God Loves You So Much....

Yes. That is what I was referrring to

Originally posted by docb77
I suppose it would be accurate... if we knew what values the various numbers were. Without that it is kind of pointless.

The point is have a starting point. It gives you a good idea of how vast the possibilities are.

Yes....its really difficult to imagine that in a very large place...we might have happened more than once.

Reminds me of the Theorem in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy that shows that we don't exist.

-There is an infinite amount of space in the universe, but there are only a finite number of people, and as anyone knows a finite number divided by an infinite number is so close to zero as makes no difference.

Plenty of inaccuracies in it, but it sounds smart.

Yes, i believe Shakya brought that up.

It doesnt really work.

Its kind of like predicting how many bacteria are in the world by staring at your hand.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
You always talk in terms of proofs. In matters of philosophy and theology, we ask questions and pose answers. That is all. Every time I ask a question or suggest an answer, you generally respond by saying that "I can't prove my assertion."

1) Untrue. I want you to admit that you really have no proof. That is all.

2) I say that, because you act is if you have already proven it. Whenever I ask a Christian on this forum to provide some kind of background evidense for thier assertions, they give me Biblical Quotes, and they don't see how hilarious that is.

I have yet to see you post Biblical quotes as any sort of evidence, thank God, but you make statements as if they are fact.

Hey it's fine, no big deal, but when you go making claims about the Nature of the Universe, i know you're bullshitting then...no one knows the nature of this universe.

For you to project your own personal bias as the factual guidelines for this Universe is absurd.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
To my recollection, I've never tried to prove anything on this board. The proper way to respond to someone on this board would be to disagree either with their argument or the manner in which they pose a question.

So you admit you cannot prove it. Fair enough. But tell me why you think you fully know the Nature of this Universe ?

And understand that I have every right to challenge such a grand assertion. Don't get pissy because I don't agree.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
To tell me that I can't prove anything is a propos to nothing. A religion forum is naturally speculative. We wouldn't be speculating if we could prove anything right?

So true. I do not EXPECT you to be able to prove anything. I am glad you admit you cannot.

Therefore, on the other hand, you cannot claim those Universe assertions as Fact. So please refrain from doing so.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
To your point about not needing a reason to have a right "to enjoy", I agree. You need no excuse or reason to be a hedonist. However, if you're going to argue on this board about principles of social justice and the like, I'm afraid you do.

The only one arguing about Justice here is you. All I am stating is that Justice is a human construct, and not enough to represent the Universe.

You do not know the nature of this Universe, nor do you know that Justice exists outside the realm of Humanity. Keep pretending you do, and I will continue to challenge your argument.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
Because you see, if human beings are accidental in the grand scheme of things, and if the values we cling to don't adhere to a transcendent Other, then you're deluding yourself. Without God, life means nothing outside of your own enjoyment. That might be enough for you. So be it.

With or without God we are of ultamate value, simply because we exist and are.

You, like SO MANY other Christians beleive that without a diety we are worth nothing...such a sad, typical, and sickening philosphy. 👇

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
But don't continue to make arguments about fairness and common decency. Because, if you are undecided about whether or not your humanity is real or not, what ground are you standing on to render any kind of moral judgment?

1) Humanity is real. IT just doesn't represent the entire Universe like you claim it to. 😉

2) Morality is subjective. It's just a word. Since when did I render any moral Judgement? That's something you Christians do all the time, it's nothing I like to take part in.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
Why are we of Absolute Value, if you don't have an opinion on how humanity fits into the grand scheme of things? Are you in fact arguing that we are significant? Could it be that you have discovered a meaning to things without traveling the length of the universe, as you suggested? And what's this "no matter how we were made" line? Are we slipping Lord U? I thought there was no Creator.

Humanity does not NEED to fit into the grand scheme of ANYTHING. I couldn't care less if God made me, I couldn't care less if I was an accident, I couldn't care less If I died tomorrow and never existed again....I love myself, I love who i am, I love my family and freinds, and I love Life.

Can YOU say the same ? Or is your love for life conditional on whether or not a myth is true? If so...what a waste ❌

I don't know if there is a Creator. I never said there wasn't. I just said I don't beleive in your God. Maybe we have a creator, maybe we don't. If we do, he or she could be ANYONE, not JUST the diety you choose to beleive in.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
For you to project your own personal bias as the factual guidelines for this Universe is absurd.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
So you admit you cannot prove it. Fair enough. But tell me why you think you fully know the Nature of this Universe ?

I make assertions because it is formal nature of the faculty of judgment to frame categorical statements. We assert what we believe. You believe things, just as I do. And when you speak, you pronounce these beliefs as if they are fact. You are not wrong in doing so. Men cannot live in a vacuum of non-belief. All philosophies are built upon first principles that cannot be proven.

Speculation arises from the various visions of the world that logically precede from these first principles. If you believe that the world is based on nothing but chance and natural laws, then this implies a certain set of corollary principles. If you believe that the universe is based on a living will much like our own, but transcendent to it, the corollary principles will be different.

My belief that the world is kin to the latter view is such because I believe my humanity is philosophically significant and betokens something about the ultimate nature of things. That is, I believe my subjectivity calls out for another living, answering subjectivity. If this Other subjectivity doesn't exist, then everything I think I know about my humanity is wrong. And we are nothing more than cruel, clever apes.

I believe in God. I cannot prove it. But I infer it from my experience and the experience of my fore bearers. And I believe. I have not been alone in this. You perhaps believe something else. Fine.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
The only one arguing about Justice here is you. All I am stating is that Justice is a human construct, and not enough to represent the Universe.

You do not know the nature of this Universe, nor do you know that Justice exists outside the realm of Humanity. Keep pretending you do, and I will continue to challenge your argument.

On numerous occasions, you have made arguments relying on appeals to justice and common fairness. Your major, recurring argument against Christianity is that it doesn't live up to the values it claims to espouse, and is thereby, in turns, cruel to gays and the like. You also argue that the idea of Christianity is bogus because the biblical God sends people to hell for, what seem to you, insignificant flaws. In other words, at the same time, you seem to argue for the fact that there is no transcendent foundation for morality and then turn around and make moral arguments based on a seemingly universal sense of fair play? If there is no God, there is no reason to adopt your arguments more than any other person's. If morality is completely socially constructed, it is arbitrary and, therefore, not binding in any sense.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
With or without God we are of ultamate value, simply because we exist and are.

You, like SO MANY other Christians believe that without a Deity we are worth nothing...such a sad, typical, and sickening philosphy. 👇

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Humanity does not NEED to fit into the grand scheme of ANYTHING. I couldn't care less if God made me, I couldn't care less if I was an accident, I couldn't care less If I died tomorrow and never existed again....I love myself, I love who i am, I love my family and freinds, and I love Life.

Can YOU say the same ? Or is your love for life conditional on whether or not a myth is true? If so...what a waste ❌

[QUOTE=7174335]Originally posted by Lord Urizen
[B]I don't know if there is a Creator. I never said there wasn't. I just said I don't believe in your God. Maybe we have a creator, maybe we don't. If we do, he or she could be ANYONE, not JUST the Deity you choose to believe in. [QUOTE=7174335]Originally posted by Lord Urizen
[B]

LOL. Well, that's a start, Lord U.

This may be the most sensible thing I've ever heard you utter.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
As in all matters of interpretation, we see the world through the lens of our own personal subjectivity. It is the nature of man qua man to be a projector. Man projects himself into the world to find himself. To some degree this makes universal agreement on hermeneutic questions impossible. However, it does not preclude vast agreement, because everyone's subjectivity is embodied in the same flesh and blood and largely partakes of the same common joy/sufferings. This is true in a historical sense as well. In all of our anxiety as Johnny-come-latelies to the historical scene, we imaginatively distance ourselves from our fore bearers and stake out impregnable no man's lands to protect our own immaculate origins. But, in many substantive ways, we are our fathers and mothers. We are our past and all of the experience that the past couples to itself. As the Book of Ecclesiastes so wisely proclaims, "That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So, there is nothing new under the sun." (Ecc. 1:9)

You did not actually counter my point. I already know that your projections of this universe are your opinion, and your right to have. However, you cannot claim them as Fact. That simple.

And for you to still argue that you know the Nature of this Universe, even when the entirely of humankind has a limitted knowledge of anything beyond our own world is absurd.

So much writing...so much more worthless semantics....for what ? You don't know enough about the Universe for your assertions to be taken seriously or factual.

End of Story.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
I make assertions because it is formal nature of the faculty of judgment to frame categorical statements. We assert what we believe. You believe things, just as I do. And when you speak, you pronounce these beliefs as if they are fact. You are not wrong in doing so. Men cannot live in a vacuum of non-belief. All philosophies are built upon first principles that cannot be proven.

