Philosophy Now Forum

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:49 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:06 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 6:47 am
My argument 'God is Impossible to be Real' is not based on a scientific justification.

Point taken. It then follows that you have NO grounds to make your claim "God is Impossible to be Real", do you understand? OR, shall I continue to consider you a moron?

Why not, since we cannot rely on science, I am relying on the grounds of philosophical reasonings and logic to assert "God is Impossible to be Real". It is a non-starter.

As I had stated it is the same ground as claiming 'a square-circle is impossible to be real' which is a non-starter for any one with average intelligence.

Call what you like, it will only reflect back on yourself.

Well then, jump here out of this ridiculous thread, with your philosophical tackle intact, and take me on: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=35082

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:55 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:49 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:06 am
Point taken. It then follows that you have NO grounds to make your claim "God is Impossible to be Real", do you understand? OR, shall I continue to consider you a moron?

Why not, since we cannot rely on science, I am relying on the grounds of philosophical reasonings and logic to assert "God is Impossible to be Real". It is a non-starter.

As I had stated it is the same ground as claiming 'a square-circle is impossible to be real' which is a non-starter for any one with average intelligence.

Call what you like, it will only reflect back on yourself.

Well then, jump here out of this ridiculous thread, with your philosophical tackle intact, and take me on: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=35082

All that can be known to be real is this immediate here and now before anything is known about it.

As soon as there is an awareness of knowledge about here and now, that which can become known, will always be of past tense, it is not real...only not-knowing is real.

The philosophy by Veritas Aequitas is accurate.

This has nothing to do with Theism or Atheism which are just imaginary concepts, not real.

Reality has no argument with itself....arguing is an illusory mental activity.

The trees are not arguing over whether God created them or not...mental activity is an institution for the mental.

----> .

seeds wrote: ↑Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:39 am Come on now, Veritas, give me the best and most memorable lines from your materialistic philosophy that will help these humans endure their darkest hours on earth.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 6:42 am I have already answered re the terrible evils [your images] you presented. Read again.

You most certainly did not answer the "specific" questions I asked.

Here they are, once again...

• 1. What words of comfort and solace do you have to offer to grieving parents who just lost their young child to a disease?
  
  2. What specific words or vital aspect of your philosophy would be useful for the little girl (in the picture) to recall in the few remaining moments before the vulture comes in to devour her flesh?

Please provide a direct and corresponding answer to each of those two specific questions, as in...

• 1. Here "________________" is what I would say to the parents to help them through their darkest hour...
  
  ...and...
  
  2. Here "________________" is the vital aspect of my philosophy that the little girl should recall that will help her endure the few remaining moments of her life.

_______

_
..and exactly what evidence is that, OP?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 5:06 am
Well, as I being a man with gnosis, knowledge that God exists (no longer a mere theist), yes you are wrong..and as per above, rather arrogant about it.

I find it extremely vexing and not really sure Y I bother dealing with your sort (borderline militant atheists - the worst type of 'godbotherers'), but alas, Y NOT?

Will you agree that this thread Dawkins and Hitchens is not the place for our further discussion, and I will start a new thread to continue where you left off?
Simply reply :- Yes or No?

Again, posts of this sort are now what I have generally come to expect over at ILP. It's just disappointing to find them here as well.

If only from my own subjective and rooted existentially in dasein personal opinion.

Also, when we come into forums such as this, we size each other up. There will be those that we respect the intelligence of and those that we do not respect the intelligence of.

It's largely a subjective reaction and it will differ for each if us.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 6:42 am The Moral Framework [leverage on the Kantian] I proposed will strive toward minimizing all evil acts, wars, poverty, famine, violence, etc.

Take note of promethean75's recent post...

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:25 pm

...and then realize that the person who would use the tragedy of that little girl to make a joke, is a sampling of the dark and demented (low conscious) mentality you are up against in your "pie in the sky" hope that once your so-called "Moral Framework" for humanity is fully implemented,...

...then everyone will simply join hands and live together in harmony, while John Lennon's song "Imagine" plays in the background.

What in the world do you think is going to keep greedy, power-hungry, egomaniacal pigs such as these types of idiots...







...from taking over the world in this fanciful utopia you've concocted in your head?

I mean, even now, with all of the warnings of some sort of eternal punishments for doing what they do, they feel no compulsion to self-regulate their lust for power and wealth.

