Is God a Metaphor?

[Navigator]

Either that's a very well crafted joke, or you missed the humor in mine.

If it got a giggle out of you, that was the point. I saw the funny side of your comment...but didn't know if you were being serious either.

 

[Navigator]

It can define all things, or not-all things. Or one thing. Or a bunch of things which already have names and definitions. The latter is a favorite from what I've seen.

The key is in the phrasing...I said "All things can thus be defined as, altogether, meaningful" (all at once - all as one thing etc.)

For some (like your definition below), it's fairly vague and ultimately nonsensical. For others, it's perfectly coherent to themselves but they can't even properly convey what it is they mean.

Part of the challenge involved with communication of this type ...all types really, but certainly this type.

Sure, so you say. But you could be wrong. In many people's minds, you ARE wrong. What then?

Hang about! First you claim what I said was "fairly vague and ultimately nonsensical" then you proceed to show that you got it!

But, that aside - to answer your question, "that which does the defining" = consciousness..and specifically self aware consciousness ... with the ability to define.

.... "is a metaphor for GOD" Equals - (in relation to the altogether part...

Self aware consciousness is a (type of) metaphor for GOD.

Okay so now hit me with 'that is an analogy not a metaphor!'



Well whatever! It is meaningful, is the point.

 

[abaddon]

The key is in the phrasing...I said "All things can thus be defined as, altogether, meaningful" (all at once - all as one thing etc.)



Part of the challenge involved with communication of this type ...all types really, but certainly this type.



Hang about! First you claim what I said was "fairly vague and ultimately nonsensical" then you proceed to show that you got it!

But, that aside - to answer your question, "that which does the defining" = consciousness..and specifically self aware consciousness ... with the ability to define.

.... "is a metaphor for GOD" Equals - (in relation to the altogether part...

Self aware consciousness is a (type of) metaphor for GOD.

Okay so now hit me with 'that is an analogy not a metaphor!'



Well whatever! It is meaningful, is the point.

You seem to be suggesting that each of us is a reflection of immortal energy.

 

[ferd burfle]

Could you summarize one idea here, to get the discussion started, so we can see what sort of cool debate your essay triggers? I'm not going to deal with asking for, downloading and reading an essay, before I even know if it's special enough to warrant it. We've already got Navigator here to tell us how the universe works, but at least he offers it in digestable posts.

Yes, Professor, please post a short excerpt (a paragraph or two) or summary. As it stands, posters are making assumptions about your ideas that are probably at least somewhat incorrect.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Dave Rogers]

No, by definition.

The question, as posed, is a stupid one. Metaphor is a literary device used to draw analogies between two different concepts; as such, the two concepts being compared in the metaphor must first of all have specific definitions in order for there to be a comparison to draw. The metaphor is not the concept itself, but rather the combination of concepts. Therefore, to take Shakespeare's classic example, "All the world's a stage," the metaphor is the statement, rather than the terms within it. The stage is not a metaphor in itself, neither is the world, rather they are the two terms being compared as to their attributes. So, no, God is not, and as a single concept cannot be, a metaphor in and of itself. It can, of course, be used within a metaphor, and frequently is; but in order to be used in a metaphor it must express a concept that is not itself a metaphor.

I very much doubt that this addresses the subject of the OP's mini-book, but if he's not sufficiently well-mannered to raise the actual subject he wants to discuss without demanding payment then I see no reason to extend him the courtesy of trying to divine his thoughts.

Dave

 

[Dr.Sid]

God isn't a metaphor. God doesn't exist, period. So it can't be anything. You could argue that he exists as character in fiction books, or even as a topic of discussion. But that's only what believers want you to believe. Every statement containing word 'god' is false.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Well, yes, but Robin Hood most likely doesn't exist either. However, it would be a perfectly valid metaphor to describe someone as "a bit of a Robin Hood" if, for example, he defrauded someone rich and gave away some of the proceeds to charity. The reason it works as a metaphor is because Robin Hood, though fictitious, has a definition as a concept with aspects that can be compared to aspects of another defined person. So, like God, Robin Hood is not a metaphor, but can be used as an element within one.

Dave

 

[The Norseman]

The key is in the phrasing...I said "All things can thus be defined as, altogether, meaningful" (all at once - all as one thing etc.)

Part of the challenge involved with communication of this type ...all types really, but certainly this type.

Hang about! First you claim what I said was "fairly vague and ultimately nonsensical" then you proceed to show that you got it!

But, that aside - to answer your question, "that which does the defining" = consciousness..and specifically self aware consciousness ... with the ability to define.

.... "is a metaphor for GOD" Equals - (in relation to the altogether part...

Self aware consciousness is a (type of) metaphor for GOD.

Okay so now hit me with 'that is an analogy not a metaphor!'



Well whatever! It is meaningful, is the point.

Okay.

Well, yes, but Robin Hood most likely doesn't exist either. However, it would be a perfectly valid metaphor to describe someone as "a bit of a Robin Hood" if, for example, he defrauded someone rich and gave away some of the proceeds to charity. The reason it works as a metaphor is because Robin Hood, though fictitious, has a definition as a concept with aspects that can be compared to aspects of another defined person. So, like God, Robin Hood is not a metaphor, but can be used as an element within one.

