by hippikon 32 Replies latest members adult
Seeker,
You are playing with words and confusing yourself.
your question seems to revolve around the word 'too,'
so I will rephrase my statement.
It would be illogical to assume that this vast universe
exists without some huge power, external to ourselves.
Pat,
here is a defination of the g-spot i found:
WHAT IS THE G-SPOT?
The Grafenberg spot is an area on the anterior or front wall of the vagina, between the opening and the cervix, which is often found to be extremely sensitive to stimulation. It is hypothesized that the G-spot is either 1) a bundle of nerves coming from the clitoris, or 2) a gland or series of glands that produces lubrication. It is thought to be perhaps analagous to the prostate gland in men.
to learn more please see: http://www.sexuality.org/l/sex/gspotfaq.html
hope this helps
harmony
"Power doesn't mean you're acting like a man, or you're a bully or a bitch. It's that you don't let people step on you"
-Sharon Monplaisir
Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't playing with words, I was going by your words. When you say something like "X is too vast to be Y" you are taking the quantity of X as proof of Y. Your clarification still makes it sound as if it is because the universe is vast that there must be a higher power. If you feel that way, say so. Then please explain at what point the universe exceeds the threshold of being too big not to have a higher power behind it. If you don't feel that way, that any size universe requires a higher power, then why appeal to the 'vastness' as being significant?
I'm not playing with words, just trying to understand your use of your words. I'm also not trying to be snide, or playing with you. These are serious questions. You said it is illogical to think otherwise, and since logic is my area, and since your statement seemed odd to me, I really do want to understand where you are going with this.
In short, when talking about the universe, does size matters? (wisecracks aside, but hey, look at the title of this thread!)
Seeker,
Thanks for your comments - you do have a point. I should add that
what is illogical to me may not be to someone else. It all depends on
the premise we base our reasoning upon. I am not out to preach or
convert anyone, hell I did enough of that years ago, just express an
opinion.
If I might interject:
It would be illogical to assume that this vast universe exists without some huge power, external to ourselves.
This is the old first cause argument, one that does seem plausible and attractive on the surface. It may even very likely be true. Unfortunately, logic alone does not support suppositions (actually speculations) of this type. Until a few centuries ago, human thinking (based on logic) dictated that the earth was the center of the universe, a very logical thought at that time; so much for the effects of logic on physical reality.
Just trying to keep an open mind. . .
Copernicus
trevor,
It would be illogical to assume that this vast universe
exists without some huge power, external to ourselves.
I have no problems understanding what you mean, but I have to point out that you should not use the world "illogical". You are basing your opinion on a feeling or intuition, not logic.
To claim that something is illogical, you have to demonstrate such to be a fact. You have not done this, and you cannot.
Wouldn't it be just as "illogical" to believe that this huge, external "power" had originated without an even greater power? And so on, until you have an infinite regress of ever-growing "powers"? That is how real logic works, Trevor.
- Jan
--
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. [Ambrose Bierce, The Devil´s Dictionary, 1911]
Thanks copernicus & janH
I understand your reasoning and the impossibility of proving the existence of a divine power. Even more difficult is the idea of attempting to define, explain or quantity such a force let alone personalize it.
The evidence of a great force or power existing beyond our planet can be observed through a telescope. There is no evidence that this force is benign or has anything to offer us as humans but it does seem that there is a high degree of order in the universe that implies the existence of intelligence beyond our own. I do not attempt to put a shape to it as people erroneously did with the earth years ago.
Logic cannot be used to trace the source of the great power at work in the universe, but to deny the existence of such a great power because it cannot be logically explained, or its source traced, would be illogical.
You guys may have a greater intelligence than me and therefore I shall be unable to follow your reasoning, but for me to deny the existence of your intelligence because I cannot grasp and prove it in my own mind, would indeed be illogical.
'I was an oak, now I'm a willow I can bend.'
Trevor:
Intelligence is really not the issue here. Einstein (certainly a great mind by anyone’s calculations) postulated several of the same things that you have; ie: the presence of a great impersonal force at work in the universe. He came to his conclusions based on his ability to understand the order imposed on the universe in a mathematical context – more specifically, that “natural” laws did in fact exist and seemed immutable. His theories were based, in part, on deductive reasoning (logic). But, even now, some of his main themes are in serious dispute. See the problem?
Another popular example often heard is the idea that it is “logical” to assume that life in some form exists on other planets, simply because there are so many of them. While I tend to agree, there is (as far as I know) absolutely zero evidence that such is the case. So where does that leave us?
So. . . from you point of view, what relationship, if any, do we hold with this “power”? That’s the crux of the whole thing. Does “it” have any active intent toward us? And do we have any responsibility toward it?
I feel, as do some others on this board, that to imagine the bible (with its contradictions, linguistic and otherwise), and other “holy books” as being some sort of message from this “force” is rather difficult to swallow (from a logical point of view) I mean if it has something to say – why not just say it! To shroud it in all the mysticism seems counterproductive to me. But, that’s just my opinion.
In any case Trevor, life is very short, driving us all to seek some answers before we expire. I only wish they (the answers) were more readily apparent.
Often wondering myself . . .
Copernicus
copernicus,
Thanks for your input it has been interesting.
You said 'So. . . from you point of view, what relationship, if any, do we hold with this “power”?
That’s the crux of the whole thing. Does “it” have any active intent toward us? And do
we have any responsibility toward it?
Wise words - I wonder if will we, as humans will ever know the answer for sure.
I think janh hit the nail on the head. Let's face it, the main reason people turn to the biblical God(apart from e'lasting life and heaven!!) is because the world is so amazing, it has to have been created!!
Yet none of the fore-mentioned carry that argument on, so I say, they cannot use that argument to convince me, unless they carry it on further, which gets you nowhere!!
It's an absolute catch 22.
Can anyone actually think of a decent argument to believe in God apart from 'the world has to have been created' argument???
I can't.
