Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:26 am
Alexiev wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:32 am
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2024 4:42 pm
Continued from another thread.
Thoughts?
First, the notion that everything that happens must have a "cause" is incorrect. Generally, what we mean by "cause" is either the intentional act of conscious agent, or a variable we can manipulate. If you shoot someone, you "cause" his death (although, of course, the powder, bullet, accuracy etc. are also involved). So if "cause" is used this way, postulate 1 is circular. Second, in experimental science, the "cause" is sometimes seen as the variable (although other conditions are necessary for the effect). We didn't manipulate the "cause" of the origin of the universe, so we can rule that out.
In addition, even if (as would be silly) we admit the postulates, they in no way confirm the existence of God. A "creator" may have existed once, but, as Nietzsche suggested, He might be dead.
So either way, the so called "proof" fails miserably.
Traditionally, "cause and effect" seem to have meant something along the lines of the classical example of billiard balls. One billiard ball hits another and "causes" it to roll in the opposite direction from which it was struck. I think that was the standard idea of matter of the early materialists. However, as some point out, including Noam Chomsky, the more theorists have delved into physics, the less we seem to be sure that matter is really like billiard balls. Apparently, there are phenomena that defy the standard billiard ball model of cause and effect, such as quantum entanglement which seems to hint at "spooky action from a distance" as theorists call it (such as with the force of gravity), things 'communicating' with each other or reacting to each other instantaneously, faster than the speed of information or light.
This later part is all just speculation, and as you pointed out only came about only after those who 'speculate', that is, literally, "theorists" only, provided what could be described as Truly 'spooky speculations' indeed.
They are, literally, only theories, guesses, assumptions, and speculations, only. They are certainly not necessarily absolutely any thing related to what is actually irrefutably True, Right, Accurate, nor Correct.
The reason all things that 'actually happen and occur' actually happen and occur for can all be very easily explained, and, very simply understood.
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:26 am
I remember reading of an experiment where neuroscientists measured the delay in the firing of a synapse and could tell before a person reacted, what they were going to say or do.
I would love to 'look at' and 'see' all of the details in the supposed experiment and.in the alleged conclusion.
It is like if the words "scientist" or "neuroscientist", or even "priest" or "preacher", (depending on the time period), are used in some some claim, which is, laughingly, backed up by or support by some alleged 'experiment' or 'it is written in some text and/or book', claim, then just this alone seems to be enough for some people to believe it is irrefutably true, and right.
Now, as for how gravity works, then this is also very simple and easy. Larger objects of mass just attracts smaller objects of mass, and, more denser objects just attract more stronger, or with more attraction.
As, as for things 'communicating' with each other or reacting to each other instantaneously, faster than the speed of information or light, then how could this have been proved, and thus known to be fact? Also, 'communicating', or 'reacting', faster than light is just some thing that just happens and occurs, anyway.
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:26 am
Essentially predicting behavior before the person was aware of what they were going to do.
Is there any actual video footage of this occurring?
If yes, then great where is it, exactly?
But, if no, then why not?
Surely one would have to be able to say what another will say or do, before the other actually says or does it, for this to have been proved True, correct?
If yes, then surely if one could do this, then they would just film it so others could see it, right?
Also, it is very obvious that things occur, like bodily reactions, before thoughts arise, which happens before words can be said, and which happens before bodies can mis/behave, anyway.
There is obviously an order of how and when things happen and occur, with saying words and doing things at the end of the order of things here. So, it is of no surprise that the firing of synapses could be witnessed before words are said or things are done. BUT, I would love to see a human being look at just the firing of synapses, only, and then tell me what 'that one' will, actually, say and do next, and then just wait to observe, and see, what 'that one' actually does say, and does do.
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:26 am
The more closely we focus our attention and learn, the stranger the world seems to get. For example, the classic particle vs wave phenomenon of atomic "particles".
There is absolutely nothing 'strange' nor 'spooky' in this One and only infinite and eternal Universe.
The only reason the world's seemed more Stanger, to human beings back in the 'olden days' when this was being written, was because they would 'look at', and thus 'see', things from a very False and Wrong already distorted perspective. And, when one False or Wrong presumption or believe led them on to 'seeing' more or further False and Wrong conclusions, then this is what kept leading them onto what they called and labelled futher 'strange' or 'spooky' things.
They just kept 'trying to' verify, confirm, or justify a previous distorted False or Wrong presumption or belief, which is what just kept leading them down to 'seeing' stranger and spookier things.
For example, just about all believed or presumed that the Universe began. (So, first False and Wrong presumption/belief). Just because they all had heard and were all told, 'In the beginning, ...'. Combine this with the fact that they, "themselves", 'began', and absolutely everything else around them that they could see and observe also 'began'. So, because every thing, 'to them', 'began', it was not much of a leap to then just conclude, presume, and believe that the Universe, also, 'must of began'.
"theists" then just 'verified' and/or 'confirmed' that the Universe beginning was because of what they called God, a claimed super, all powerful Being.
Whereas, "scientists" claimed that observed 'red shift' meant, absolutely that the Universe is expanding, which means that It was, previously, minutely small, and which must have all 'began'. To these ones 'red shift' 'verified' and/or 'confirmed' that the Universe beginning was because of what they called the big bang.
It was like they all just 'wanted' to 'find evidence' for what they all were previously and 'currently' believing and presuming was true. That was; The Universe began.