge information. Come to think of it, that's the point of science. So you can see why I would note that God ought to come to dinner, then by observation I could know."

(I will continue this, maybe later today. But if someone wants to hop in and help the theist here before I write some more dialogue, go ahead and give it a go.)

Perhaps the theist says,
"Maybe, you do not exist in the way you think you do. Perhaps I am a superior being and you are just a rhetorical device being used by my own more infinite mind to communicate to others of my superior kind. So you are just my words to them. That's why I created you."

"What?! What empirical observations can you make to support your claim? Hmmm?"

"Well, I suppose I could say to my own rhetorical device, 'Dance my atheist, dance!'"

"What the....? I, uh...why am I dancing?! Something is not right here!"

"Dance...and now, prance! I think I will keep you around, as you're quite an entertaining fellow!"

No comments: