Why Atheists Will Never Find Proof of God And Why Information Sciences Did It

Actually, Is it possible to find the real proof of God?

Yes, if you really want to. If Truth – the truth of existence of God- is not your goal, no one can ever convince you to even consider a point of view that opposes what you believe to be correct.

I like to browse through “YouTube” looking for fresh ideas and insights. As religious and atheistic beliefs are related to my work, I sometimes enjoy watching videos of intellectual battles between atheists and believers.

I find my personal stance on these “debates” is that I am not on the side of believers, because often their position is backed up only by their belief in the sacredness of their religious scripts and authority of specific religious prophets.

But I don’t support the atheists either. They platform themselves on words “science” and “objectivity,” but if we look closer at how they approach the idea of God, we can see that they are quite irrational too, and not less than their opponents.

In my previous article I mentioned that the first common mistake atheists make is confusing “God” as an independent mysterious entity with religious interpretations of Him.

The second issue is that people naturally become irrational when they approach a problem without any intention to find the truth. If they have preconceived notions of their rightness, their arguments inevitably lose objectivity as in this case, when atheists do not accept even an idea of a possible proof of God.

Here is a typical example of a lame generalization used by atheists that I found in an atheistic video series:

“How can we prove or disprove God, if people say they cannot examine or test or have anything to do with God? How can we know what we are looking for?”

Let’s look closer at what is actually said and how “unbiased” the real approach is of those who claim to represent scientific objectivity.

First of all, what kind of “people” say that we “cannot examine or have anything to do with God”?

Probably only those who have never had any experience of either examining God or “doing” something with God.

Who are those people?

Usually atheists.

I personally, have examined, tested and experienced God, as many others do, who come to God voluntarily and consciously at the age when we are able to make independent and responsible decisions of our own.

Yes, here we talk about personal experiences that cannot be objectively measured with scientific devices, but which nevertheless are absolutely true for a system of individual perception for an individual person. Multicultural, spiritual literature is a compilation and recording of hundreds of thousands of spiritual experiences that people have shared with the world. What is that but a huge amount of empirical data about “doing something” with God?

I agree that personal experiences are not objective “proof of God,” however, to be perfectly scientifically honest; we cannot ignore these phenomena that have been experienced and recorded by hundreds of thousands of people for thousands of years. We also cannot ignore the phenomena of miracles, which are also quite well documented, especially during the 20th century.

True scientists, like Einstein, who look for Truth, never slam the door before the face of a new higher mystery that is waiting to be explored. Rather than jump to the conclusion that ‘this is not possible,’ they see the mystery as the peak of a new unconquerable mountain, which is hiding in the sky above the clouds just waiting for those who dare climb it.

Does it make sense to approach an inexplicable phenomenon with a ready-made attitude of rejection of the possibility to reveal the mystery of it? I don’t think so as it is simply not productive.

True scientists and mountain-climbers have one thing in common: until they have courage and an open mind to believe that it’s possible to get to the peak where no one has ever been before, they don’t conquer the Everest or make mind-blowing scientific discoveries.

On another hand, the attitude of rejection makes sense, too: It is comfortable as it saves us from the possible embarrassment of admitting that at this moment we are incapable of explaining something.

This might be the reason why for many atheists the logic, functionality and precision of nature has never been enough proof of God as the ultimate Creator, as well as, tons of testimonies of those who have had their own personal spiritual experiences.

The third observation relates to how atheists use the word “science” when they attack religious irrationality.

Before opposing science to God, let’s see what science actually is. According to Aristotle, “science refers to the body of reliable knowledge itself, of the type that can be logically and rationally explained.” According to another definition, science is “any body of knowledge organized in a systematic manner.”

Nobody will argue that the modern science has a very broad spectrum of “organized and logically explained knowledge,” which includes: formal sciences, natural sciences, social sciences, behavioral sciences, political sciences, informational sciences, etc.

But here is the question: What kind of “science” do atheists use to justify their views?

As I noticed, the majority of atheists love to confront bible-proponents with their own “scientific trinity” of cosmology, microbiology and physics. Their argument is nearly always the same: there is no God as “science” could not discover its physical particle yet.