Yet you are quick to challenge and question the evidense behind my assertions in every thread. Likewise, I challenge yours.

Instead of challening your right to make these assertions, let me ask you the foundation for your beleifs that you present as fact.

If you say "The Bible" , I'm gonna piss in my pants laughing.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
Speculation arises from the various visions of the world that logically precede from these first principles. If you believe that the world is based on nothing but chance and natural laws, then this implies a certain set of corollary principles. If you believe that the universe is based on a living will much like our own, but transcendent to it, the corollary principles will be different.

Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, And your point is ?

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
My belief that the world is kin to the latter view is such because I believe my humanity is philosophically significant and betokens something about the ultimate nature of things. That is, I believe my subjectivity calls out for another living, answering subjectivity. If this Other subjectivity doesn't exist, then everything I think I know about my humanity is wrong. And we are nothing more than cruel, clever apes.

And I take it you think Apes are worthless? Or are of any lesser value than ourselves ?

And what if we are nothing more than the evolved state of apes? That renders us and our lives worthless?

Wow, boy, you really got a black and white, all or nothing, perspective on humanity don't you ? 🙄

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
I believe in God. I cannot prove it. But I infer it from my experience and the experience of my fore bearers. And I believe. I have not been alone in this. You perhaps believe something else. Fine.

Okey Dokey then. I just wanted you to admit you have no proof. My satisfaction is quenched, and from now on I will not take your points as fact...purely as opinion, and I will argue them as opinion, unless you can provide concrete evidense for some of your rather outrageous claims.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
On numerous occasions, you have made arguments relying on appeals to justice and common fairness. Your major, recurring argument against Christianity is that it doesn't live up to the values it claims to espouse, and is thereby, in turns, cruel to gays and the like. You also argue that the idea of Christianity is bogus because the biblical God sends people to hell for, what seem to you, insignificant flaws. In other words, at the same time, you seem to argue for the fact that there is no transcendent foundation for morality and then turn around and make moral arguments based on a seemingly universal sense of fair play? If there is no God, there is no reason to adopt your arguments more than any other person's. If morality is completely socially constructed, it is arbitrary and, therefore, not binding in any sense.

If you take a look at this world, and every culture that exists within it you will see that morality is not universal in its aspects. Every culture promotes a different moral standard, and every individual has a different sense of right or wrong.

Does that mean morality is all in our heads? Maybe...maybe not...even if it IS all in our heads, does that lessen it ? Not necessarily...I beleive the mental existances are equal to the physical ones as well. If something feels real to you, and you respond to it with your entire being...then it might as well be real, no ? What's the difference?

I beleive morality to be both subjective and intuitive. I think deep down inside we all know when something is bad or good. There may be a common confusion and grand conflict as to the guidelines of what is bad or good, or right and wrong, but no matter what we don't choose what we think is right or wrong...we just think it.

BTW, if Morality DOES exist independent of Human Definition, it does not automatically require a "God" to be the concrete distributor of right and wrong. There are many possibilities as to what is the foundation or spectrum of good and evil.

Deep down inside, I beleive good is something that promotes love, unity, tolerance, equality, and pleasure. I think evil is anything that promotes Hate, disunity, conflict, inequality, and pain. Are my beleifs any more right than your own?

I don't know. Neither do you.

Point is, I don't need a God to validify my beleifs, and i DONT need other people's approval to validify them either. You, apparently, DO require a God and a cult of like minded individuals to approve of your personal moral beleifs.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
I beg to differ. If there is no God, our humanity means nothing because it is an illusion. We are just a collection of atoms bumping into each other, a set of preprogrammed biological impulses self-deluded into thinking there is such a thing as principled living. Without God, we are like Camus's Sisyphus eternally rolling his boulder to the top of the hill...only to have it roll back down again. Without God, man's moral dignity as a willing agent is reduced to the decision to roll the boulder back up again, despite the fact that we know it serves no purpose and will ultimately just come crashing down again. Without God, our free will is reduced to a choice to heroically persist in a knowing lie.

So basically you beleive Humanity is an illusion without God. How do you define Humanity any way ? I think that's what matters.

If you define Humanity as "being a human being" then that is independent of God or any religion.

So you are saying that if it just do happened that God does not exist, that that means Love is worthless ?

