The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Religion & Philosophy

Is belief in the supernatural an intelligent person’s game?

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · >>
GreatestIam2 On October 17, 2019




Ottawa, Canada
#76New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 16:55:07
@bob_the_fisherman Said

Well, plenty of people have enunciated a claim of that kind. They just make it all sciency to obfuscate.

But the idea that prior to the advent of the universe there was no space, time or matter is a widely held one. Paul Davies, Stephen Hawking... I'm pretty sure they both do. Unfortunately I live away from all my old books or I'd give a more comprehensive list. But the view is actually an amazingly standard one among those who adhere to the folly of a big bang precipitating a finite universe from nothing.

The only belief dumber than a creationist view of the origin of the universe is the Naturalistic view, tbh.


You deflect into a safe place where there is no end game.

You play where both religions and science have their gods of the gaps.

Better to chat on the immorality of your god than your fantasy of his being a worthy and moral god.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam2 On October 17, 2019




Ottawa, Canada
#77New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 16:59:06
@Erimitus Said

Nothing


Gravity, perhaps.

Regards
DL
GreatestIam2 On October 17, 2019




Ottawa, Canada
#78New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 17:06:30
@Erimitus Said

a believer, I suppose, must have some degree of intelligence.



Yes, but all intelligence is based on true knowledge and not on supernatural speculative nonsense.

All knowledge is subject to being either good or evil.

Knowledge with proofs and logic trails are superior to knowledge based on faith without facts.

The faith believers do have intelligence, which is the ability to mimic, but they are not good at original free thinking.

They are like the children in the princess Alice experiment.

Regards
DL
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#79New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:06:27
@GreatestIam2 Said

Better to chat on the immorality of your god


"Your god"? What "god" is that, precisely? I'm not sure the god you appear to hate while claiming not to believe in is a god I know much of. So, talk of this god you hate and I'll probably agree with you that it is worthy of our contempt.
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#80New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:10:16
@chaski Said

You could try.

So far your "purely philosophical" proof has failed.

You are one of the blind men assessing what an elephant is.


Chaski, your 'failure' to grasp simple concepts (which we both know is you being disingenuous for reasons only you know, rather than not comprehending them), is never going to be an argument, let alone a good one.
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#81New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:21:51
@chaski Said

Yet again your English comprehension skills fail you.

I have been making fun of your failed attempt at logical reasoning, not trying to disprove a supernatural being.

Since I believe in an infinite universe, which your flawed reasoning fails to disprove, an infinite supernatural being is possible.

Your finite universe can contain an infinite being.

Trying patching the bottom of your bucket and then filling it with an infinite amount of your time-water.


You are free to believe in things that are demonstrably false according to much of the scientific community (this is reasonable. Scientists are often wrong about things).

Even when it is a demonstrable falsehood you are free to believe it. And by all means, adhere blindly to logical impossibilities Chaski.

I say this all the time. We are all allowed to be wrong, and we all are wrong to varying degrees. I try not to be as wrong as possible though, because that seems a reasonable position to adopt. You are free to disagree with me on this too, and you can champion your cause for obtaining maximal error as much as you like. I'm not sure what you want me to say about it though?

Stout fellow?

Bravo?



What response would you like to your willing abnegation of reason?
chaski On about 3 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#82New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:31:19
@bob_the_fisherman Said



Even when it is a demonstrable falsehood you are free to believe it.



Except it has not been proven false, and your sad attempts at so called thought experiments, philosophical arguments, incorrect math, failed logic and misapplied science tend to give my position credibility.

Thank you for that.

Erimitus On about 7 hours ago




The mind of God, Antarctica
#83New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:34:34
@mrmhead Said

Why are you dividing by infinity?

We are adding water to a bottomless bucket.
Merely adding water.
We are not trying to fill it, or calculate how many buckets to fill it.
Nonetheless, there is water in the bottomless bucket.



If you divide a thing by infinity wouldn't you get an infinite number of parts?


If you add more water to the bottomless bucket than comes out the bottom wouldn't the bucket fill.

I have to admit I don't understand the analogy.
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#84New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:35:35
@mrmhead Said

Why are you dividing by infinity?

