Conversation with God

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
I just stumbled across this and found it thought provoking. I will c&p the first part but due to the length and the wish to avoid copyright infringement, I suggest to read it on the linked site.

I met god the other day.
I know what you’re thinking. How the hell did you know it was god?
Well, I’ll explain as we go along, but basically he convinced me by having all, and I do mean ALL, the answers. Every question I flung at him he batted back with a plausible and satisfactory answer. In the end, it was easier to accept that he was god than otherwise.
Which is odd, because I’m still an atheist and we even agree on that!
It all started on the 8.20 back from Paddington. Got myself a nice window seat, no screaming brats or drunken hooligans within earshot. Not even a mobile phone in sight. Sat down, reading the paper and in he walks.
What did he look like?
Well not what you might have expected that’s for sure. He was about 30, wearing a pair of jeans and a "hobgoblin" tee shirt. Definitely casual. Looked like he could have been a social worker or perhaps a programmer like myself.
‘Anyone sitting here?’ he said.
‘Help yourself’ I replied.
Sits down, relaxes, I ignore and back to the correspondence on genetically modified crops entering the food chain…
Train pulls out and a few minutes later he speaks.
‘Can I ask you a question?’
Fighting to restrain my left eyebrow I replied ‘Yes’ in a tone which was intended to convey that I might not mind one question, and possibly a supplementary, but I really wasn’t in the mood for a conversation. ..
‘Why don’t you believe in god?’
The Bastard!
I love this kind of conversation and can rabbit on for hours about the nonsense of theist beliefs. But I have to be in the mood! It's like when a Jehova’s witness knocks on your door 20 minutes before you’re due to have a wisdom tooth pulled. Much as you'd really love to stay… You can’t even begin the fun. And I knew, if I gave my standard reply we’d still be arguing when we got to Cardiff. I just wasn’t in the mood. I needed to fend him off.
But then I thought ‘Odd! How is this perfect stranger so obviously confident – and correct – about my atheism?’ If I’d been driving my car, it wouldn’t have been such a mystery. I’ve got the Darwin fish on the back of mine – the antidote to that twee christian fish you see all over. So anyone spotting that and understanding it would have been in a position to guess my beliefs. But I was on a train and not even wearing my Darwin "Evolve" tshirt that day. And ‘The Independent’ isn’t a registered flag for card carrying atheists, so what, I wondered, had given the game away.
‘What makes you so certain that I don’t?’
‘Because’, he said, ‘ I am god – and you are not afraid of me’
You’ll have to take my word for it of course, but there are ways you can deliver a line like that – most of which would render the speaker a candidate for an institution, or at least prozac. Some of which could be construed as mildly entertaining.
Conveying it as "indifferent fact" is a difficult task but that’s exactly how it came across. Nothing in his tone or attitude struck me as even mildly out of place with that statement. He said it because he believed it and his rationality did not appear to be drug induced or the result of a mental breakdown.
‘And why should I believe that?’


‘Well’ he said, ‘why don’t you ask me a few questions. Anything you like, and see if the answers satisfy your sceptical mind?’
This is going to be a short conversation after all, I thought.
‘Who am I?’
‘Stottle. Harry Stottle, born August 10 1947, Bristol, England. Father Paul, Mother Mary. Educated Duke of Yorks Royal Military School 1960 67, Sandhurst and Oxford, PhD in Exobiology, failed rock singer, full time trade union activist for 10 years, latterly self employed computer programmer, web author and aspiring philosopher. Married to Michelle, American citizen, two children by a previous marriage. You’re returning home after what seems to have been a successful meeting with an investor interested in your proposed product tracking anti-forgery software and protocol and you ate a full english breakfast at the hotel this morning except that, as usual, you asked them to hold the revolting english sausages and give you some extra bacon. ‘

He paused
‘You’re not convinced. Hmmm… what would it take to convince you? May I have your permission for a telepathic link?’
'Do you need my permission?'
'Technically, no. Ethically, yes'
Might as well play along I thought. 'OK - you have my permission. So convince me'
'oh right! Your most secret password and its association'
A serious hacker might be able to obtain the password, but no one else and I mean
NO ONE
knows its association.
He did.