So, just imagine how unrestrained future egomaniacs will feel in fulfilling their own selfish desires once they are convinced that there is no higher (platonically-based) moral reason not to milk the world for everything they can get for themselves.
_______

Bruh. I'm the one who's tryna give the whole world a genuine Marxist revolution. You're a champion of the free market qua free market, not me.

In my world, kids wouldn't get eaten by buzzards out in the muhfuckin desert. They'd have a home, a job, a family, and would be productive members of their society in their own right and capacity.

That aside, I'm actually a philanthropist humanist who just doesn't pass up a chance to make a meme even if the joke is vicious and cruel, that's all.

Maybe you NEEDED to see that to start taking famine and poverty siriously and stop thinking capitalism'll fix everything. Huh? HUH!?

Wait r u even on team capitalism? I think I got you mixed up with another fella.

For me, of course, the whole point about the buzzard or the vulture and the starving child revolves around theodicy.



Okay, you watch the video and Dawkins and Hitchens convince you that there is evidence for the existence of God.

And, okay, just for the sake of argument, let's say that it is your God.

Now, many who take their leap of faith to God -- or those who know that He exists -- tell us that God is both omniscient and omnipotent. So, He knows that the child is starving. And He knows that when this truly innocent child does die the vultures will rip him to shreds.

And yet, in being omnipotent, He does absolutely nothing to stop it.

Theodicy.

My own main interest in God and religion.

Sure, given the staggering mystery that must be at the very center of existence qua existence itself, God is certainly one possibility.

But how can an omniscient and omnipotent God permit the staggering amount of terrible, terrible pain and suffering endured by countless babies, infants, toddlers and children day after day after day to go on and not be reasonably construed to be a sadistic monster?

Unless, of course, it's henry quirk's God. He set it all in motion but then split. Or Harold Kushner's God: infinitely loving, just and merciful...but not omnipotent.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:07 pm Bruh. I'm the one who's tryna give the whole world a genuine Marxist revolution. You're a champion of the free market qua free market, not me.

What in the world are you talking about?

In the nearly six years I've been posting on this site, I don't think I have ever, not even once, mentioned the terms "free market" or "capitalism" in any of my posts.

So yeah, this...

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:07 pm I think I got you mixed up with another fella.

...is the only thing you got right.
_______

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 6:26 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Jun 14, 2022 1:16 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Jun 14, 2022 4:44 am God is an Impossibility [to be Real]
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

Seen it. It's nothing.

It contains arguments that impress only you, and are unimpressive to anybody who can do basic logic. You don't listen to any of your critics, don't respond to questions cogently, and don't develop any line of argument any sane person has a reason to believe.

Bluffs...is that all you ever do?

As I had argued theism and God is a psychological derivative

You seem to thing "insisted" or "repeated" means the same thing as "argued."

It's not. To "argue" a thing, philosophically, you have to have reasons, evidences or proofs sufficient to warrant the claim. You've got nothing there.

I'm amazed you don't know this.

As I had stated the idea of God is a psychological derivative

Yep. But you have nothing to show that's the case. And "you stating" it means nothing without that.

What you don't understand, because you don't do logic, is that the burden is on you to show that ALL religious activity is NOTHING BUT stuff in the brain. If even one religion, or one religious experience since the dawn of time, is something else, then your argument is utterly disproven. And there's no way you can meet anything close to that burden of proof.

But you won't see that, because you despise logic.

My point again,
As I had argued theism and God is a psychological derivative

There's the same mistake. Your insistence means nothing. Without a proper argument to back it, including sufficient warrant by way of proof or reasons, its nothing but stubborn ignorance or adolescent mewlings.

Here is the brief outline of the book...

You've just copied the table of contents! You've given no evidence you understand anything of it. You apparently don't even have the sense to know what might be relevant in all that, and what might not be!

Bluff, again.

You're fooling nobody -- save, perhaps, yourself. You certainly aren't fooling me.

"What in the world are you talking about?"

Doh! I got you mixed up with the 'simplicity' fella, my bad dude.

I offer a complete and utter retraction of that entire post and ask with great earnestness that you forgive the paltry abhorrence of my indolence and accept my unconditional apology.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:07 pm Bruh. I'm the one who's tryna give the whole world a genuine Marxist revolution.

I've got just one question: why do you hate the world so much?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 9:37 pm

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:07 pm Bruh. I'm the one who's tryna give the whole world a genuine Marxist revolution.

I've got just one question: why do you hate the world so much?

So much more to the point [mine] given "an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages", why does the Christian God?