We are adding water to a bottomless bucket.
Merely adding water.
We are not trying to fill it, or calculate how many buckets to fill it.
Nonetheless, there is water in the bottomless bucket.



No, you are not trying to fill the bucket, you are trying to raise the relative level of water in the bucket (move forward in time).

You can't.
Going back to my time travel analogy: You can go backwards at an ever increasing rate of years that multiplies by itself every second and continue doing that eternally and never reach a point where time would need to move forward. It's like saying time moves forward at a rate of one second per second while moving backward at a thousand years per second. At that rate, how long does it take to get here? Answer: Forever, because we never do.

I really don't know how else to explain this.

But again, this is irrelevant anyway. Is there a credible scientific theory proposing an infinite universe (not an infinite cycle of universes that leaves no proof)?
Erimitus On about 7 hours ago




The mind of God, Antarctica
#85New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:37:54
@mrmhead Said

Would that be taking a Mobius Trip?



why did the chicken cross the Mobius strip?
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#86New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:45:22
@Erimitus Said

If you divide a thing by infinity wouldn't you get an infinite number of parts?


If you add more water to the bottomless bucket than comes out the bottom wouldn't the bucket fill.

I have to admit I don't understand the analogy.



The concept is that for time to move (or the water level in the bucket to rise), the bucket can not be infinite. If it is the water level never changes relative to the bucket. In other words, time never moves. This is not about absolute quantities, it is about the relative quantity of water to the bucket. The quantity of water relative to the bucket is always the same. 0.0000*%
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#87New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:47:11
Hm... double post... Is TFS going strange again?
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#88New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 21:50:17
@GreatestIam2 Said

If there is a god, we should reject him or her for being rude and hiding from us.


We should reject a god that does not do what we want... ok, but why?
bob_the_fisherman On October 26, 2019
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#89New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 22:02:51
@chaski Said

Let's try that one out:

0 + X = X

0 + 1 = 1

0 + 20 = 20

0 + 2019 = 2019

0 + 299 792 458 = 299 792 458

So apparently your statement is incorrect. Adding any amount to the number (i.e. "0" ) does in fact make a difference.



And now, to make this argument of yours more accurate, relative to the infinite quantity, which number is, in relative terms, larger. 1, 10, 100 or 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000?

If one of those numbers is larger in relative terms the "infinite" is quantifiable, and if it's quantifiable it's finite.

This is not about absolute numbers or quantities. We know that we could continue to count from now until forever, which is a practically infinite number, yet the number has a base and is always going to be quantifiable (even though we actually can't quantify it). You are arguing for the infinite, it seems to me, by relying on that type of argument, however, it is not correct.

The problem with your counting is that it has a base at which it starts, then it moves forward. Now, while you are adding your 1+1, have someone else subtracting by 2. How long does it take to get from zero to one?
chaski On about 3 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#90New Post! Jul 04, 2019 @ 22:45:57
@bob_the_fisherman Said

You are arguing for the infinite...



Actually I am not "arguing for the infinite". I am stating that I believe the universe to be infinite.

What I am (generally speaking) arguing is that your argument against an infinite universe is flawed and thus far has proved nothing. You certainly haven't provided a valid argument disproving an infinite universe. There might be a proof for that, though I doubt it. Regardless, you haven't provided any such proof.

Now, In my post that you responded to, my comment and point was NOT "arguing for the infinite".... I was posting out your mathematical error.

You said "Any number divided by infinity equals a zero... Adding any amount to the number makes no difference."

So, if we take a number and divide it by infinity and get zero, then add "any amount" to that we get that amount.

So what we have is "any number" (Y) divided by infinity plus "any amount" (X).

Or Y/∞ + X = _____.

The order of operations to work out this problem is first do the division, then do the addition; i.e. PEMDAS.

So let's try it out using Y = 5 & X = 3.

5/∞ + 3 = _____.
(5/∞) + 3 = _____.
0 + 3 = 3

Perhaps you meant to say something different, but if so you didn't.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Politics
Tue Jul 21, 2009 @ 16:50
13 698
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Mon Nov 28, 2011 @ 19:51
55 4483
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Fri Dec 02, 2011 @ 22:07
10 707
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Thu Feb 21, 2008 @ 19:47
22 1655
New posts   Random
Fri Apr 20, 2007 @ 20:24
6 1785