A Rationalist's Argument for God 

Click here to edit subtitle

Transcripts to Random Arguments

THE DORMANIAN ARGUMENT FOR GOD (abridged version) -- preface to upcoming book: REALITY -- THE PREFACE by Andre Dormand, (c) 2017

- The smallest piece of matter would have at least two properties: a front and behind. Even if everything was one sheet of mass, it would necessarily be mutli-dimensional with an equally inaccessible outer-inner core.
- If a thing didn't have dimensions, then it would be abstract. Even a one-dimensional thing would be abstract, as conceiving it would be counterintuitive and directly unobservable without any background surface.
- So relativity exists: Either a thing is physical or abstract; or it's a physicality with two properties: an internal or an external at its core.
- Thus, oppositions exist and are as universal as energy-matter.
- So every thing that "is," then has an "is not.
- But in physical reality, cosmologists claim that 'voids" don't exist (cf. In physics, "nothingness" is simply the term for low energy spaces).
- Thus, the "is not" would only exist as the abstraction of the physical "is."
- Yet relations such as oppositions are abstractions -- none of which are tangible. Rather, they're conceived into existence.
- In other words, they exist in thought.
- Thought exists in brains.
- So if there are abstractions of relativity universally throughout the universe, then the universe itself must be a brain.
- Whenever a mind is so universalized as to be absolute, it would be accountable for all things meaningful: all-knowing, all-good and all-powerful, which equates to God.
- This would be the opposite to opposition itself: the middle term in relation to all other contraries.

Or, in other words:

- Abstractions exist everywhere. For example, for every "is" there's an "is not." The "is not" is the abstract.
- Abstractions are basically conceptual -- that is to say, of the mind.
- But it's unlikely such abstraction was caused by thought in general because thought generally requires abstraction.*
- So for abstractions to exist and be known, there must be a mind that all other minds would have abstracted such a concept from that is most absolute in thought: a meditative mind that would be the opposite to opposition itself.
- That which is most absolute in thought is essentially "all-knowing, all-pure and all-powerful."**
- "All-knowing, all-pure and all-powerful" = God by definition.

Conclusion: God exists.

[*FOOTNOTES: Pure affirmative thought isn't known to exist, nor is there any pre-negative language. For anything to be recognized, one must first comprehend a thing by what it isn't (cf. the principle of identity).
**The epistemic, the moral/aesthetic, and the natural/ontological: the three basic categories of truth.]

Or, as updated:

1) For something to survive, a thing has to make distinctions
2) For a thing to make distinctions, a thing has to have the ability to negate (e.g., distinguish good from not-good).*
3) Negation is conceptual.**
4) Yet the first known forms of life, although they had the ability to make distinctions, had no brains nor central nervous systems.***
5) Thus, the ability to mentally conceive need not come from brains nor nervous systems
6) Thus the physical must have a mental basis as the mental has a physical basis
7) Ultimately, these bases are one and the same (i.e., God and energy).

Generally, this highest form of mentality is understood as "all-knowing, all-good, and all-powerful" -- these absolutes are the three most essential attributes for anyone seeking truth: Epistemology, ethics, and causality (i.e., the ability to so conceive). "The Christian God" best fulfills the role of being all-good, for example, in light of how we observe the world to be: imperfect. We seem to choose our world to be imperfect, in large part, by our collective free will, and our procrastination in overcoming life's challenges. After all, sin is not without its pleasures. So we suffer. Even so, Christianity fulfills this requirement of "all-good" by providing a redemption figure: Jesus Christ, if we so choose by our free will. The latter is consistent with the other two essential attributes, as well, since all-knowing involves knowledge of every possibility, not-so-much what we choose to do, while all-powerfulness involves restraint, as well - which allows free will.

*Distinctions are essentially to say: this as opposed to that; this, not that....
**That is to say, it adds to the experience beyond the experience itself. Without thought, one can only experience things that exist outright, not having the ability to conceive of absences.
***Bacteria, one of the first and simplest forms of life, respond to specific molecules -- swimming toward higher concentrations of attractants and away from higher concentrations of repellants.



EXPERIENCE GOD!!!! Theist Proves God In FIVE Minutes To Heathen Atheists!" by Andrew Dorman, 2013:

This video will demonstrate the consistency of an all-knowing, all-good, and all-powerful entity, as the ancient creator of the problem of evil, Epicurus, has defined God. First of all, all of these attributes imply absoluteness. It should be further mentioned that it's only these attributes in us (knowledge, morality, and willpower) that are necessary in order to realize truth in general. This is why only these attributes are necessary in order to define God.

All-knowing implies a mind that's absolutely aware of not only beginning and end, but everything in between including all unity of oppositions and all possible worlds. Such knowledge further includes what we choose to include and/or exclude by our freely willed decisions. Such a God would have no other will but our own, in fact, since will on God's behalf would imply that She still wanted something done: and THAT would be inconsistent with all-powerfulness.

All-good implies a mind, as well, as morality is based on knowledge between good and evil. Such absoluteness, to be sure, must account for seemingly uncontrollable events like natural disasters and genetic disorders. But God is only all good, otherwise that attribute wouldn't be absolute. So how do these things occur yet be consistent with God being all-good, one may ask? First of all, one must recognize that good by definition is a simplicity, a proposition of which its definition, in order to be affirmed as true, we must already know the definition of. This is the case as such knowledge of goodness itself appears to be innately inborn within us by nature. This is God in our lives. We become aware of its opposite only by things opposing it, such as disasters and disorders, as well as what we freely will. Even so, all of these challenges are surmountable should we collectively choose to overcome them. The problem is, even to this day, we have much more work to do to prioritize overcoming them. The sooner we will to do so, the better, though, as such problems have become more devastating over time -- the further entropy acts upon the world.

Last but not least, God is all-powerful, powerful enough even to rule out the aforementioned evils, it's true. But God's aggressive power is just as much balanced out by passive restraint, and it's for this balance that God's power is complete. In fact, it's from the latter attribute free will is granted, whether for good or ill. Unfortunately, most people have chosen sin at least one time, if not enjoyed it for the short-term. Many, as well, have profited by other's misfortunes. Mercifully, God has it that any pain is soon forgotten as it always is once it's over. Furthermore, only with God is justice assured, any suffering inflicted by such evils will balance eternally. Sinners should be mindful that those who lived only to please the senses will live on by that mindset, which they have chosen to lead in this lifetime. But as the senses would no longer be satisfiable beyond the body, that mindset will prove to be hellish, eternally. This is what religious texts forewarn people of.

In general, God doesn't interfere unless petitioned to by prayer, in which our requests are considered. Yet, so as not to trample on the will of others, or over the paths we have chosen, such requests are not always answered unless the request is otherwise necessary for the world to achieve the only goal worthy of God: Heaven on earth. If God had given us such a place from the get-go, our God-like being would have been redundant (there only need be one God), and without purpose (which is related to choice). It is exactly these challenges that fulfill us and give us character in our manner of overcoming them.

Overall, the world is what we make of it. God has given us the power to provide meaning to this planet, and so far we have always shown we can do better, including this present time. But if you object to God not giving us Heaven from the outset, despite how inconsistent that would have been, realize that God granted you to likewise have the power to achieve this goal yourself, should you choose to work collectively with others in order to achieve it.

So I hope this demonstration of the consistency of absolute knowledge, morality, and will in one being proves to you that God is possible.

Feel free to comment

Members Area

Recent Photos