v

[Gianna99]

There is a deep and continuing conversation between science and religion. While science uses reason and factual data to comprehend the natural world, religion frequently uses faith and tradition to investigate issues of morality and meaning. Both fields provide insightful understandings of the human condition and encourage a diverse range of viewpoints.GB Whatsapp download

[The Tanager]

I don't agree with the summary.
Person A is saying the same thing as person B

They obviously agreed on some things and disagreed on others. I agree with the latest GPT summary.

[William]

I don't agree with the summary.
Person A is saying the same thing as person B

They obviously agreed on some things and disagreed on others. I agree with the latest GPT summary.

Then we should be able to pinpoint the difference remaining re our 2 perspectives which may assist us with understanding the manner in which subjective/objective interpretation differ.

Person A (my position) posits a perspective that everything, including the universe, exists within the mind or consciousness of the Creator. This viewpoint implies a sort of panentheism, where the Creator's consciousness encompasses and transcends all aspects of existence, including the universe itself. From this perspective, morality would be perceived as an inherent aspect of the Creator's mind, permeating all of creation.

Person B, (your position) on the other hand, holds a different perspective, suggesting that the universe exists separately from the mind of the Creator. This viewpoint implies a form of theism where the Creator exists independently from the universe and may have created it but does not necessarily encompass it within their mind. From this perspective, morality is still seen as originating from the Creator but may be perceived as existing independently within the universe itself rather than solely within the Creator's mind.

[The Tanager]

Then we should be able to pinpoint the difference remaining re our 2 perspectives which may assist us with understanding the manner in which subjective/objective interpretation differ.

Person A (my position) posits a perspective that everything, including the universe, exists within the mind or consciousness of the Creator. This viewpoint implies a sort of panentheism, where the Creator's consciousness encompasses and transcends all aspects of existence, including the universe itself. From this perspective, morality would be perceived as an inherent aspect of the Creator's mind, permeating all of creation.

Person B, (your position) on the other hand, holds a different perspective, suggesting that the universe exists separately from the mind of the Creator. This viewpoint implies a form of theism where the Creator exists independently from the universe and may have created it but does not necessarily encompass it within their mind. From this perspective, morality is still seen as originating from the Creator but may be perceived as existing independently within the universe itself rather than solely within the Creator's mind.

Okay, so what do you see as the difference? I’ve tried to explain it in different ways and you still don’t seem to understand what I’m saying about objective versus subjective morality.

[William]

Then we should be able to pinpoint the difference remaining re our 2 perspectives which may assist us with understanding the manner in which subjective/objective interpretation differ.

Person A (my position) posits a perspective that everything, including the universe, exists within the mind or consciousness of the Creator. This viewpoint implies a sort of panentheism, where the Creator's consciousness encompasses and transcends all aspects of existence, including the universe itself. From this perspective, morality would be perceived as an inherent aspect of the Creator's mind, permeating all of creation.

Person B, (your position) on the other hand, holds a different perspective, suggesting that the universe exists separately from the mind of the Creator. This viewpoint implies a form of theism where the Creator exists independently from the universe and may have created it but does not necessarily encompass it within their mind. From this perspective, morality is still seen as originating from the Creator but may be perceived as existing independently within the universe itself rather than solely within the Creator's mind.

Okay, so what do you see as the difference? I’ve tried to explain it in different ways and you still don’t seem to understand what I’m saying about objective versus subjective morality.

I don't see a difference which is real.
If a human mind (or any type of mind) exists within The Creator Mind then (as I mentioned way earlier) the perspectives might be perceived differently but the perspective to adopt (re truth) is that of The Creator Mind, and Its perspective is wholly subjective in relation to all other minds.

Other minds (being inside of The Creator Mind) may believe that because they are inside The Creator Mind, they must therefore think of The Creator Mind as and objective mind (and also that other minds are objective minds to their own) but the perspective is incorrect (which is what the "image without redness" posted in an earlier reply, exampled.
The same applies to those who believe that The Creator Mind is outside of the universe and therefore seen to be objective because of that.

[The Tanager]

I don't see a difference which is real.
If a human mind (or any type of mind) exists within The Creator Mind then (as I mentioned way earlier) the perspectives might be perceived differently but the perspective to adopt (re truth) is that of The Creator Mind, and Its perspective is wholly subjective in relation to all other minds.

Other minds (being inside of The Creator Mind) may believe that because they are inside The Creator Mind, they must therefore think of The Creator Mind as and objective mind (and also that other minds are objective minds to their own) but the perspective is incorrect (which is what the "image without redness" posted in an earlier reply, exampled.
The same applies to those who believe that The Creator Mind is outside of the universe and therefore seen to be objective because of that.

What do you mean that the Creator Mind and Its perspective is wholly subjective in relation to other minds. Please define objective and subjective in how you are using it, so I can better analyze what you are trying to convey here.

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #75]

What do you mean that the Creator Mind and Its perspective is wholly subjective in relation to other minds.

I mean that The Creator Mind does not view all other minds a separate from/outside of Itself.

[The Tanager]

I mean that The Creator Mind does not view all other minds a separate from/outside of Itself.

Okay, so were you thinking that I was saying that even in your view the minds within the thought world creation would be separate from/outside of the Creator Mind? Or was your point something else in talking about real differences between person A and person B?

[William]

I mean that The Creator Mind does not view all other minds a separate from/outside of Itself.

Okay, so were you thinking that I was saying that even in your view the minds within the thought world creation would be separate from/outside of the Creator Mind? Or was your point something else in talking about real differences between person A and person B?

Exploring the Evolution of Consciousness within the Creator Mind

[bluegreenearth]

There is a deep and continuing conversation between science and religion. While science uses reason and factual data to comprehend the natural world, religion frequently uses faith and tradition to investigate issues of morality and meaning. Both fields provide insightful understandings of the human condition and encourage a diverse range of viewpoints.GB Whatsapp download

I'm not sure if both fields necessarily encourage a diverse range of viewpoints. Science often begins with viewpoint diversity but is limited to investigating only those that are falsifiable and functions to narrow down the list to the single most reasonable hypothesis as determined by the available evidence. Nevertheless, I suppose it could be argued that the solicitation of multiple falsifiable hypotheses for testing is how science encourages a diverse range of viewpoints. A religion almost never begins with viewpoint diversity but almost always fails to maintain its homogeneity because of internal disputes over the interpretation of doctrine that often develop over time. Accordingly, maybe it could be argued that religion encourages viewpoint diversity, though, it does so unintentionally.