Do geese see God?

This time, an interesting discussion on a well-known social platform about the idea of god, which might be of interest. Yet, I don‘t know why it ended so abruptly, but this circumstance might again be of some interest. First an foremost, I want to express my gratitude for this exciting debate! Thank you! So here it comes…

My friend G. posts (as an update)

Do geese see god?

L., comments

the notion of seeing is slightly misleading. in catholocism, god is rather to be lived. but as to the geese: the scholastic theologian nicholas of cusa, one of the most influential, believes the world to be the emanation of what one may call „god“. hegel radicalizes this thought by arguing that „god“ or the „absolute spirit“ („weltgeist“) is not some sort of a timeless will or a separate, superior being but the totality of history as it is defolding. in this sense it all depends on whether geese perceive themselves as historical beings. most people don‘t.

G.

It all depends through which lenses you view it. One category for universal ancestry argues about the homology in vertebrate limbs, i.e. A bat’s wing, a porpoise’s flipper, a horse’s legs, and a human’s hand. Their homology proof that they all „historically“ share a common ancestor. Isn‘t homology good evidence for Darwinism? But for me, it can be summed up in a single word: „design“. I believe that irreducibly complex systems are strong evidence of a purposeful, intentional design by an intelligent agent. Would it not be strange if a universe without purpose accidentally created humans who are so obsessed with purpose? Now try to read my status back to front..there we go :p

L. counters

a friend gave me an interesting hint: irreducibly complex structures that might contradict evolution have been falsified. there are none (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagella#Evolution_of_flagella_and_debate). obviously, this has made creationists deeply sad, but anyway, an argumentation referring to a common origin simplifies the complexity of the natural history and history of men, just as much as bare physiology waters down the existential matters of mankind. the way history has evolved is not inherently reasonable, nor does the pope know why. on the contrary, his almost charmingly naive view upon the world is the conclusive evidence of the regress within catholicism. it did take a long way from the blooming early christianity and the emancipatory plebeian sects (the pataria of milan or the cathars in south france) to the miserable state of the institutionalized, contemporary christian churches. ever since, they have proven their predisposition for reactionary ideologies. now don‘t get me wrong, i am a believer, but differently. i cherish the universal idea of love and therefore a belief that is not satisfied with what is. so in other words, i feel deeply attached to the original idea of christianity that is one of emancipation. it just needs to be rejuvenated. and that’s when marx pops up, litterally outta nowhere! really, it’s all the rage now!

G.

I‘m totally with you and I like all of your point of views..hope we can get together soon to discuss it further more, along with some good music and a cup of wine :)

- L. likes this. He really does!

G. adds

And actually the most funny/interesting thing is how the conversation turned this nice from a palindrome!!! Hehehe

Unfortunately unsatisfied, L. gives in

to sum it up, „step on no pets“. ;-)

Eventually, G. sums it up yet again

Or: „Oozy rat in a sanitary zoo“ hehehehe. Sweet!!