If you find that something fulfills your nature is it reasonable to think that the object of that fulfillment exists?

[IWantGod]

If you find that the idea of something fulfills your nature, is it reasonable to have faith that the object of this fulfillment actually exists?

We get hungry, there is food.

We get horny, there is sex.

We have a desire to survive, therefore is it reasonable to believe there is life after death. Or to put it another way, is it reasonable to think there is an ultimate fulfillment of our lives on the bases that we have an innate desire to live.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

No. One might have a hunger that cannot be satisfied. It would be NICE if that couldn’t be the case, but we have no reason to believe it isn’t the case.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

If you find that the idea of something fulfills your nature, is it reasonable to have faith that the object of this fulfillment actually exists?

We get hungry, there is food.

We get horny, there is sex.

We have a desire to survive, therefore is it reasonable to believe there is life after death. Or to put it another way, is it reasonable to think there is an ultimate fulfillment of our lives on the bases that we have an innate desire to live.

Feelings/cravings are not “ideas” .

When I was a kid I had an urge to jump off the shed roof and fly unaided.
Use to dream about it a lot.

What do you think?

 

[IWantGod]

Feelings/cravings are not “ideas” .

When I was a kid I had an urge to jump off the shed roof and fly unaided.
Use to dream about it a lot.

What do you think?

But that is based on your idea and experience of birds. I’m talking about innate desires. I’m born with a desire to survive and avoid death. I am not born with a desire to fly.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

But that is based on your idea and experience of birds. I’m talking about innate desires. I’m born with a desire to survive and avoid death. I am not born with a desire to fly.

It *could *be true that every innate desire is fulfilled. But the mere existence of the desire is not proof that this is so.

 

[IWantGod]

It *could *be true that every innate desire is fulfilled. But the mere existence of the desire is not proof that this is so.

However i have an innate desire to eat and there is food
I have innate desire for sex and there is sex.
I have an innate desire to live…so on and so forth.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

However i have an innate desire to eat and there is food
I have innate desire for sex and there is sex.
I have an innate desire to live…so on and so forth.

That’s inductive reasoning, which does not prove its conclusion. You might as well say that since you’ve only seen Emperor penguins, every penguin is an Emperor penguin.

 

[po18guy]

Have you perhaps been reading C. S. Lewis?

“I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.”

If not, should you be?

 

[IWantGod]

That’s inductive reasoning, which does not prove its conclusion. You might as well say that since you’ve only seen Emperor penguins, every penguin is an Emperor penguin.

Well no. i clearly show a correlation between innate desires and the existence of that which fulfill those desires. These seemingly teleological relationships clearly exist.

I then go on to say that i have an innate desire for life, and therefore it seems reasonable to think that there is a fulfillment for that desire.

This clearly is not the same thing as saying *'you’ve only seen Emperor penguins, every penguin is an Emperor penguin."
*

 

[Blue_Horizon]

But that is based on your idea and experience of birds. I’m talking about innate desires. I’m born with a desire to survive and avoid death. I am not born with a desire to fly.

We are born with many such desires.
They often conflict so if they are “innate”, and mine was not innate, I dont know how you define or recognise innate.
Lots of people never have any desire for sex, about 10% I believe.
Lots of people would rather die with dignity which seems to contradict your simple exposition.

And regardless, these are not “ideas”.
Though “dignity” may be.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Well no. i clearly show a correlation between innate desires and the existence of that which fulfill those desires. These seemingly teleological relationships clearly exist.

You give three examples of innate desires that have things to satisfy them. Let me show you the same procedure:

10 is a number that can be divided evenly by 5
20 is a number that can be divided evenly by 5
45 is a number that can be divided evenly by 5

Therefore, all numbers can be divided evenly by 5.

The logic is EXACTLY the same as the logic you use. It is called inductive logic, and it can *sometimes *provide support for its conclusion, but it can never prove its conclusion.

 

[IWantGod]

You give three examples of innate desires that have things to satisfy them. Let me show you the same procedure:

10 is a number that can be divided evenly by 5
20 is a number that can be divided evenly by 5
45 is a number that can be divided evenly by 5

Therefore, all numbers can be divided evenly by 5.

The logic is EXACTLY the same as the logic you use. It is called inductive logic, and it can *sometimes *provide support for its conclusion, but it can never prove its conclusion.

I’m sorry i still don’t see how your example compares to my argument. You saying that just because some numbers can be divided by five that doesn’t mean all numbers can.

Your comparison is superficial at best.

In my argument there a meaningful relationship between the desire and the object of that desire. If you understand how numbers work you will know that the fact that 10 can be divided by 5 does not in itself imply all numbers can be divided by 5. But the fact that an innate desire has an objective object to which it teleologically and meaninfully relates to does imply that all innate desires have an object that fulfills that desire because desires are teleological.

 

[IWantGod]

Lots of people never have any desire for sex, about 10% I believe…

Well that is not exactly normal is it. But in any case when the desire is present it relates meaningfully to the object and the object exists. It doesn’t exactly seem coincidental does it.

Lots of people would rather die with dignity which seems to contradict your simple exposition. .

