I’d said in an earlier post that 1.6% of the North American population are philosophically illiterate. (http://thesauros-store.blogspot.com/2010/04/16-solution_12.html) This was demonstrated again in my last go-round with them.
There is a sub-group of this 1.6% who say, out of complete and total ignorance, that the universe came into being ex nihilo - out of literally nothing. These people have absolutely no clue as to what they’re admitting. They just blissfully repeat,
Matter didn’t exist > Matter did exist > Matter caused it to happen. It's magic!
Or they just say that what they mean by matter not existing is that at one time in the past matter was really, really, really small. In the minds of these Brights, that’s the same as “nothing.”
Another sub-group of this 1.6% say that matter / energy have existed forever and ever and ever, back and back on into eternity. These people are describing not only a material infinite, they’re describing an infinite regress of cause. They fundamentally believe in both.
Here’s the curious thing about this last group. These people will never admit that they are philosophically committed to the material infinite. They twist and turn and perform all kinds of mental and linguistic contortions to avoid saying they believe that matter is eternal. But that is exactly what they’re saying.
What’s the problem?
We know from both science and philosophy that matter cannot be past eternal.
We know from both science and philosophy that there cannot be an infinite regress of cause.
This group of atheists believe either that
(a) matter / energy has lain dormant from the eternal past until roughly 14 billion years ago when it exploded for no known reason (It's magic!) into what we now call the universe, or
(b) matter / energy have exchanged forms to this universe from the previous universe from the previous universe, from the previous universe etc. etc. on into the eternal past.
We know and they know that this is impossible.
It's imaginary.
Yet they continue to cling to this belief. Every one of their Origin Of The Universe Mythologies are nothing but an attempt to avoid singular creation ex nihilo.
Atheists will tell you, on the one hand, that they don’t like imaginary things. On the other hand they hold to the profoundly imaginary eternal material past and the imaginary infinite regress of cause.
The people in this population must, at all cost maintain their implausible position or their faith system will come crashing down.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There is a sub-group of this 1.6% who say, out of complete and total ignorance, that the universe came into being ex nihilo - out of literally nothing.
ReplyDeletelol! No, you're the one who says that!
God created the universe out of nothing, right?
These people have absolutely no clue as to what they’re admitting. They just blissfully repeat,
Matter didn’t exist > Matter did exist > Matter caused it to happen.
No no and no! Again, you're the one who says that everything that we know of, everything that we describe as being natural, had to be created, out of nothing, by something supernatural. You believe that. I don't.
I don't believe the opposite either, that there has to be a natural cause to everything; I just don't know... I have no reason to believe that there was nothing, and then BAM there was everything in a 0-second petiod, i.e. infinitely fast. That does not make any sense.
Or they just say that what they mean by matter not existing is that at one time in the past matter was really, really, really small. In the minds of these Brights, that’s the same as “nothing.”
Lol! Again, you pretend that everything put together equals nothing. That's what YOU pretend, not what I believe.
Another sub-group of this 1.6% say that matter / energy have existed forever and ever and ever, back and back on into eternity. These people are describing not only a material infinite, they’re describing an infinite regress of cause. They fundamentally believe in both.
No, lol, same thing again, I don't believe in either of what you write.
Material infinite is a conceptual representation, it's imaginary, not real.
An infinite regress of cause is a conceptual representation, it's imaginary, not real.
Remember that you're the one who believe that he knows what caused the universe to be the way we see it. Science makes no such claims
Here’s the curious thing about this last group. These people will never admit that they are philosophically committed to the material infinite. They twist and turn and perform all kinds of mental and linguistic contortions to avoid saying they believe that matter is eternal. But that is exactly what they’re saying.
Well I guess I just covered that didn't I?
What’s the problem?
We know from both science and philosophy that matter cannot be past eternal.
We know from both science and philosophy that there cannot be an infinite regress of cause.
Yeah!!
Atheists believe
ReplyDeleteOh oh, strawman alert!!
either that
(a) matter / energy has lain dormant from the eternal past until roughly 14 billion years ago when it exploded for no known reason into what we now call the universe, or
That's a good description yes because it uses the work "eternal" which automatically refers to an imaginary construct. Because it's imaginary, I don't believe it to be real, i.e. I don't believe this to be an accurate description of what has to be true. I cannot believe that.
(b) matter / energy have exchanged forms to this universe from the previous universe from the previous universe, from the previous universe etc. etc. on into the eternal past.
Using eternal again, good.
We know and they know that this is impossible.
It's imaginary.
Yeah again!!!
Yet they continue to cling to this belief.
Wait, what!? A belief in imaginary things being real? I know at least one person who does that, and he does not describe himself as an atheist...
Every one of their Origin Of The Universe Mythologies are nothing but an attempt to avoid singular creation ex nihilo.
No! creation ex nihilo is a possibility, just like eternal energy/matter, because both imply imaginary concepts. Creation ex nihilo implies a timeless creation, in 0 time, that's a singularity, it's imaginary. Same as above again...
Atheists will tell you, on the one hand, that they don’t like imaginary things.
I love imaginary things, lol, what's wrong with them?
Unlike you though, I consider all imaginary things to be... imaginary. I make no exceptions.
On the other hand they hold to the profoundly imaginary eternal material past and the imaginary infinite regress of cause.
Nope. Both imaginary. Both not real.
The people in this population must, at all cost maintain their implausible position or their faith system will come crashing down.
Well I guess that could be true if there were a faith system to make crumble... I don't have any.
Oh that's funny, I had copy/pasted your post a few minutes ago and then came back to it, but it changed in the meantime, you added extra words there:
ReplyDeleteMatter didn’t exist > Matter did exist > Matter caused it to happen. It's magic!
Why did you add It's magic? So that it is even more obvious that this is what YOU believe?
Remember, you're the one who believes that something can come out of nothing by the help of an imaginary entity...
Why is the entity imaginary again? oh ya, because it's described with terms describing imaginary things only... it's eternal, timeless...
And Hugo don't forget, it's also immaterial. Which just means "nothing" ,"no matter". You cannot define terms and mechanics out of philisophical concepts like the immaterial and expect them to carry the weight of being the entire reason that the universe exists, mak. All your doing by saying that is reinforcing your belief that something came out of nothing, the very thing you criticize atheists over. Not that Hugo didn't already basically mention that, but he covered a lot right now and I gotta say something. But strangely enough you also make the claim that infinity can exist. Sure you'll say, it's okay, it's the immaterial infinite. But you never explain how you are able to make that claim. You need to come to terms with the fact that you, as well as anybody else, cannot make claims on what the immaterial "does" let alone know what immaterial even means being a material entity in custody of of a material container.
ReplyDeleteThis is the same mentality that thinks he can tell us what it's like "after death". Death has nothing to do with the sensory perception of conciousness, you therefore cannot understand death, under it's own terms, it's incompatible. The same applies for immaterial.
I actually thought this conversation had ended, I'm suprises.
If mak can give me a scientific answer to the following question i'll leave him alone forever; ...
ReplyDeleteYou say god is immaterial. You also say god is a spirit. Explain to me how a spirit is immaterial. ... For 500 points and my exile. Bonus points for explaining how angels commute between the immaterial and material as they relay gods messages.
YOU, Rod, are the one that believes in MAGIC.
ReplyDelete