The Christian Message...An Analogy (proof, purpose, influence, definition)
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.
You have introduced a different kind of thought experiment. They do not use analogies. That is using what is known put into the laboratory of the mind to see what it does. These still need science to verify them and are hypotheses and are not proof.
The use of analogy is something else, even if you call them 'thought experiments'. And using an analogy to prove something that is only claimed is just what Arach was doing and you said that it was. You are the one who is confused. Or possibly trying to confuse others.
ANALOGIES DO NOT PROVE ANYTHING THEY SIMPLIFY EXPLANATIONS! Does that make it clearer, Arq? Of course, anything that cannot be currently tested, such as traveling at the speed of light, remains hypothesis but does not stop us from using the understanding the thought experiment provides to understand how our Reality operates. Einstein was correct before his bending of the light theory was validated by experimental observation and the time and gravity effects of the speed of light were correct before we adapted them to achieve more accurate GPS. They were derived from thought experiments.
lmao. he said you change what is said and then tell us we are wrong. based on how you changed it.
the claim that religions have the traits of the system we are in wrong is completely different than denying everything because of your Fundy-level fear of religion.
its really simple.
you wont square off with me will ya trans ... you know you lost before and you will lose again.
lmao, lost so fast your boiz had to DM you and tell you to get out of there, you were bad for business.
ANALOGIES DO NOT PROVE ANYTHING THEY SIMPLIFY EXPLANATIONS! Does that make it clearer, Arq? Of course, anything that cannot be currently tested, such as traveling at the speed of light, remains hypothesis but does not stop us from using the understanding it provides to understand how our Reality operates. Einstein was correct before his bending of the light theory was validated by experimental observation and the time and gravity effects of the speed of light were correct before we adapted them to achieve more accurate GPS.
The analogy is NOT used to pretend that the analogous situation actually exists. It uses a situation that CAN be understood as the springboard to understanding the situation that is NOT understood.
Ok I can see the remark in a context of Arach proposing an hypothesis, even though he is using what is known as an analogy of what is only claimed, so it isn't quite the thought Experiment of the Einstein type, using what is known in the head to see what it does. .
The analogy is NOT used to pretend that the analogous situation actually exists. It uses a situation that CAN be understood as the springboard to understanding the situation that is NOT understood.
Ok I can see the remark in a context of Arach proposing an hypothesis, even though he is using what is known as an analogy of what is only claimed, so it isn't quite the thought Experiment of the Einstein type, using what is known in the head to see what it does. .
The analogy is NOT used to pretend that the analogous situation actually exists. It uses a situation that CAN be understood as the springboard to understanding the situation that is NOT understood.
Ok I can see the remark in a context of Arach proposing an hypothesis, even though he is using what is known as an analogy of what is only claimed, so it isn't quite the thought Experiment of the Einstein type, using what is known in the head to see what it does. .
The purpose of the analogy is specifically to use what is known in the head and can be imagined to elucidate the dilemma we face in trying to understand our role and purpose within the body of God by using an imagined dilemma for a single cell within our own body by pretending it was sentient. That IS a thought experiment, Arq.
oh good, I thought you implied you were Phd science and nothing you have ever said implied that you know any science.
Yet it was you used the wrong formula to calculate how much work the biosphere did, and I pointed out your error. You are like a child in a corner crying that the teacher who put you there knows NOTHING.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
And harry' old comrade friend, I told you to bring your little friend to me to make sure I can make it clear what I am saying.
1) I have just said he is not my friend. I do not know him. What part of 'he is not my friend' did you not understand?
2) I gave you his contact details so you could talk to him yourself. Do not pretend it is my fault that you can not talk to him.
3) I quoted his definition of life, and suggested we could discus this in the science section. I even raised a question there about this. We have been waiting 2 years for you to do so. Instead you choose to hide.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
You are so filled with anti-religious iron curtain nonsense from the mother land that you are complexity misrepresenting what I say. But I get it, us evil capitalist are the enemy and you need that rage to live. You people let you down, so you blame over's.
I am neither left wing nor do I live in what was East Germany, so you are inventing here. And I described what I stand for. And if you have a problem with that, then logically you are for the opposite. That is not misrepresentation, it is the logical conclusion derived from your misrepresentation. You sowed, you reap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
there is nothing you can do harry. list the properties of life. The biosphere has every one of them. at that is just using the most basic understanding of life. toss is in physics and you need to run away, behind a curtain, becomes obvious.
The biosphere is a chemical reaction and not a collection of life forms? And pointing out again the stupidity of making such a claim is running away?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
claiming the biosphere is not life is less valid comrade harry. oh wait a min ... thats a straw man because youre only about anti-religious/god iron curtain ... anything past that just isn't real to you.
lmao.
For someone who claims to only look at the data and properties, the one thing you have a problem with is looking at the data and properties.
If you wish to discuss this, here is the question I raised in the science forum. Otherwise let us get back on topic.
lmao ... you can stay in your rampage or you can control your own path.
the question is directly related to this forum and the underlining reason to why more people believe in something over nothing.
you rant and rave about a hateful god. You jump around, in tantrum mode, about a god that isn't doing what you want it to do.
are you a hateful person because some of the cells in your body "suffer" and die?
The question has nothing to do with this forum or this OP.
So no tantrums from you, answer the question, how many degrees do you have? I have one.
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.