So If you found out that God didn't really exist, would you stop loving your mother? Would you stop loving your freinds and family ? Would you stop loving yourself ?

Is your happiness and security entirely dependent on the existance of GOD? Is your OWN existance entirely dependent on the existance of God ?

If that's the case, then I feel sorry for you. I don't beleive in God (note that I am open to the possibility of his existance), but over all I don't truly think he exists.

So what? I'm doing just fine. I love my family, I love myself, and I am enjoying the hell outta my life ! I still have a strong sense of morality, I still aim to only do what I percieve as Good.

If God didn't exist, we would still be worth just as much as we are now.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
I love my life. That is why I cannot believe that the substance of it is an illusion and that my moral agency is a cosmic trick.

You don't have to. Why do you HAVE To know the Truth behind our origins to validify your love for yourself ?

I was an accident at Birth. My mother had me to early, and I wasn't planned. Does that mean my existance is worthless ? Should I go cry somewhere and go kill myself ?

Uhh...yeah okay....I'm a cocky mofo who loves what he is, and dont givva shit what's the story behind his birth. I exist now, I love what I am, and that's good enough for me.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
This may be the most sensible thing I've ever heard you utter.

I utter a lot of bullshit. Sometimes you gotta read between the lines to find meaning in my rants. 😉

Real proof that there is no God:

"He" puts people like Lord Urizen on earth.

Any questions ex-believers?

Oh and sorry for double post but....hahaha:

Originally posted by Bardock42
Real proof that there is no God:

"He" puts people like Lord Urizen on earth.

Any questions ex-believers?

It's hard to argue with that logic, Bardock...

Originally posted by Bardock42
Oh and sorry for double post but....hahaha:

Bardock, you need a life..serously.

Find a boyfreind, develop a sex life, develop a sense of humor...and then come back.

Otherwise, drown in your boredom. 💃

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
It's hard to argue with that logic, Bardock...

His logic actually makes more sense than your own ✅

Thanks for NOT responding to the argument. Shows how little you have to say. Pity...

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Bardock, you need a life..serously.

Find a boyfreind, develop a sex life, develop a sense of humor...and then come back.

Otherwise, drown in your boredom. 💃

HEY.....the sense of humour thing hurt.

Originally posted by Bardock42
HEY.....the sense of humour thing hurt.

Sorry cry

Originally posted by Bardock42
Real proof that there is no God:

"He" puts people like Lord Urizen on earth.

Any questions ex-believers?

Actually wouldn't that be proof.... since God likes doing things like that to test the faith of his much loved children....

"Hmmm. What can I do today to test their faith.... Ah, I know! I have been wanting to try out this Lord Urizen soul, nows my chance. Down you go. Let the fun begin!"

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
You did not actually counter my point. I already know that your projections of this universe are your opinion, and your right to have. However, you cannot claim them as Fact. That simple.

And for you to still argue that you know the Nature of this Universe, even when the entirely of humankind has a limitted knowledge of anything beyond our own world is absurd.

I can argue that I know the universe. Why? Because in matters that concern us, there are only two broad categories of knowledge--the physical universe and the human world. The physical universe is vast in scope, but governed by largely knowable laws. Most physicists will argue that although they cannot observe every physical phenomenon, they can reasonably assume that all physical laws function universally, and that, therefore, all unobserved phenomena will behave in similar fashion to the observed ones. This is called inductive reasoning. Kant called it "a priori synthetic judgment", the ability of the mind to synthesize a general law from particular circumstances. Do you deny this faculty exists? If you do, you are at odds with virtually every rational human being on the planet. What does our general knowledge of the universe tell us? How does the known, and by extrapolation, unknown physical universe behave? Indifferently, uniformly, without concern for man or his desires...Do you disagree with this?

The human world is a world we know by virtue of us living within it. Much like the physical universe, even though we each have limited experience, we can deduce that men and women are virtually the same everywhere in their fundamental desires, disappointments, joys, aspirations, and despair. Although cultural and social differences exist among different peoples, much more remains common to all than not. Again, I ask you, do you disagree with this? If so, you again will be in disagreement with virtually the entire rational world. Lord U is not a private, unfathomable, inscrutable universe all unto himself. He is a man in a universe of like men who have like natures.

What's more, there is history and literature from the past. So not only do we have our own experience to reason from, but those of countless others from the distant past who lived and breathed much like we do.

