Philosophy Now Forum

Arising_uk wrote:

Walker wrote:Good grief. Check out the NEIN evidence.

What does German have to do with it. Are you going to post or cite a link or not?

You're doing poorly on your Turing tests, btw.

Clearly does not understand what the Turing Test is.

Well, since you insist.

Child psychology for sthitapragya

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2M1FU5JQwLY

Walker wrote:Well, since you insist.

Child psychology for sthitapragya

As I thought, keiner.

Thou art a stranger in a strange land.

Walker wrote:Thou art a stranger in a strange land.

If an atheist is a heretic then for sure and I'm quite sure you and your ilk would crucify me if you could.

Truly, you live in a strange world. If it isn't aimless questions, it's silly proclamations.

You mean things like, "The empirical evidence is pointing towards Atheists being pretty fucked up."?
p.s.
I prefer sci-fi to the bible.

Arising wrote:

I prefer sci-fi to the bible.

You probably also believe one plus one will always equal two. It would never dawn on you when it is impossible. That is one of the drawbacks of the secular mind.

Nick_A wrote:You probably also believe one plus one will always equal two. It would never dawn on you when it is impossible. ...

Depends on the context.

What does appear to be impossible is for the theist to back-up their statements with the empirical evidence they claim.

That is one of the drawbacks of the secular mind.

What is? As I know of at least one case when one plus one does not equal two.

Arising wrote:

What is? As I know of at least one case when one plus one does not equal two.

If you understand the basic concept I don't see how you can remain a blind denier.

Nick_A wrote:If you understand the basic concept I don't see how you can remain a blind denier.

What basic concept? If you add one drop of water to another you don't get two.

Arising wrote:

What basic concept? If you add one drop of water to another you don't get two.

Your example includes the basic concept. The point is that 1+1=2 is true in matters of quantity but not in quality. When the two drops unite, their quality changes.

The ONE God includes everything. So the ONE God cannot be added to anything since everything is within it. One God plus one God when added together can only produce two gods when the one God is lesser in quality. That is why Simone Weil wrote: "Algebra and money are essentially levelers; the first intellectually, the second effectively." A really remarkable observation. Algebra and money diminish recognition of objective quality. As soon as a person admits the potential for objective quality as a measure of universal value. then a source for objective value becomes necessary.

Nick_A wrote:Your example includes the basic concept. The point is that 1+1=2 is true in matters of quantity but not in quality. When the two drops unite, their quality changes.

No it doesn't, it's still water.

The ONE God includes everything. So the ONE God cannot be added to anything since everything is within it. One God plus one God when added together can only produce two gods when the one God is lesser in quality. ...

Er!? So there's more than one 'God'? Make your mind up.

That is why Simone Weil wrote: "Algebra and money are essentially levelers; the first intellectually, the second effectively." A really remarkable observation. Algebra and money diminish recognition of objective quality. As soon as a person admits the potential for objective quality as a measure of universal value. then a source for objective value becomes necessary.

Give me an example of this "objective quality"?

I read this differently, if you know Algebra and or you have money you have leveled yourself to those who have such things, to those who don't you are effectively upon another level. Are you saying this is why people have a 'God' because they do have or cannot learn Algebra or make money?

Arising wrote:

Give me an example of this "objective quality"?

The simple explanation is that objective quality is defined by distance from the Source of our existence. The closer to the source, the greater the quality. Subjective quality in contrast is a measure of societal importance.

Attempt to keep your original quote intact so that we can all garner the context this time, if you have the intelligence to work out a simple forum quote system. If you cant be bothered then neither can i.

sthitapragya wrote:Also, believing in God serves no purpose.

Actually it does, it makes you second think your actions.

sthitapragya wrote:If you belive that God created this earth, well, big deal. With all that power and intelligence, he did a very poor job and I am not impressed.

This planet is perfection. Are you really some kind of spoiled brat?

sthitapragya wrote:However, if God did not create this earth, then the possibilities are endless.

How so?

sthitapragya wrote: WIth God, the bottom line will always be magic and science does not work well with magic.

What the hell does magic have to do with God? Since i KNOW God exists, i KNOW there is a scientific explanation for its existence.

sthitapragya wrote:Also magic is for children, not grown ups. And I really don't understand why grown ups want to believe in magic. It is just absurd.

Again, suggesting magic=God.. you are talking bollocks.

sthitapragya wrote:And don't say it's not magic. If God created everything from nothing, then it was magic. Nothing more and nothing less.

Who is saying God created something from nothing?

sthitapragya wrote:So when grown ups need to believe in magic, it can only be because they need the psychological crutch that in case something goes wrong, God will break the laws of science for them, work his magic (read miracle) and everything will be all right because they are special and God keeps an eye out for them.

More bollocks.

attofishpi wrote: More bollocks.

As arguments go, this is not amongst the best I've seen.