This doesn’t mean they are not born with an innate desire for life. For example a person might be damaged by their experiences and want to commit suicide, but that doesn’t mean they really want to die. It just means they don’t want to suffer.

And regardless, these are not “ideas”…

I don’t understand why you keep saying this

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Well that is not exactly normal is it. But in any case when the desire is present it relates meaningfully to the object and the object exists. It doesn’t exactly seem coincidental does it.

If you want to talk about innate instincts/desires you have to prove it because it clearly isn’t self-evident.

Saying something “isn’t normal” just because you have personally decided it has to be because its innate in everyone is such poor logic I am surprised I need to point that out to you. It essentially means no one can ever raise a fact that will show your unusual view is mistaken.

May as well say all swans are black and those we think are white must be of a similar looking species but not truly swans .

This way of thinking is called “rationalism” or perhaps “idealism”.

 

[IWantGod]

May as well say all swans are black and those we think are white must be of a similar looking species .

If my penis does not function it does not mean that i am just different from the rest of humanity; it means my penis is not functioning the way it should be.

If i have a loss of appetite, it does not mean i don’t have an innate desire for food. Get It? Or is that too complex for you to grasp? And if some one lacked that desire for food entirely we would rightly think that something is wrong with them and there gonna starve to death.

And all of this is irrelevant anyway because when there is an innate desire in a human being, like eating food, we find that fulfillment in reality; there is such a thing as food. It really doesn’t matter if no one else has that innate desire.

The correlation between the innate desire for food and the existence of food is actually very obvious.
.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

IWantGod,

If you BEGIN with the thesis that all things have a purpose, THEN your argument makes more sense. But I was assuming you weren’t beginning with that premise, since it would be essentially begging the question, and arguing in a circle.

If you do not assume that all things have a purpose, then I see no reason to admit that the cases you bring up are teleological. You need an argument for that part. I’m open to such an argument, since I am open to the view that all God-given desires can be satisfied. But your inductive argument follows the same structure as the numbers argument I’ve given and the swans argument Blue Horizon just mentioned.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

When CS Lewis used “desires” as pointing to there being a method of satisfying those desires, he wasn’t talking about fantasies such as jumping off the shed roof.

The desires he used were far more demanding. I have a desire to drink, but it only becomes urgent when I am truly thirsty. It then consumes my whole being. Water exists to satisfy thirst.

Likewise with food. Most of the readers on this forum have probably never starved, but it seems to be a truism that if you’re hungry enough you’ll eat anything. Food exists to satisfy hunger.

If I am cold, I seek a solution to stop feeling cold, and if I’m cold enough, I’ll do anything I can to find shelter, clothing and warmth. These things exist.

If I have a desire for a sexual relationship (and that can be pretty obsessive), then it indicates that there must be something which will satisfy that desire. As we all know, sex exists - it’s one of the strongest drives in human nature. Most animals seem to have a breeding season but humans are happy to have sex all year round.

By inductive extension then, what CS Lewis was saying was that our search for our lives to mean something indicates there’s an answer to this search. Even atheists like Dawkins are trying to give their lives meaning.

In the long run, water, food, warmth and sex are all gifts. We didn’t create any of them, nor did we create the desire for them. It’s built in.

This would indicate that our desire to find meaning and purpose for our lives is a part of us from the beginning.

There’s a given answer to that desire. God expects us to look for it.

And find it in Him. If we don’t we’ll go looking somewhere else, and find nothing.

 

[IWantGod]

When CS Lewis used “desires” as pointing to there being a method of satisfying those desires, he wasn’t talking about fantasies such as jumping off the shed roof.

lol

 

[inocente]

We have a desire to survive, therefore is it reasonable to believe there is life after death. Or to put it another way, is it reasonable to think there is an ultimate fulfillment of our lives on the bases that we have an innate desire to live.

Here’s an alternative (warning, viewer discretion is advised):

You evolved to want to survive. The reason why you want to survive is the same reason you feel hungry when the body is low on fuel, same reason you feel fear when in danger, same reason you feel cold when the body needs warmth. It keeps you alive. People with those traits tend to survive longer than those without, and so have more offspring to pass on their genes. The traits produce feelings and desires, but they don’t program us to understand why we have them, so people have invented beliefs.

You may not like that explanation, but it’s also teleological in its own way.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

If my penis does not function it does not mean that i am just different from the rest of humanity; it means my penis is not functioning the way it should be.

If i have a loss of appetite, it does not mean i don’t have an innate desire for food. Get It? Or is that too complex for you to grasp? And if some one lacked that desire for food entirely we would rightly think that something is wrong with them and there gonna starve to death.

And all of this is irrelevant anyway because when there is an innate desire in a human being, like eating food, we find that fulfillment in reality; there is such a thing as food. It really doesn’t matter if no one else has that innate desire.

The correlation between the innate desire for food and the existence of food is actually very obvious.
.

So if the correlation is so obvious and self evident why waste our time asking the question which, by your own definition, we cannot gainsay you on .

I leave you with your fully functional penis and this mad thread while I go in search of a sane discussion .