The Instigator
CrazyPerson
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
ConservativePolitico
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Humans can achieve a Godly state.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
ConservativePolitico
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,661 times Debate No: 22874
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (6)

 

CrazyPerson

Pro

I propose that humans can achieve a god-like state of mind. A godhead, or divine experience. Humans have the ability to be all-knowing and supernal.
ConservativePolitico

Con

I accept.

Make your case.

2000 characters or less ... Oh boy.

Go!
Debate Round No. 1
CrazyPerson

Pro

Humans can achieve a god like state as depicted by the definition of all-knowing or supernal state of being, if not permanently then temporarily. This, to me, is immediately relevant in two major cases which i'll briefly discuss:

1.) The New Testament

I believe that we all can recognize that, as the story has it, Jesus Christ himself was indeed a human. Jesus was presented with a variety of archetypical human experiences including birth, pain, injury, suffering, and death. Jesus was a facilitator of a certain doctrine amongst his disciples. The bible makes it clear that Jesus was divine, yet human. Jesus was said to have walked the Earth amongst many people and throughout his missions displayed great acts of divine knowledge, such as healing the blind, parting the red sea, turning water into wine, predicting future acts of his disciples, and so on.

2.) The Buddha

Gautama Buddha was a spiritual teacher from India who essentially founded the study of Buddhism. He facilitated a series of paths that one could follow to attain a human state of 'enlightenment,' which is synonymous to the idea of the godhead or divine state. "The Four Noble Truths:" claiming that suffering is a human trait; that the origin of suffering is desire; that suffering can be ended through following the Noble Eightfold Path. From wiki - "Traditional biographies of Gautama generally include numerous miracles, omens, and supernatural events." The Mahāvastu depicts Gautama as one with supernatural abilities as he displays no need for sleep, food, medicine, or bathing, omniscience, and the ability to "suppress karma" or essentially alter fate. Gautama recognized meditation to be the main way to quiet the mind to prepare it to enter the world of the divine. Gautama, although human, has been widely accepted as a man of divinity, or one that achieves godly states.

Though the processes by which one might attain such states are questionable, the evidence is available that such a claim is valid.
ConservativePolitico

Con

1) The New Testament

The New Testament can be considered as a story, a myth or legend if you will. Since the Bible and the New Testament aren't accepted as fact by the scientific communities in the world it cannot be used to prove that humans have achieved a godly state. If you can use the New Testament as basis for this argument then one could also use Hercules and other half gods from Greek mythology.

Also, if we look at the original resolution set up in the First Round we see this:

Humans have the ability to be all-knowing and supernal. [sic]

To fufil the debate we must show that humans can be all-knowing AND super natural and Jesus wasn't all-knowing.

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." - Matthew 24:36

So while there is loose, non scientific, evidence that Jesus could have been supernatural - using the same evidence we know that he was not all-knowing.

2) The Buddha

First off, enlightenment does not equal supernatural. Being enlightened is far from being supernatural. Also, just because these Paths are "synonymous" with a divine state does not mean they include a divine state. The Buddha may have created a way to enlighten human kind but that does not make him divine. Indeed, the stories of the Buddha again can be classified as myth or legend and cannot be used to definitively say that man achieved godhood or a divine state. Again, the Buddha is just the character in a legend much like King Arthur was. The Buddha was real but his exploits have been exaggerated over time.

Also, my opponent has failed to fulfil his own debate parameters by failing to show how either Jesus or the Buddha are both supernatural and all-knowing. We have proof that Jesus was no all-knowing and the exploits of both these men can be and have been classified by myth or legend and are not accepted by the world at large as truth.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
CrazyPerson

Pro

Assuming we both understand supernal to be supernatural:
1.) The New Testament

--Humans have the ability to be all-knowing and supernal. [sic]--

Let's break this down. I am arguing the 'ability' to be able to manifest these states at least temporarily, if not at the same time then separately. My opponent has already expressed his acceptation of the fact that Jesus was in fact supernal, as we both recognize his connection to the Father.

--To (fulfill) the debate we must show that humans can be all-knowing AND super natural and Jesus wasn't all-knowing. [sic]--

I will add that Jesus has the ability to be all-knowing in that he is directly a part of or connected to the Father, the all-knowing source. Whether he was all-knowing or not is not to say the ability was nonexistent.