So, on the basis of these arguments, I say that, yes, I have a large, though not perfect, knowledge of the universe I inhabit. The physical universe that surrounds me is indifferent to human ends. The human world I inhabit and help shape is peculiar in that it professes values and meanings not native to the purposeless physical order of things. This observation makes me think that there is something either aberrant or special in the existence of men.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Yet you are quick to challenge and question the evidense behind my assertions in every thread. Likewise, I challenge yours.

I will accept your position on either one of the other of these two stances, but not both at the same time. This is intellectually inconsistent. If you argue both, you must somehow explain how you do so without violating basic logic.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Instead of challening your right to make these assertions, let me ask you the foundation for your beleifs that you present as fact.

If you say "The Bible" , I'm gonna piss in my pants laughing.

My foundation is as follows:
1. Personal experience.
2. My modest knowledge of the thousands year old tradition of liberal learning in the Western world, of which, the Bible is a large, influential part.
3. My relationships with other people.
4. Rational inference.
5. Intuition.

What is yours?

If you say, my own personal, uncorroborated feelings and the popular, current wisdom of the day, I'm gonna piss in my pants laughing...

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Okey Dokey then. I just wanted you to admit you have no proof. My satisfaction is quenched, and from now on I will not take your points as fact...purely as opinion, and I will argue them as opinion, unless you can provide concrete evidense for some of your rather outrageous claims.

Lord U, here you go again with this "proof" nonsense. There is no empirical proof for any of the things we're talking about. I thought we had already established this. Your problem is that you are not consistent with your arguments and simultaneously assert mutually contradictory premises.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
If you take a look at this world, and every culture that exists within it you will see that morality is not universal in its aspects. Every culture promotes a different moral standard, and every individual has a different sense of right or wrong.

This is not true. Most cultures agree on virtually all points of common morality. Murder, stealing, lying, being disrespectful...these are condemned in virtually every culture at every time. There will of course be differences in how these things are exactly defined, but almost everyone agrees in principle...except maybe Lord U.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
BTW, if Morality DOES exist independent of Human Definition, it does not automatically require a "God" to be the concrete distributor of right and wrong. There are many possibilities as to what is the foundation or spectrum of good and evil.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
So basically you beleive Humanity is an illusion without God. How do you define Humanity any way ? I think that's what matters.

If you define Humanity as "being a human being" then that is independent of God or any religion.

I probably define humanity in much the same way you do. And yes, I'm saying that without God, everything you philosophically seem to take for granted about us, is an illusion. If something like our humanity doesn't exist as a fundamental principle in the universe to confirm us in our strivings, our aspirations, our sufferings, and all our pretensions to principled living, then these things are a nullity. If love doesn't exist independently of us, then that means that exists only in human beings. It is certainly not found elsewhere in the physical universe. If there is no transcendent love, or Lover, then we can probably make the inference that we are deluding ourselves, and that what we think is love, is not that at all, but a bit of clever biological programming to help us perpetuate the species. If love is just that, it is not what we call love.

I don't think you appreciate how staggering are the claims we human beings make about ourselves. We claim to experience and want things that are completely foreign to the rest of the universe. From where does this uniqueness come? Certainly, not from anything we can observe yet.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I don't beleive in God (note that I am open to the possibility of his existance), but over all I don't truly think he exists.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
You don't have to. Why do you HAVE To know the Truth behind our origins to validify your love for yourself ?

I was an accident at Birth. My mother had me to early, and I wasn't planned. Does that mean my existance is worthless ? Should I go cry somewhere and go kill myself ?

Ahh...so here's the explanation for the cockiness, or, at least, some of the explanation--anxiety over the circumstance of your birth. False bravado always covers up personal insecurity.

To answer, your question, no, the circumstances of your birth have nothing to do with your worth. (My circumstances were similar, by the way.) But you're talking apples and oranges here. Unintentional pregnancy may be an accident, but it is still the result of human agency. Whether the anomaly of human life in the otherwise lifeless universe is an accident or a miracle is a philosophical/theological question that pertains to the ultimate nature of things.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Uhh...yeah okay....I'm a cocky mofo who loves what he is, and dont givva shit what's the story behind his birth.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I exist now, I love what I am, and that's good enough for me.

