It makes sense to talk about my personal opinion here because that is the only one I know for sure. The opinions of others can, at best, be catalysts. But I have to put my own head on the grindstone and further my ideas over time. Chandrachoodan asked me some good questions at the place where it all started and here is what I said
C>>What do you think is God?I said all this because I genuinely believe that the existence of God is a matter that can be concluded only on the basis of personal experience. 'Does God exist?' can be answered using either a 'Yes' or a 'No' depending upon how the mind of the person (answering the question) works. Take my case: I believe that every new person I meet is genuine and good unless I confirm otherwise. There might be someone else who believes that every new person she meets is cunning and manipulative unless she confirms otherwise. Both of us are right because we are open to the idea that we may have to confirm otherwise. Likewise God can exist and not exist in the minds of people depending upon how they choose to approach the subject. What is totally irritating is the way average discussions about God and his existence degrade into ego matches where defending one's shaky opinion becomes far more important than acceptance of a better opinion.
Echo: My opinion has been evolving and will continue to do so. At the moment, I think that God is the highest potential energy state that can be reached. Every man has the inherent capacity to get to that state.
C>>If you don’t try reason and logic to find god, how else would you?
Echo:I have been applying reason and logic all along and it has been frustrating to discover that I just go around in circles with no convincing pointers forward. Therefore, I have been thinking that there must be other ways of understanding that do not necessarily stop with cold logic. Logic says if it is not black then it must be white; if it is not love then it must be hate. Where do we fit in entities like ‘gray’ and ‘indifference’ then? Logic is a useful tool, but it cannot be the only instrument used to arrive at rock solid conclusions.
C>>What would you discover and how will you understand whatever you found?
Echo:Ah. Now this is a tough one to answer. I have no clue what I would discover but I do know that when I question something, I must be open to finding answers that I may not really like.
C>>The prime number example:
Echo: Logic works beautifully in a number of examples but does it mean that Logic can answer everything? A knife can be used to cut some things but in other cases a scissor is simply a better tool. In short, Logic is necessary but not sufficient.
I see various opinions as rungs on a ladder, serving for a short interval until the climber puts another foot forward. But hey, is the ladder on the right wall? So, tell me, what would your answers be to Chandroo's questions?
Some important things to note:
- I would love to hear from you. That is why this post is up with the comments sections open. However, you are expected to articulate your opinion without being offensive. I shall not tolerate impolite people here. Period.
- If you are contradicting another person's opinion, please substantiate your argument. Simply calling someone wrong does not further open discussion.
- This post is just a prelude to a more detailed discussion on the subject. If there are enough open-minded takers that is.
- If you decide not to comment, I am going to conclude that you agree with me. Ah, the bliss of simple logic! :)
- Thanks for stopping by.