tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post1676819762272120813..comments2024-01-29T01:22:14.621-08:00Comments on Makarios: Yet Another QM ArgumentThesauroshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13305052511095551483noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-29280795192501217902009-10-04T23:47:03.685-07:002009-10-04T23:47:03.685-07:00It doesn't matter. None of your post matters....It doesn't matter. None of your post matters.<br /><br />I'm an atheist. I don't care how it all started. You can go on and on about how it may have taken something god-like to create existence, but you have nothing after that that comes even remotely closed to convincing me that the particular god you've chosen out of thousands is the right one.<br /><br />So it becomes a case of, I don't know, and when it all comes down to it, Pascal's Wager is just one way for me to potentially make one invisible being happy while potentially pissing off thousands of other invisible beings. Rather than waste my life trying to divine which invisible being to represent to other people on an offensive blog, I'll just try to get by in life and help people when I can.<br /><br />And you can keep writing about this monolithic "atheist" cabal you've imagined in your head. What's humorous to me though is how many secular types you've hooked in as voyeurs to your masturbatory blog posts. You keep fantasizing and we'll keep watching.Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09166838174791926206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-13819303892746217042009-10-04T19:16:47.233-07:002009-10-04T19:16:47.233-07:00Not if they thought about it logically.
If they tr...Not if they thought about it logically.<br />If they tried to shoehorn it into their religion, perhaps.<br /><br />"and began to personalise this Cause."<br /><br />Which you did for seemingly no reason.<br /><br />The path you took went along the lines of "the cause" must be personal because it must exist before matter and the laws of physics.<br /><br />I quote you:<br /><i>If the cause existed prior to matter nor the laws of physics (i.e., the laws that science has observed and identified), then the cause can't be mateial, natural or scientific.<br />Therefore the Cause of the beginning of the universe is not scientific but Personal</i>.<br /><br />That does not follow.Gorth Satanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03778005789604262673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-17543139948356826742009-10-04T19:14:41.183-07:002009-10-04T19:14:41.183-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Gorth Satanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03778005789604262673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-19335513553832150382009-10-04T18:04:22.970-07:002009-10-04T18:04:22.970-07:00Okay. Then this "God", beleived in, may ...Okay. Then this "God", beleived in, may be different for other people."<br /><br />Only if they move away from analyzing what characterise a cause that operated outside of time and matter etc. and began to personalise this Cause. Keep the focus of the definition narrow and I think most people would be forced to come up with something much like I described.Thesauroshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13305052511095551483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-53777544516755108382009-10-04T13:10:02.023-07:002009-10-04T13:10:02.023-07:00"If the cause is able to create time and ener...<b>"If the cause is able to create time and energy, space, matter and the laws of physics, then the Cause is immeasurably more powerful than the mathematically precise universe and its exquisitely Finely Tuned constants and quantities."</b><br /><br />Everything written after the word "then" is "non sequitur". The words "finely tuned" are an example of "petitio principii". (Sorry about using Latin but I assume you understand because Latin is widely understood and I don't know the English)<br /><br />"non sequitur" means the conclusion can be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because the conclusion does not follow from the premise.<br /><br /><b>"If the cause existed prior to matter nor the laws of physics (i.e., the laws that science has observed and identified), then the cause can't be mateial, natural or scientific.</b>"<br /><br />What? No. These laws are descriptions. If something happened, scientific laws can describe it. If there was a "before OUR universe's laws of physics" then maybe the description will be different. Current physics and cosmology allow for such a scenario.<br /><br /><b>"the Cause of the beginning of the universe is not scientific but Personal.</b>"<br /><br />Hang on. That's a huge unsubstantiated jump. Personal? We see impersonal processes creating everyday.<br /><br /><b>"The transcendent Cause of the universe is therefore on the order of a Mind.</b>"<br /><br />Another non sequitur.<br /><br /><b>"If the cause is able to bring this life supporing universe ito existence, then the Cause is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent.</b> "<br /><br />The BIGGEST non sequitur.<br /><br /><b>"That Cause, is what is normally described as God.</b>"<br /><br />Okay. Then this "God", beleived in, may be different for other people.<br /><br />If you wish to make a logical argument the conclusion must follow from the premise.Gorth Satanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03778005789604262673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-32953764120677462622009-10-04T13:07:38.581-07:002009-10-04T13:07:38.581-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Gorth Satanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03778005789604262673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-43339784879863836852009-10-04T12:32:23.158-07:002009-10-04T12:32:23.158-07:00It's just logic Gorth.
If the cause isn't...It's just logic Gorth. <br />If the cause isn't natural, then the cause is immaterial.<br /><br />If the cause exists outside of and prior to time, then the cause is timeless or eternal<br /><br />If the cause is able to create time and energy, space, matter and the laws of physics, then the Cause is immeasurably more powerful than the mathematically precise universe and its exquisitely Finely Tuned constants and quantities. <br /><br />If the cause existed prior to matter nor the laws of physics (i.e., the laws that science has observed and identified), then the cause can't be mateial, natural or scientific.<br /><br /><br />Therefore the Cause of the beginning of the universe is not scientific but Personal.<br /><br /><br />The transcendent Cause of the universe is therefore on the order of a Mind. <br /><br />If the cause is able to bring this life supporing universe ito existence, then the Cause is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. That Cause, is what is normally described as God.Thesauroshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13305052511095551483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764946987133813099.post-71674472925928865112009-10-03T14:18:53.940-07:002009-10-03T14:18:53.940-07:00Universe 6000 to 10000 years old or not?
"we...Universe 6000 to 10000 years old or not?<br /><br />"we wind up with a Greatest Conceivable Being"<br /><br />Isn't imagination fun?Gorth Satanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03778005789604262673noreply@blogger.com