Many have made the connection between the christianized Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be directly comparable with the buddhist Mind, Body, and Soul. Both paths recognize the inherent human connection with the Spirit, or the Soul - meaning the source of all possible knowledge.

One cannot deny the possibility of infinite knowledge, as the mind is already infinite.

2.) The Buddha

'Supernatural' means an event or manifestation beyond scientific analysis. The term exists to explain events beyond logical analysis. There are many, many cases of human experiences generally classified as 'strange experiences' that are unexplainable, thus classified as supernatural.

'All-knowing' is synonymous to the term 'omniscience' -defined as the capacity to know everything infinitely. In Latin, omnis means "all" and sciens means "knowing".

According to Therevaada tradition, the Buddha in omniscient in the sense that all knowable things are 'potentially' accessible to him. This expresses the ability to become all-knowing.

As far as science is concerned, the brain can never reach a state of fullness, and is open to an infinite ideas, thus the fact that any human has the ability to become all-knowing.
ConservativePolitico

Con

1) The New Testament

While Jesus may have been part of the Father he was not the Father. The Trinity is 3 in 1, not 1 in 3. While they are connected they are not the same and therefore cannot be given the same characteristics. Jesus was the Word of God but the Word doesn't mean that He possesses the knowledge behind the words. While you claim Jesus has the "ability" to become all-knowing, evidence says that he was NOT all-knowing and in fact had things hidden from him by the Father (who is not human) preventing him from being all-knowing.

Unfortunately the mind is not infinite. People cannot remember their early childhood, they can only focus on 7 things at once, we are forgetful and I'm sure you cannot remember what you ate a year ago today. Don't worry, no one can because the mind is not infinite but finite like everything in nature. The human mind will pass away when a person dies leaving it as a finite thing. Since people only live 100 years tops they only have the opportunity to acquire knowledge in an 100 year span.
All the knowledge in the world would take more than 100 years to acquire.

"Every hour, enough information is consumed by Internet traffic to fill 7 million DVDs

Read more: http://techland.time.com...;

There's more information on the Internet in a single hour than a person can acquire in a lifetime.

2) The Buddha

The same argument can be applied to the Buddha. Since Buddha was no more than a man, he did not have the potential to acquire all knowledge because that is impossible a) by the nature of the brain and mind and b) by the vast amounts of knowledge available to any person at anytime.

Thus it is impossible for a person to become all-knowing and therefore the resolution cannot be met.

"Humans have the ability to be all-knowing and supernal." - False
Debate Round No. 3
CrazyPerson

Pro

1.) The mind is infinite:

To think that the mind is finite, is like choosing to live in jail. Humans have the ability to produce any thought possible. The human mind knows about every single thing that exists in this life. Knowledge is a specific trait to humans, therefore all knowledge can be attributed the the human mind. When one looks into the stars, out at the universe - these labels like 'stars' and 'universe' have no real meaning, these labels are just an object of communication between ourselves and other humans. We see, feel, and experience everything that there is in life, and that IS all. We understand when staring into the night sky that there is no end to the universe, there is no end to the mind. There exists no knowledge outside of the human mind, thus the human mind is all-knowing. It is not a matter of 'becoming' all-knowing, but realizing the inherent ability that already exists within the mind.

2.) A supernatural state:

Again, as far as all evidence points, a supernatural event can only occur within the human mind. There exists nothing supernatural outside of the human mind, thus all claims of 'supernatural' events taking place did so in the mind. The term itself only comes from the experiences that define it. How would it be possible for any other being that we are aware of, to achieve and experience a supernatural state of mind? The name in itself is misleading - 'supernatural' just refers to an experience that is unexplainable by analytical science. Super, meaning beyond - and natural, meaning 'of nature'. Nature is entirely physical up until the mind, then it becomes beyond nature, or supernatural. We know plenty of experience reports of supernatural states of mind and do not refuse to acknowledge the existence of the human supernatural experience. The human mind is supernatural.

