New: It is Impossible for God to be Real

[Skepdick]

I think Islam could outgrow the competition under the Quran-FSK.

Anything is possible if you have the right FSK.

Every FSK needs a First Miracle.

[Agent Smith]

It is a good argument, but the key premise is shaky.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I have at times thought, this guy is literally inventing new fallacies...

The origin of the disagreement is due to the very contrasting fundamental grounds, i.e.;

1. FSK-ed reality
2. Mind-independent reality - philosophical realism.

No, the thing you quoted has nothing to do with whether I disagree with you about any matter of fact. There are plenty of people who i disagree with just as much as I disagree with you, who I wouldn't say that about. That they're "inventing new fallacies". Hell, there are people who have argued for things I agree with, who have presented arguments so nonsensical that I said something like that about them.

It has nothing to do with any disagreement of that sort

Note we are digging into very refined philosophical issues and it is not easy for all on the other side to understand [not necessary agree] with the other, especially the later anti-philosophical views that usually defy common sense.

Regardless, I will accept and change to whatever is rationally justified.

[Harbal]

I think Islam could outgrow the competition under the Quran-FSK.

Anything is possible if you have the right FSK.

Every FSK needs a First Miracle.

No, every one of VA's miracles needs an FSK.

[Skepdick]

No, every one of VA's miracles needs an FSK.

Not just VA's miracles - all miracles.

The miracle we call "The Big Bang" explains nothing.

In the beginning The Big Bang created the heavens and the earth.
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of The Big Bang was hovering over the waters.
And The Big Bang said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

[Harbal]

No, every one of VA's miracles needs an FSK.

Of course. The miracle we call "The Big Bang" explains nothing.

In the beginning The Big Bang created the heavens and the earth.
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of The Big Bang was hovering over the waters.
And The Big Bang said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

I don't know enough about the Big Bang to comment.

[Skepdick]

I don't know enough about the Big Bang to comment.

It's a miracle. Like God.

[Harbal]

I don't know enough about the Big Bang to comment.

It's a miracle. Like God.

I really wouldn't know.

[Veritas Aequitas]

No, every one of VA's miracles needs an FSK.

Of course. The miracle we call "The Big Bang" explains nothing.

In the beginning The Big Bang created the heavens and the earth.
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of The Big Bang was hovering over the waters.
And The Big Bang said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

My main principle;
Reality, facts, truths, knowledge and objectivity is conditioned upon a specific human-based FSR-FSK of which the scientific FSK is the most credible, reliable and objective at present.

As such the credibility, reliability and objectivity of all FSKs come in a continuum from 0.001 to 100.
The human based scientific FSK in general is the most objective, but there is also a range of objectivity within the scientific FSK depending on whether they are evidenced directly & established theories or speculative theories.
The Big Bang is a speculated theory without direct evidence, as such, its objectivity would be rated relatively much lower that evidence justified theories, say 20/100 in contrast to 'oxygen is a gas at room temperature' at say 80/100 objectivity.

The Big Bang despite its weakness do make sense to support the present evidenced scientific-FSK reality and help in predictions and other hypothesis.
Scientists can do away with the Big Bang theory and still continue with establishing scientific reality of the present based on current evidence.

The human-based scientific-physics-cosmology-FSK's Big-Bang-theory cannot be rated as the same as the claim God exists which is from on the human-based-theistic which is based on blind faith without strong support from possible empirical evidences. As such, relatively, the objectivity of God exists can be rated at 0.1/100.

In addition, the human-based scientific-physics cosmology FSK will qualify the uncertainty of the Big-Bang theory and it can be rejected if there are new evidence to justify an alternative theory.
On the other hand, theists will claim with absolute certainty their God exists are real.

[Skepdick]

As such the credibility, reliability and objectivity of all FSKs come in a continuum from 0.001 to 100.

0.001 to 100 isn't a continuum.

There's a discontinuity at 0.0001
And 0.00001
And 0.000001
And 0.00000...1

Further down that line of reasoning emerges the fact that continuity undermines choice; and choice undermines continuity.

Pick one.

[Veritas Aequitas]

As such the credibility, reliability and objectivity of all FSKs come in a continuum from 0.001 to 100.

0.001 to 100 isn't a continuum.

There's a discontinuity at 0.0001
And 0.00001
And 0.000001
And 0.00000...1

Further down that line of reasoning emerges the fact that continuity undermines choice; and choice undermines continuity.

Pick one.

There are many perspectives to 'continuum'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum

What I referring to the general meaning, i.e.

• Continuum (measurement), theories or models that explain gradual transitions from one condition to another without abrupt changes. ibid

[Skepdick]

There are many perspectives to 'continuum'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum

What I referring to the general meaning, i.e.

• Continuum (measurement), theories or models that explain gradual transitions from one condition to another without abrupt changes. ibid

All of those perspectives have a universal semantic property. The property of continuity.

And in the common/general/Englishmeaning If it has a discontinuity it's not a continuum. The discontinuity is choice.

And then your definition suffers from the loosely defined notion of "abruptness". What's the difference between abrupt vs non-abrupt change?
And you land up in the realm of dynamic systems and differential equations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stability_theory

It's adjectives all the way down.

[Veritas Aequitas]

There are many perspectives to 'continuum'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum

What I referring to the general meaning, i.e.

• Continuum (measurement), theories or models that explain gradual transitions from one condition to another without abrupt changes. ibid

All of those perspectives have a universal semantic property. The property of continuity.

If it has a discontinuity it's not a continuum.

And then your definition suffers from the loosely defined notion of "abruptness". What's the difference between abrupt vs non-abrupt change?
And you land up in the realm of dynamic systems and differential equations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stability_theory

There is no need to nit-pick in my case.

I stated there is a continuum in the FSKed objectivity.
I believe any rational person will understand me when I state,
while the scientific FSK is in one end of the continuum of objectivity, the theistic-FSK is on the other extreme of the continuum.

It is the same in the context of colors if I were to put white on one end of a continuum of greyness with black at the other end.

[Skepdick]

There is no need to nit-pick in my case.

I stated there is a continuum in the FSKed objectivity.
I believe any rational person will understand me when I state,
while the scientific FSK is in one end of the continuum of objectivity, the theistic-FSK is on the other extreme of the continuum.

It is the same in the context of colors if I were to put white on one end of a continuum of greyness with black at the other end.

The understanding is not the problem. Your choices are perfectly clear.

But it's precisely because YOU are doing the ranking (you have an undefined notion of "higher" or "lower" rank), and not their inherent properties is where the discontinuity emerges.

Because (arbitrary) choice is the discontinuity.

[Veritas Aequitas]

There is no need to nit-pick in my case.

I stated there is a continuum in the FSKed objectivity.
I believe any rational person will understand me when I state,
while the scientific FSK is in one end of the continuum of objectivity, the theistic-FSK is on the other extreme of the continuum.

It is the same in the context of colors if I were to put white on one end of a continuum of greyness with black at the other end.

The understanding is not the problem. Your choices are perfectly clear.

But it's precisely because YOU are doing the ranking (you have an undefined notion of "higher" or "lower" rank), and not their inherent properties is where the discontinuity emerges.

Because (arbitrary) choice is the discontinuity.

Since it is FSK-ed the ranking has to be based on a collective basis just as millions or billions will accept the black-grey-white continuum.
If it is only 'me' then it would be the tabooed subjectivity which I will not accept.