Dave

That's my point in this thread, except furthering the fact that 'god' is used and defined in every way imaginable as to be completely useless for any rational, coherent, or meaningful metaphor.

 

[jrhowell]

Every statement containing word 'god' is false.

So, that statement is false?

 

[Pup]

The metaphor is not the concept itself, but rather the combination of concepts. Therefore, to take Shakespeare's classic example, "All the world's a stage," the metaphor is the statement, rather than the terms within it. The stage is not a metaphor in itself, neither is the world, rather they are the two terms being compared as to their attributes.

Nailed it! And the next post too, that god can be a metaphor same as Robin Hood. It's a shame we don't know whether this is what the essay is about.

 

[Dr.Sid]

So, that statement is false?

Obviously ..

 

[Navigator]

No, by definition.

The question, as posed, is a stupid one. Metaphor is a literary device used to draw analogies between two different concepts; as such, the two concepts being compared in the metaphor must first of all have specific definitions in order for there to be a comparison to draw. The metaphor is not the concept itself, but rather the combination of concepts. Therefore, to take Shakespeare's classic example, "All the world's a stage," the metaphor is the statement, rather than the terms within it. The stage is not a metaphor in itself, neither is the world, rather they are the two terms being compared as to their attributes. So, no, God is not, and as a single concept cannot be, a metaphor in and of itself. It can, of course, be used within a metaphor, and frequently is; but in order to be used in a metaphor it must express a concept that is not itself a metaphor.

I very much doubt that this addresses the subject of the OP's mini-book, but if he's not sufficiently well-mannered to raise the actual subject he wants to discuss without demanding payment then I see no reason to extend him the courtesy of trying to divine his thoughts.

Maybe the whole point of the thread creation is to harvest ideas which can be used to write another book to sell.

Whatever, - even if the OP never writes another thing on this forum, the opportunity to use this thread as a springboard for educational purposes etc, is the only validity needed.

Well, yes, but Robin Hood most likely doesn't exist either. However, it would be a perfectly valid metaphor to describe someone as "a bit of a Robin Hood" if, for example, he defrauded someone rich and gave away some of the proceeds to charity. The reason it works as a metaphor is because Robin Hood, though fictitious, has a definition as a concept with aspects that can be compared to aspects of another defined person. So, like God, Robin Hood is not a metaphor, but can be used as an element within one.

Thinking on that reasoning, 'Robin Hood' is the name of an individual character whereas 'God' is more than just that.

You can say 'so and so' is comparable to Robin Hood in that usage, but it isn't the case with the various uses of the word God.

So then...God can be used either as an element within a metaphor as well as a metaphor for something which isn't just a name of an particular idea of a being.

 

[Navigator]

God isn't a metaphor. God doesn't exist, period. So it can't be anything. You could argue that he exists as character in fiction books, or even as a topic of discussion. But that's only what believers want you to believe. Every statement containing word 'god' is false.

So, that statement is false?

Obviously ..

This ties in nicely with my last post.

The word GOD is used in a variety of ways.

'God doesn't exist' as a statement on its own, neither takes that into account nor can be considered true.

First the subject GOD has to be defined. Your statement Dr.Sid, does not define what you mean by using the word God other than in stating that it is fictional. That is your definition by all accounts, but it is vague and does not take into account the many ways in which the word GOD is used.

For example, I sometimes use the word GOD to include everything which is conscious and self aware. It is acceptable to do so. There is evidence that at least some things are conscious and self aware and these are seen by me to being aspects of GOD. They are not fictional.

GOD overall, is the conceptual metaphor used in the idea that Consciousness has always and ever will exist and is the reason why everything else exists.

While you might argue that such a being is fictional, you cannot know that this is actually the case.

Thus, your conclusion that "Every statement containing word 'god' is false" is not necessarily true.

 

[The Norseman]

I'm quoting myself because the latest posts are pure examples of it.

That's my point in this thread, except furthering the fact that 'god' is used and defined in every way imaginable as to be completely useless for any rational, coherent, or meaningful metaphor.

Except I think I'll change my last line to "...completely useless for any rational, coherent, or meaningful conversation/point/conclusion."

 

[Navigator]

I'm quoting myself because the latest posts are pure examples of it.

That's my point in this thread, except furthering the fact that 'god' is used and defined in every way imaginable as to be completely useless for any rational, coherent, or meaningful metaphor.

Except I think I'll change my last line to "...completely useless for any rational, coherent, or meaningful conversation/point/conclusion."

You are mistaken. As long as the word is defined, meaningful conversation/point/conclusion can be used in relation to the definition.

For example.

"God is evil"

This is one definition of GOD and once defined, meaningful conversation/point/conclusion can be gained.

That there can and are numerous definitions of GOD, makes no difference.

Think about it and see if, by using critical thinking, you can establish that your 'point' is wrong.

 

[Loss Leader]

Well, I guess I'm convinced that the OP has a great deal to say about physics and about communism. I can't see how that has anything to do with philosophy.

I would like to hear a brief synopsis.

 

[Crossbow]

Since God is so subjective that God can mean whatever one wants God to mean, then 'Yes. God can be a metaphor.'.

I hope this helps.