03 Oct '07 17:16>
Originally posted by NemesioAs I said, clearly define 'need,'
As I said, clearly define 'need,' and then we can show how either God doesn't fit into the picture, or
that there are many needs that go unfulfilled.
Nemesio
That which is cumpulsory for man's existence, a drive either of his pyshce or his body's physical pain. Already used are the drives for food, liquid and sex, so I don't know that using them again will further flesh the concept out.
...and then we can show how either God doesn't fit into the picture...
Actually, the question is about why God is in the picture, so the presumption is premature.
... that there are many needs that go unfulfilled.
To be sure, once we fuzzy-up the borders and start calling any and all whims of the psyche needs (sans the undergirding principles and/or ultimate drives), we should be able to work backwards and make all of them disappear. But that's not really the point, is it?
Further, unfulfilled or not, just the fact that needs exist at least suggests their possible fulfillment. In looking at the whole of man's accepted needs finding their fulfillment in things that actually exist, that suggestion smells an awful lot like a demand.
In a universe bound by laws, to not have an actual outside fulfillment of the surety of God's existence would be akin to bracketing an 'i' or a 'b' when doing so yields nothing... or, worse, bracketing a '/i' or a '/b' when doing so has no meaning whatsoever.