But if a life of comfortable non-reflection is your summum bonum, why are you arguing on this board? Don't these types of questions only interfere with your pursuit of pleasure and self-indulgence?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
[b]He provides you a place of Eternal Torment of you disobey him 🙄

Thoughts ? [/B]

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
We utter as fact what we believe to be true. As I said, it is the nature of our faculty of judgment to render categorical statements. You believe it is wrong for gays to be discriminated against and you utter statements to that affect as matters of moral fact. My point? All moral statements are uttered in the indicative mode. It is wrong to murder. It is wrong to steal. It is wrong to bear false witness, etc...Can you think of another way to make a moral statement without resorting to the indicative case? If so, please enlighten me. You may disagree with my particular statements, but you cannot argue against the categorical form of the statement itself, which you appear to be doing.

Wrong...YOU UTTER as fact what you beleive to be true. The difference is that some of what you blab you can actually back up..while other bullshit you come up with, you can't back up.

Like your "Nature of the Universe" thoery. You can't back it up, and you have almost no basis to work on. Give it up already.

Morality is subjective...as far as we know. Does it make it any less real? No...just isn't absolute.....atleast not yet. I'm sure you and I share common aspects in our own moralities, but that doesn't make either of us right or wrong.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
I can argue that I know the universe. Why? Because in matters that concern us, there are only two broad categories of knowledge--the physical universe and the human world. The physical universe is vast in scope, but governed by largely knowable laws. Most physicists will argue that although they cannot observe every physical phenomenon, they can reasonably assume that all physical laws function universally, and that, therefore, all unobserved phenomena will behave in similar fashion to the observed ones. This is called inductive reasoning. Kant called it "a priori synthetic judgment", the ability of the mind to synthesize a general law from particular circumstances. Do you deny this faculty exists? If you do, you are at odds with virtually every rational human being on the planet. What does our general knowledge of the universe tell us? How does the known, and by extrapolation, unknown physical universe behave? Indifferently, uniformly, without concern for man or his desires...Do you disagree with this?

Blah blah blah blah blah blah...u done ?

Okay my turn.....yes, I am aware that Physicists have made basis of this Universe on experiments and observations from what we could work with, many of which are more likely true than false.

However, you made no such "physical" conclusion. At least a physicist has years and years of study, and access to such knowledge in detail that many of us cannot grasp.

What do you have? Personal experience and your Bible ? 😆

Oh boy...watch out ! Dr. Zaius is LOADED !

Please....you are going to say that this Universe has "Justice" a human social construct that doesn't even exist in the animal world, so how the f*ck does it exist throughout the rest of our universe ?

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
The human world is a world we know by virtue of us living within it. Much like the physical universe, even though we each have limited experience, we can deduce that men and women are virtually the same everywhere in their fundamental desires, disappointments, joys, aspirations, and despair. Although cultural and social differences exist among different peoples, much more remains common to all than not. Again, I ask you, do you disagree with this? If so, you again will be in disagreement with virtually the entire rational world. Lord U is not a private, unfathomable, inscrutable universe all unto himself. He is a man in a universe of like men who have like natures.

I agree with you that as human beings we have more in common than we do different. That I would definately agree with 👆

However, in terms of morality, we do not all have a common morality. If we DID there would be no Wars, no conflict, and NO DEBATES....

As for you last statement, Lord Urizen is not a "man in a universe of like men". He is a Man is a world of like men"

We do not know that male and female exist outside of Earth, so don't project your opinion as fact again...please. It's a bad habit.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
What's more, there is history and literature from the past. So not only do we have our own experience to reason from, but those of countless others from the distant past who lived and breathed much like we do.

True, but all accounts are biased. Only the victors write history, and we only get thier points of view. There are tons of records that we are not aware of, that would most likely contradict whatever was told to us now.

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
So, on the basis of these arguments, I say that, yes, I have a large, though not perfect, knowledge of the universe I inhabit. The physical universe that surrounds me is indifferent to human ends. The human world I inhabit and help shape is peculiar in that it professes values and meanings not native to the purposeless physical order of things. This observation makes me think that there is something either aberrant or special in the existence of men.

No you don't. You don't even have enough knowledge of this EArth, so NO again you're DELUSIONAL . ✅\

You do NOT have a large knowledge of this universe. Do you even know what a fkn Universe is ? You think reading things like the Bible, literature books, stories, comic books, and observing the animal world are enough to tell you of the nature of this universe ?

We never even met an Alien Civilization yet.....we know very little, if nothing, of the nature of this universe.

The only reason you think human beings are so special, is because you only know human beings, and you do not know any other life that exists in this Universe.....