Come on, if all these debates are more than just entertainment, let’s have a bit more common sense: How would it be possible to come to any relevant proof of God if we narrow modern science and its methodology to physical and natural sciences like physics, cosmology or microbiology, and exclude the other knowledge that equally coexists with these disciplines, for instance, formal and information sciences?

Are they less important?

Probably not, as formal sciences are rooted in Logic and provide logic as the ultimate instrument of exploring the Truth in any kind of other scientific discipline.

How rational would it be to apply methodology of physics or microbiology to cognitive or politic sciences? Sure, it’s nonsense.

If there is no such thing as a particle of philosophy or linguistics, does it mean that they don’t exist?

It’s a well-known fact that we live in a dual world of tangible materialistic outer reality and intangible reality of thoughts, feelings, logic and information. So, let’s leave the study our brain’s cells, neurons and receptors to microbiology, but let’s not confuse the brain with the mind as they are different things; and methods of physical sciences with all microscopes and telescopes are useless when dealing with the mysteries of the mind, and it’s an easy extension to include the mysteries of the soul and God.

It’s like using knives to eat soup and spoons to cut steaks.

By the 21st century science has accumulated enough instruments to successfully deal with any kind of knowledge or problem. Why not apply methods of system and information sciences to the phenomenon of God?

In the sense of understanding the essence of God and proof of God, system-informational approach is far more productive than anything else, as it offers the understanding of God as the ultimate and neutral informational system.

Any proof, including “proof of God” starts with unbiased observation and the collection of data. Then we organize this data using a system approach and mathematical logic. As any proof requires a system, we have to arrange all existing information into the totality of one hierarchical system before we can finally see what is what.

The system-informational approach leads us to an astonishing conclusion that in the world of information and systems in which we live, each system is formed by its own logic, which organizes the elements of the system in a perfect order with the purpose to serve the needs of the creator of that system.

As our Universe is a totality of magnificent hierarchy of endless systems, the God as the Creator of this divine system totality or System Matrix, must be not less than the Absolute Logic or the Absolute Law of Unity, which unites all possible elements of the universe in a perfect order.

Is it there any science-based framework other than system-informational approach that would allow us to conceptualize all existing information into one harmonious totality? No.

Is there any other neutral non-religious way to approach the ideas of God and Truth besides system and information sciences? Unlikely.

Maybe it’s time for those who really care for truth to re-consider scientific approaches to the idea of God and move from the physical sciences to a system-informational methods when dealing with non-materialistic reality.

Humankind has enough knowledge and information to finally realize that the proof of God existence is possible and quite simple.

Elena Iam is an author of a new original concept “System Outlook” that unit

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Comments Off on Why Atheists Will Never Find Proof of God And Why Information Sciences Did It

Tourette’s Syndrome and ADHD-Juvenile Coping Strategies

My views concerning TS and ADHD come entirely from my own experiences. I am not in the medical or mental health fields. I did not take medications as a kid, and I have no expertise on the subject and thus have no view on the topic one way or the other. If your child’s mental health practitioner feels as though medications will benefit your child, then by all means proceed in that light if both he or she and yourself feel as though it is best for your youngster.

My views are predicated upon what I think would have helped myself as a child, as my young character is described within my story. In no way am I asserting that any “one size fits all” solution will benefit every child. On the other hand, one lesson I have learned from life with absolute certainty is that one should never think of one’s self as being entirely unique. Whatever problems one might have, it is a certain bet that someone, somewhere is suffering the same.

In the wake of reported tragic cases of youngsters taking their own lives after having experienced profound bullying at school, individuals affected have taken up what might be termed the “anti-bullying” cause. Their approach to this problem has been to attempt to change the school environment by holding schools accountable to maintain a safe atmosphere for kids to learn. They have been successful in educating school administrators and teachers and in passing anti-bullying legislation on a state level. Some give lectures at schools in an attempt to educate students as well.

I commend such individuals. It must be acknowledged that some kids have problems that make them potential victims of bullies that they cannot adjust, such as aspects of their physical appearances or intellectual abilities. It is therefore incumbent upon schools to be as vigilant as possible in protecting such kids.

