U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 06-08-2019, 05:46 PM
 
69 posts, read 9,480 times
Reputation: 13

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
No, I am not. It has nothing to do with the origin of Reality since we can not KNOW about that. It is about the origins of everything in our 5% of Reality that we can measure directly.
That would be Big Bang. How Big Bang originated and, while at it, how organic chemistry turned into biology
we don't know, but, like I said, the "God" hypothesis is still useless, so no need to get it involved.
Quote:
Do you consider chemical reactions "mindful?" Do you consider nuclear reactions "mindful?" Do you consider biochemical reactions "mindful?"etc.
Do you know any other way anything gets originated, including brain activity that, in turn, produces what can be called "mindful"?
Quote:
See dark matter and dark energy.
Oh, dark matter and dark energy! that's where you are coming from!
So you are equating enormously massive amount of "something" with enormous amount of "missing" knowledge? By this "logic", since hydrogen is 75% of what is known in the Universe you should conclude, that by learning what there is to know about hydrogen, we"d gather 75% of of what there is to know about known Universe? Do you see how silly that is!!? What if DM/DE is simply a ridiculously huge amount of simplest "anti hydrogen" or something, that is doing nothing, but pushing things apart and there is nothing else to know about it? After all, that's the only DM/DE effect that can be noted and measured for now, so how do you get to an assumption that it does anything else or, even worse, hides in itself 95% of what is knowable?
Quote:
No, I am asking is the Reality that we exist in OUR God since it is responsible for our existence and the existence of everything else we know about?
Another silly approach. Why do you need another label? We already have one - Reality. Why to invoke another, completely unnecessary one that does not add anything to our understanding of our existence and the existence of everything else we know about, but brings in a huge number of completely unnecessary
complications?
Do you see how silly that is!!?

Last edited by Sonof; 06-08-2019 at 06:03 PM..

 
Old 06-09-2019, 04:52 AM
 
13,473 posts, read 4,982,321 times
Reputation: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonof View Post
That would be Big Bang. How Big Bang originated and, while at it, how organic chemistry turned into biology
we don't know, but, like I said, the "God" hypothesis is still useless, so no need to get it involved.

Do you know any other way anything gets originated, including brain activity that, in turn, produces what can be called "mindful"?

Oh, dark matter and dark energy! that's where you are coming from!
So you are equating enormously massive amount of "something" with enormous amount of "missing" knowledge? By this "logic", since hydrogen is 75% of what is known in the Universe you should conclude, that by learning what there is to know about hydrogen, we"d gather 75% of of what there is to know about known Universe? Do you see how silly that is!!? What if DM/DE is simply a ridiculously huge amount of simplest "anti hydrogen" or something, that is doing nothing, but pushing things apart and there is nothing else to know about it? After all, that's the only DM/DE effect that can be noted and measured for now, so how do you get to an assumption that it does anything else or, even worse, hides in itself 95% of what is knowable?

Another silly approach. Why do you need another label? We already have one - Reality. Why to invoke another, completely unnecessary one that does not add anything to our understanding of our existence and the existence of everything else we know about, but brings in a huge number of completely unnecessary
complications?
Do you see how silly that is!!?
its not about invoking another view. we are defining reality. if the traits of his god line up exactly to the traits of the system we are in who is more wrong?

you that say there is nod god or him that says I am calling the, lets say the biosphere, god?

I mean you can ask why call it god, but explain to me, why you are more right in saying there is no god?
 
Old 06-09-2019, 05:00 AM
 
13,473 posts, read 4,982,321 times
Reputation: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonof View Post
Is not it easier to just show how logic does leave you a choice instead of going into this blah-blah-blah tap dance with all these "whatever", "lmao", etc.?

It looks pretty lame and helpless, just like a child pooping its pants. Are you sitting there all happy and warm?
just as I predicted. You start with a confrontational tone and when I reply you use that tone to disengage so that your logic can't be shown to be flawed.

you didnt address what I said at all, you addressed only the tone of my reply.

typical.
 
Old 06-09-2019, 07:27 AM
 
69 posts, read 9,480 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
its not about invoking another view. we are defining reality.
We don't need to define reality. This definition already exists.

Definition of reality

1 : the quality or state of being real

2 (1): a real event, entity, or state of affairs
(2): the totality of real things and events

What we need is your/Mystic's definition of "god".

As soon as I get this definition I will address all your points.

Last edited by Sonof; 06-09-2019 at 07:36 AM..
 
Old 06-09-2019, 07:34 AM
 
Location: Western Washington
8,931 posts, read 8,394,310 times
Reputation: 15515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonof View Post
We don't need to define reality. This definition already exists.

Definition of reality

1 : the quality or state of being real

2 (1): a real event, entity, or state of affairs
(2): the totality of real things and events

What we need is your definition of "god".

As soon as I get this definition I will address all your points.
Arach and several others are not fond of clearly stating their positions. They tend to want to attack minor nuances of phrasing and divert arguments, then claim a hollow victory.

Nice handling of mystic by the way.
 
Old 06-09-2019, 07:46 AM
 
13,473 posts, read 4,982,321 times
Reputation: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonof View Post
We don't need to define reality. This definition already exists.

Definition of reality

1 : the quality or state of being real

2 (1): a real event, entity, or state of affairs
(2): the totality of real things and events

What we need is your/Mystic's definition of "god".

As soon as I get this definition I will address all your points.
your are avoiding the question.

and, if you recall, my main point was that theist are misunderstanding understanding the system the they are in.

if I give the "god" the traits of the biosphere am I more correct in saying that it is there or are you more correct in saying it is not there?
 
Old 06-09-2019, 07:50 AM
 
13,473 posts, read 4,982,321 times
Reputation: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Arach and several others are not fond of clearly stating their positions. They tend to want to attack minor nuances of phrasing and divert arguments, then claim a hollow victory.

Nice handling of mystic by the way.
absolutly false raf. in fact, its so false that it is complete nonsense.

I can't define the system because I don't know enough. all i can do is use what we do know to come up with the best descriptor we have of the system. then evaluate what people are saying.

You clearly do not know enough but insist that what you know is all I need to know. worse than that, you think that we need to describe the system based on how you feel about religion.
 
Old 06-09-2019, 07:50 AM
 
69 posts, read 9,480 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Arach and several others are not fond of clearly stating their positions.
I'm sure they are not. But who cares.
 
Old 06-09-2019, 07:55 AM
 
69 posts, read 9,480 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
I can't define the system because I don't know enough.
Can you define "god"?
That's all we need for now.
 
Old 06-09-2019, 09:55 AM
 
69 posts, read 9,480 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
if I give the "god" the traits of the biosphere am I more correct in saying that it is there or are you more correct in saying it is not there?
Do you seriously want me to asses some fantasies that you can come up with?
For me, to consider all this seriously you need to show that "it" is there in a first place.
If you can not show that "it" is there before you start giving "it" some traits, then what you are doing is engaging in a mental masturbation, which is something I'm not interested to participate in.

Last edited by Sonof; 06-09-2019 at 10:03 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top