Why Do the Religious Reject Science While Embracing the Impossible?

[attofishpi]

Fuck off Jacobi U imbecile.

Christ DID wot is written. For LOVE & TRUST (faith)

[Gary Childress]

Not all philosophers are mentally ill as I am. There are many people in philosophy departments who are not fanatically religious, who nevertheless lead fulfilling lives.

I am speaking of something different. I think it fair to say that Our Modernity, if we see it as an intellectual current, has no power to decide anything. We are (therefore) is processes of breakdown. Nothing can be built up.

Religious conviction can sometimes be the choice to subscribe to “faith” as a way to solve internal, existential conflicts. (I locate BigMike (to a degree) in that “desperate” need of a solution.)

“Fulfilling lives” does not mean very much, really. And not when a larger existential conviction about ultimate values is unattainable. It might only mean one has chosen to get by as best one can.

If you say so.

[attofishpi]

..idiot.

Not all philosophers are mentally ill as I am.

Shut up ...U R not mentally ill U R an example of the TEST....as to whether U can LOG_I_C yer way to comprehension.

..and I'll say it again ....JE SUS CHRIST.

I sussed the kunt

It's possible, I suppose.

..Jacobi has no idea about GOD.

[Gary Childress]

..idiot.

Shut up ...U R not mentally ill U R an example of the TEST....as to whether U can LOG_I_C yer way to comprehension.

..and I'll say it again ....JE SUS CHRIST.

I sussed the kunt

It's possible, I suppose.

Oh sober up.

[Alexis Jacobi]

If you say so.

It is really what you say. And you have no means nor power to say anything different. (The “you” I refer to is to a general person and includes you-singular).

You have not one solidity upon which to house even your very self. And even your self is doubtable.

You get my point?

[attofishpi]

...Jacobi and U have no idea about GOD and ITS REASONS


IN FACT NONE ON THIS SITE APPEAR TO KNOW GOD


...i know GOD too well.

[attofishpi]

Christ DID wot is written.


LOVE & TRUST (faith)


⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀Love & Trust

[Gary Childress]

If you say so.

It is really what you say. And you have no means nor power to say anything different. (The “you” I refer to is to a general person and includes you-singular).

You have not one solidity upon which to house even your very self. And even your self is doubtable.

You get my point?

Truth and objectivity aren't always easy things to handle, Mr. pronouncer.

[Immanuel Can]

No, I said none of that. But don't confuse yourself: even a network has to have a starting point. There's no such thing as an infinite regression of causes, whatever model we adopt.

1. I can imagine such a chain.

You can imagine all sorts of impossible things, perhaps: but you can't create them. It's mathematically that we can see that it's impossible. A chain with infinite prerequisites never gets started.

[Immanuel Can]

What was claimed (by me)is that the $5 being put there is part of the cause of her deciding to borrow 3 of it.

That doesn't work. It doesn't "cause" her to make any choice.

There's still a choice to be made,

Not if Determinism were true.

Then there would be no genuine choice at all...just, perhaps, the inexplicable feeling of making one, without any reality behind it, but no possibility at all of a difference being made.

[attofishpi]

No, I said none of that. But don't confuse yourself: even a network has to have a starting point. There's no such thing as an infinite regression of causes, whatever model we adopt.

1. I can imagine such a chain.

You can imagine all sorts of impossible things, perhaps: but you can't create them. It's mathematically that we can see that it's impossible. A chain with infinite prerequisites never gets started.

There is NO issue of INFINITE REGRESS because GOD FORMED FROM CHAOS - ---- > A PLACE OF NO CAUSALITY


U evangelical TURD.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Truth and objectivity aren't always easy things to handle, Mr. Pronouncer.

You, Gary, have absolutely no access either to “objectivity” and certainly to no “truth”.

You pronounce this, not me.

[Middle English pronouncen, from Old French prononcier, from Latin prōnūntiāre : prō-, forth; see pro-1 + nūntiāre, to announce (from nūntius, messenger; see neu- in Indo-European roots).]

[promethean75]

Mate, there's no such thing as chaos. It's just a lyric in metal songs and a cool name we've given to a problem of observation and doesn't describe any real states. The inability to predict a future state of a system due to a lack of causal information says nothing about the order or causal efficacy of the actual system, only the observer trying to make predictions.

For instance, a hurricane is not an anomaly in a weather system causally, only statistically. It certainly is part of an order of events that, despite being able to be known in advance (and therefore predicted), was not random by any stretch.

[attofishpi]

Mate, there's no such thing as chaos.

..pretty certain U R directing shite at me.

It's just a lyric in metal songs and a cool name we've given to a problem of observation and doesn't describe any real states. The inability to predict a future state of a system due to a lack of causal information says nothing about the order or causal efficacy of the actual system, only the observer trying to make predictions.

That's the 'beauty' of ACTUAL chaos...that U can attempt to make it sound cool via woteva crappy metal bands etc etc...(shite i was never in to)

ACTUAL CHAOS - is a void that we cannot even contemplate for contemplation requires reasoning (causal access) - shit in CHAOS doesn't have that.

For instance, a hurricane is not an anomaly in a weather system causally, only statistically. It certainly is part of an order of events that, despite being able to be known in advance (and therefore predicted), was not random by any stretch.

Wanker.

[promethean75]

"ACTUAL CHAOS - is a void that we cannot even contemplate for contemplation requires reasoning (causal access) - shit in CHAOS doesn't have that."

Right. Whenever you are talking nonsense about something that doesn't exist, you can just call it ineffable and everybody's like "ohhh ahhh".

Wait a minute, though. If chaos can't be contemplated, then what is the thought contemplated in my head giving rise to this word 'chaos' which we speak with here?

Bit of a logical problem here, mate.