Nevertheless, I believe that in regard to many other kids, such as the one in my story, this is only half the equation in solving the problem. A child can never be completely sheltered from a harsh world with harsh individuals inhabiting it. So, whenever possible, teaching coping and social skills should be the other half of the equation in ultimately eliminating the problem.

Such an approach should not be seen as “blaming the victim.” The more a child learns to act in a socially graceful manner, the better his or her chances will be for success and happiness throughout life. The formative years of childhood are all-important in deciding a person’s destiny and lot in life.

My earliest memories begin at around the age of four and one-half. Talking with others, I think this is a fairly typical point when the human mind develops to the degree that it is capable of forming long-term memories.

This is the point where I believe a child begins to function in more than a strictly reactive manner. The child becomes fully self-aware and begins to think in the true sense of the word. My definition of thinking is: The ability to predict the future from past experience in intellectualized terms.

In a sense, we might say that this is the point when a human begins life as an individual. This is when the child becomes fully aware of the concepts of “self” and “not-self” and learns to make distinctions between the two. This is when the concept of competition with others first becomes apparent within a person.

No child sits down one day at around that age and reflects to himself or herself: “Well, I’m just beginning life now. I think I shall be a nervous, high-strung, impulsive, obsessive-compulsive person;” any more than another decides: “I’m going to be a calm, cool and collected and self-confident person.” A child simply begins to act in accordance with his or her genetic nature. Children have very limited senses of self-analytic abilities and do not ask themselves, “Why am I acting this or that way?”

Lambasting a child for simply acting in accordance with his or her nature would make as much sense as buying a cat and then complaining when it doesn’t bark. We all have certain proclivities towards certain traits.

There is a link between Tourette’s Syndrome and OCD, and it is my belief that TS should be classified as an emotional disorder within the OCD grouping of disorders. As exampled on the hilarious television comedy *Monk*, people with obsessive-compulsive traits tend to be very bright. It is my belief that they process external stimuli more rapidly and efficiently than does the average individual. They also arrive at different conclusions than do others; rapidly dismissing stimuli that do not interest them; then reverting to the chronic self-reflection which is the hallmark of the condition.

It is my theory that the root cause of all emotional disorders within OC pathologies is what I term to be “acute self-awareness.”

Some people have much better vision acuity when it comes to color than does the average person, and such individuals often make great artists. For those of us with more average color vision acuity, it never occurs to us that those with a superior sense see the world more vividly than we can. Although I, of course, have had no experience with being anyone other than myself-and therefore can never test the theory-, it is my belief that most people have somewhat less of a sense of “self” than do people with OC emotional disorders and are better able to focus their attention away from themselves and onto outside stimuli. Being less self-conscious, they are more poised.

The result of this is that individuals with OC disorders, because of their greater sense of self-awareness (or self-consciousness), develop defense mechanisms to protect that acute sense of self not common to people with a more normal sense of self. Protecting self becomes paramount to the point of becoming counterproductive.

Thus, those with OCD, for example, develop elaborate, seemingly bizarre rituals akin to superstition in the belief that if this or that seemingly mundane task is not constantly attended to, and performed with a precise protocol, then some terrible threat to the self will surely emerge as a result. Through learned behavior by repetition, the condition can persist to the point of becoming debilitating.

For those with TS, I believe the analogous defense mechanism is tics. The person will jerk his or her head, for example, in an effort to focus consciousness away from one’s self and onto the outside stimulus he or she is expected to observe. Verbal tics are analogous to a karate expert’s practice of yelling while breaking a board with his or her bare hand, as both an effort to increase concentration and avert attention away from physical pain. Through repetition, these aberrant practices become virtually involuntary.

People born with a greater sense of “self-awareness” have a correspondingly greater sense of trying to defend themselves, seeing threats, real or imagined, sooner than others. Thus, their naturally nervous or “high-strung” dispositions. Anxiety is their constant companion. This often provokes stress which aggravates the condition, resulting in a vicious cycle.

As with any other condition, the sooner it is recognized, diagnosed and treated the better the eventual outcome will be. Much of the advice I would have given myself as a kid is reflected within my story. What kids like these need most is structure in their lives and to learn self-discipline, patience and increased concentration.