So how would you have played it?
I threw a few more questions about relatively insignificant but unpublicised details of my life (like what my mother claims was the first word I ever spoke – apparently "armadillo"! (Don't ask…)) but I was already pretty convinced. I knew there were only three possible explanations at this point.
Possibility One was that I was dreaming, hallucinating or hypnotised. Nobody’s figured out a test for that so, at the time I think that was my dominant feeling. It did not feel real at the time. More like I was in a play. Acting my lines. Since the event, however, continuing detailed memories of it, together with my contemporaneous notes, remain available, so unless the hallucination has continued to this day, I am now inclined to reject the hallucination hypothesis. Which leaves two others.
He could have been a true telepath. No documented evidence exists of anyone ever having such profound abilities to date but it was a possibility. It would have explained how he could know my best-kept secrets. The problem with that is that it doesn’t explain anything else! In particular it doesn’t account for the answers he proceeded to give to my later questions.
As Sherlock Holmes says, when you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
Good empiricist, Sherlock.
I was forced to accept at least the possibility that this man was who he claimed to be.
So now what do you do?
Well, I’ve always known that if I met god I would have a million questions for him, so I thought, ‘why not?’ and proceeded with what follows. You’ll have to allow a bit of licence in the detail of the conversation. This was, shall we say, a somewhat unusual occurrence, not to mention just a BIT weird! And yes I was a leetle bit nervous! So if I don’t get it word perfect don’t whinge! You’ll get the gist I promise.

------------------------------

http://www.fullmoon.nu/articles/art.php?id=tal
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
That was a good read, MP. I love this - 'Seriously though, species who hold on to religion past its sell-by date tend to be most likely to self destruct. They spend so much energy arguing about my true nature, and invest so much emotion in their wildly erroneous imagery that they end up killing each other over differences in definitions of something they clearly haven’t got a clue about. Ludicrous behaviour, but it does weed out the weaklings.’
I wanted to get your take on this paragraph -'In many ways the transition to an information species is the most traumatic stage in evolution. Biological intelligences have a deeply rooted sense of consciousness only being conceivable from within an organic brain. Coming to terms with the realisation that you have created your successor, not just in the sense of mother and child, but in the collective sense of the species recognising it has become redundant, this paradigm shift is, for many species, a shift too far. They baulk at the challenge and run from this new knowledge. They fail and become extinct. Yet there is nothing fundamentally wrong with them - it is a failure of the imagination.Is god saying that we need to develop a thinking machine (artificial intelligence), and that we encode our consciousness onto said machines, or simply that it is the machines that move forward and evolve in place of our species and we become extinct?
 

Zaehet Strife

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't doubt it Hep, it's a cool story... and people believe what they want, rather than what they should most of the time.
 

woodsusa

Well-Known Member
The problem is that people want to define the Creator in human terms which is not accurate. Our knowledge is growing at a tremendous rate but there is much we do not know or even perceive..
 

Zaehet Strife

Well-Known Member
Machines have helped us soooo much with showing us the things that the human eyes can't detect. It's really crazy.... AWESOME!
 