Humans are all knowing and supernatural, therefore -
Humans do indeed have the ability to be all knowing and supernatural.
ConservativePolitico

Con

The Mind Is Infinite

Your assumption is based soley on the universe we can percieve with our 5 senses. The human mind does live in the jail and the bars are our senses. We cannot percieve anything outside of sight, feeling, smell, hearing or taste. There could be universes out there that aren't perceptable to our five senses that we will NEVER know about because of our senses. It it naive to think that we are all-knowing because we cannot know what lies outside of our realm, our universe and our senses and there will never be a way for us to know that. Even if we discover the entirety of our universe we will never know if there is something that lies beyond it due to our senses. There does exist knowledge outside of humans. If humanity didn't exist the universe would endure on with infinite amounts of things to know and learn. In fact there might even be other intelligent life out there that we don't know about harvesting their own knowledge so your argument really holds no water.

A Supernatural State

The human mind occurs naturally in nature therefore it is silly to think that it is beyond nature as the word supernatural implies. The mind is a series of tissues that carry electrical signals which when patterned correctly can be manipulated into thoughts and actions. This is explainable. This is natural. All minds work like this. To say that no other animals have minds like ours is silly to think. Do dolphins not have families? Don't ducks mate for life? These are things that occur in nature and therefore cannot be considered supernatural.

I have successfully refuted all of your arguments and have proved that:

a) there are no 100% belieable instances of man becoming supernal
b) the human mind is finite and limited by natural means
c) knowledge does not hinge upon humanity alone and therefore isn't contained soley in humans
d) humans cannot be all knowing
e) humans cannot become supernatural or supernal

Thank you. Welcome to DDO.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 5 years ago
ConservativePolitico
A great debate! Fresh and interesting from start to finish!
Posted by ConservativePolitico 5 years ago
ConservativePolitico
I am a Christian but, for the sake of debate, I will use worldly facts.
Posted by Ahmed.M 5 years ago
Ahmed.M
aren't you a christian, conservativepolitico? Why would you use clear proof from the bible that Jesus is not God where as you're suppose to defend that he is God? What do you believe about Jesus, that he was a prophet only?
Posted by CrazyPerson 5 years ago
CrazyPerson
Feel free to base your argument on my misuse of the term but I thought that supernal meant supernatural.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 5 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Whoops, my computer corrected supernal into supernatural and I didn't realize it.

Sorry about that. I don't think it distracted from the meaning of my arguments but I'll be more careful next time.
Posted by CrazyPerson 5 years ago
CrazyPerson
Thaddeus, you're bringing down the House of Crazy one post at a time. I sneer at you.
Posted by Thaddeus 5 years ago
Thaddeus
<------- Evidence riiiiiiiiight here. Ladies. One at a time.
Posted by tarkovsky 5 years ago
tarkovsky
I never knew "supernal" meant "supernatural". I always thought of either heavenly bodies or stuff or something of inimitable quality.
Posted by CrazyPerson 5 years ago
CrazyPerson
Ouch, good one.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 5 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Nice post. I wasn't expecting something like this. I look forward to refuting your arguments.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Gileandos 5 years ago
Gileandos
CrazyPersonConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con clearly established the negation of the resolution and wins the arguments point.
Vote Placed by frozen_eclipse 5 years ago
frozen_eclipse
CrazyPersonConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: con wins
Vote Placed by GenesisCreation 5 years ago
GenesisCreation
CrazyPersonConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Even if we have faith in the Bible, at no point can we claim to have access to a state of deity. Christ is the only human who is also God and this was done through a miracle of divine will. Human beings are not coequal with Christ. Con established and carried his position without much difficulty (although I can't say that I agree with everything Con established). Neat debate topic. I may revisit this topic at some point myself.
Vote Placed by jwesbruce 5 years ago
jwesbruce
CrazyPersonConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were alot more agreeable
Vote Placed by CalvinAndHobbes 5 years ago
CalvinAndHobbes
CrazyPersonConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The first few rounds did not really address the claim that humans can achieve a godly state, but Con had a very impressive closing argument.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
CrazyPersonConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: there is a hell of a difference between being supernal and supernatural, and towards the end of the debate the con emerged with more convincing arguments. Arguments to the con but I will give conduct to the pro since ive never seen such a great "1st" debate by someone before. Well done