Because these kids tend to be bright-even in spite of often mediocre school performances due to ADD-, they are often very defensive when it comes to criticism. (“Had anyone else spoken to twelve-year old Bobby Schultz like this, the boy would have reacted defensively from pride and dismissed the advice out of hand. Others had made similar comments in the past.”) A parent must therefore appeal to the child’s intellect and gradually lead him or her in the direction of self-realization and, hopefully, self-improvement practices.

Basically, any activity that will tend to increase a youngster’s poise and self-confidence will be extremely beneficial, along with a parent’s gentle but firm persuasion that he or she sticks to it. Youngsters like this tend to gravitate towards those relatively few activities which can successfully command their attention away from themselves. In my day, it was reading escapist fare like *The Hardy Boys* and then science fiction. Today, I would imagine it is video games. Excessive engaging in such pastimes is, in my opinion, a form of “self-medicating” and is detrimental to the child’s well being.

Two activities I would suggest-if possible-are martial arts and acting lessons; especially from a teacher who holds to the “method acting” technique where one is taught to “become” the character one is playing. By doing such, the child might learn to recognize different character types and thus might also learn to better realize his or her own nature and how others see him or her.

Martial arts lessons, such as karate classes, are excellent vehicles to improve a child’s concentration and self-confidence, as well as his or her physical stamina. It also has obvious side benefits when it comes to dealing with bullies, especially for boys.

Suggesting acting lessons might seem somewhat less practical due to financial or logistical considerations. But if at all possible, I believe they would be extremely beneficial in teaching a child social skills and poise. As I said, the method acting technique in particular, teaching an acting student to “become” his or her character while playing the part, will help the child develop an excellent intuitive and empirical perspective regarding the different natures people have and will help him or her learn more about the child’s own. Such an insight is invaluable. By learning to act the part of another-perhaps a character with far more self-confidence than the child exhibits by nature-he or she might learn to try to incorporate within himself or herself such positive traits. By practice and repetition, such a transition might become virtually “second nature” to the youngster.

The mere fact of performing before others will do wonders for a child’s self-confidence, poise and self-esteem. I know of at least one professional actor afflicted with Tourette’s Syndrome. He has appeared on primetime network television programs; thus, yet another possible side-benefit. Your youngster might one day become very successful as an actor and repay the costs of such lessons many times over!

The major point to bear in mind is that such youngsters must learn to control their minds and bodies rather than allowing them to control and define them. As it is oft said, knowledge is power. By learning on an intellectual level to understand their inherent natures, children can be forewarned and thus forearmed and will be better able to face life on successful terms. As stated within my story, breathing exercises and a daily period of silent meditation, gradually increasing the time, will be extremely beneficial.

If I could choose one passage from my story that I consider the most important, it would be: “He told the boy that he simply had to learn to be patient and do things in their proper place and time and to do so with care. He explained that the youth had to learn to have confidence in the future and to stop acting like now was the only time he would ever have to play or do something else he enjoyed.”

In the case of all people who suffer from what I consider to be “acute self-awareness,” which is often accompanied by acute anxiety, there is always an underlying, often subconscious and unspoken fear that tomorrow will indeed never come. Thus, the present moment takes on undue importance in the case of such youngsters. Teaching a child to learn to cultivate the virtue of patience is paramount to the child’s chances of success throughout life. A parent must insist on this and not give in to the child’s demands for immediate gratification when such is not appropriate. One will not benefit his or her child if a parent folds.

Once again, appeal to the child’s intellect and explain your reasoning. Listen to the child’s almost certain rebuttals with patience yourself, but stand firm in your reasoning with him or her.

A parent must resist the temptation to baby such kids. A parent must use his or her wisdom of years to gently, but firmly guide a youngster into the path of right direction and insist that he or she sticks with these activities or others that might prove beneficial to the child’s entire life.

As Gary Moore, the late television personality, once put it: “Deep in his heart, no child wants a forty-year old friend.”

Donald Schneider is the author of “Pride’s Prison,” a short story conce

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on Tourette’s Syndrome and ADHD-Juvenile Coping Strategies