drolove

Well-Known Member
your fucking crazy like the rest of these people believing in this crazy CRAP. you people and believing these story books for kids. grow up and use some common sense!
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
That was a good read, MP. I love this - 'Seriously though, species who hold on to religion past its sell-by date tend to be most likely to self destruct. They spend so much energy arguing about my true nature, and invest so much emotion in their wildly erroneous imagery that they end up killing each other over differences in definitions of something they clearly haven’t got a clue about. Ludicrous behaviour, but it does weed out the weaklings.’
I wanted to get your take on this paragraph -'In many ways the transition to an information species is the most traumatic stage in evolution. Biological intelligences have a deeply rooted sense of consciousness only being conceivable from within an organic brain. Coming to terms with the realisation that you have created your successor, not just in the sense of mother and child, but in the collective sense of the species recognising it has become redundant, this paradigm shift is, for many species, a shift too far. They baulk at the challenge and run from this new knowledge. They fail and become extinct. Yet there is nothing fundamentally wrong with them - it is a failure of the imagination.Is god saying that we need to develop a thinking machine (artificial intelligence), and that we encode our consciousness onto said machines, or simply that it is the machines that move forward and evolve in place of our species and we become extinct?
We do not know what consciousness is. In fact some serious researchers are seriously doubting the reality or utility of the concepts consciousness, self, mind even. This may pose a conceptual (not merely technical) barrier to transferring our selfness onto a mechanical substrate.

Imo the quest for artificial mind is like that for artificial life. The concepts are straightforward, but the execution is so fraught with as-yet undetermined complexity that nobody has really begun to try. cn
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
We do not know what consciousness is. In fact some serious researchers are seriously doubting the reality or utility of the concepts consciousness, self, mind even. This may pose a conceptual (not merely technical) barrier to transferring our selfness onto a mechanical substrate.

Imo the quest for artificial mind is like that for artificial life. The concepts are straightforward, but the execution is so fraught with as-yet undetermined complexity that nobody has really begun to try. cn
Yeah, Pinker doubts true AI is possible regardless of technology, and I really respect him. Hell, I was impressed by Deep Blue in the 90s beating the masters, and even more so with Watson of late. Pretty good progress for early 21st century imo. The different polymers of XNA and Dr. Craig Venter's Synthia seem to be promising first steps to artificial life. We've only just begun, I'm excited to see the progress the geniuses will make toward these goals...
 

WeedPublican

Active Member
hey you guys should google "Conversations with God" by Neale Donald Walsh, he has 8 hours of conversation with GOD, its in a 3 part book, its on audible.com to
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
hey you guys should google "Conversations with God" by Neale Donald Walsh, he has 8 hours of conversation with GOD, its in a 3 part book, its on audible.com to
when i saw the title of this thread i thought that is what it was about.. read those series and highly recommend them.. good stuffs.. :D
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Why is it more believable?

And am I the only one that doesn't find this interesting? (no offense)

It proves nothing.
Prove? What do you expect a philosophical story to prove? I merely thought it was interesting. This 'god' happened to have come from completely naturalistic origins, just as I proposed in other threads that if a god does indeed exist, it has to have an explanation for its origins in order for us to have any kind of satisfying answer about our own. I find it similar to the Neale Donald Walsh books that I enjoyed some time ago. After reading the website of the author, he mentioned that if he wrote the story today, he would have changed some things. Not sure what, but IMO, the intervention implied by the question about the dinosaurs was totally out of place. If intelligent biological creatures can evolve without any interference as he said, then no interference was necessary, so why the asteroid?

Sorry I haven't been around the last few days, right after posting, I had some shit I had to deal with.
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
Prove? What do you expect a philosophical story to prove? I merely thought it was interesting. This 'god' happened to have come from completely naturalistic origins, just as I proposed in other threads that if a god does indeed exist, it has to have an explanation for its origins in order for us to have any kind of satisfying answer about our own. I find it similar to the Neale Donald Walsh books that I enjoyed some time ago. After reading the website of the author, he mentioned that if he wrote the story today, he would have changed some things. Not sure what, but IMO, the intervention implied by the question about the dinosaurs was totally out of place. If intelligent biological creatures can evolve without any interference as he said, then no interference was necessary, so why the asteroid?

Sorry I haven't been around the last few days, right after posting, I had some shit I had to deal with.


Shit, MP, we all have those days. I call them weekdays ;)
 
Top