Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:25 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 9:43 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 9:30 pm
That doesn't change the problem. A state of affairs is also an event in space/time.

By state of affair I meant space+time included.

I was agreeing that that is the supposition. The problem with it is that you are presuming you can call the eternal-past a "state," which you now admit means "space/time" have to be included in it.

They don't, and in fact, cannot be.

So if you accept that nothing is before something then this means that we are dealing with two points

No.

I've repeatedly said this, but I'll say it again: eternity past has no "points." There are no such things in eternity-past.

In a sense, you're making Zeno's mistake. He thought that because you could infinitely segment a path between two points, that actually made it impossible for things to move -- in spite of the fact that Zeno could see they moved every day. And for a long time, people couldn't figure out what was wrong with his argument.

But 'I' figured out what was wrong with it, almost immediately, the first time I LOOKED AT it. But, then again, I do LOOK AT and SEE things differently than 'you', adult human beings do.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:25 pm But the fault was that he was describing motion as a segment instead of as a ray. And a ray has a starting point, but no end point.

And this 'trying to' segment and separate 'that', which is Truly NOT, is WHY 'you', human beings, are still SO SLOW to catch up to what is ACTUALLY True AND Right.

Although, compartmentalizing, segregating, and separating thee One and ONLY 'Thing' WAS necessary to better SEE and UNDERSTAND 'It', thee Truth IS that there is NO actual separation ANYWHERE.

And, 'zeno's paradox' can be used a GREAT EXAMPLE of and for this.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:25 pm You're having the opposite problem. You're trying to turn eternity past into a point, and Creation into a line-segment. Since you can't find any way that it makes sense, you assume that motion, meaning change, is impossible...in spite of the fact that you witness change every day.

But the fault is in your suppositions. You have to realize that eternity-past is not a "point," and thus Creation ex nihilo has to be described as a sort of "ray" or better a "threshold," (in the sense that it's an undefined action rather than a specific point or rather than a line-segment). And until that explanation makes sense to you, you're likely to spin yourself into a tizzy trying to make it make sense, or else to just dismiss the whole thing altogether, baffled by it completely.

Which is the EXACT SAME case with 'you', when 'trying to' make sense of just HOW Everything could come from Nothing.

But then again you can ALWAYS just say, "God did it", and that is ALL that 'you' NEED, correct?

BELIEF and FAITH, themselves are about one of the STRONGEST 'things' in the Universe. BUT, VERY UNFORTUNATELY, both BELIEF and FAITH get used in the MOST Incorrect AND Wrong ways, and at the MOST INOPPORTUNE times.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:25 pm I understand, because Zeno fooled a lot of people for a long time. But it's still a fallacy.

And there are a LOT OF OTHER THINGS, which have been FOOLING a LOT OF PEOPLE, for a VERY LONG TIME. ALL of them I will add are of these people's OWN MAKING.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 11:32 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 11:17 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:49 pm I am not making Zeno's mistake.

Something very close to it, I suspect.

You're arguing, it seems, that if there aren't two definite points, then nothing can happen...change is impossible, you seem to say. But Zeno failed to realize that it's possible to have only one fixed point and still have motion. Something similar is bamboozling you right now, I think.

Causation is discrete in its nature.

Not to 'me' it is NOT.

The OBVIOUSNESS of continual Causation, and continual Creation, is BRILLIANTLY BRIGHT and STRIKING. It is VERY REVEALING in fact.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 11:32 pm Cause and effect. You first have causation, the act of creation, for example, then effect, the creation for example.

And you are very close to using thee ACTUAL WORDS that will be used to EXPLAIN, once and for ALL, the VERY NATURE of the ALWAYS changing and Creating Universe, Itself.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 12:33 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:45 pm Well. I have to confess that I witness a few years of conversation in this forum and I just rarely saw any agreement between debaters. So I was wondering how religion can succeed while we cannot.

Fear and trepidation.
Religion promises something that people think they need, though it does not provide what it promises.
It's called delusion, and people love it.

HOW do 'you' KNOW religion does NOT provide what it promises?

Have you lived for long enough to KNOW and PROVE this?

Also, have you read religious texts 100% accurately to KNOW what is ACTUALLY PROMISED?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:45 am When you discover what thee ANSWER to this question is, then the rest makes PERFECT SENSE.

I found 23 messages in my inbox this morning: more than I usually get from everybody combined, and more than I have ever gotten before. And of those I even bothered to open, not one seems to show a glimmer of understanding.

That's why I don't bother to talk to you. You don't learn, you don't really think; you just talk. A man who tries to converse with you is like a man trying to drill a hole in water....or more aptly, in gas.

I hope for your own sake, maybe one day you'll learn to hear. But that's not my affair, that's up to you.

Meanwhile, I say again,

Bye.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:23 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:23 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 7:36 pm
Which 'religion"?

All of them.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 7:36 pm For example, some might succeed by indoctinating and confusing people: cults do that. Or sometimes they use hallucinogens or abuse to render people pliable. Some succeed by force, making people submit to the will of their god by the sword, by bombs or by terror. Some succeed by having a great weight of cultural inertia behind them; people "born into' them believe them because they think it's part of "what they are" already, and don't know any alternatives. Some succeed by manipulating desperation, naivete or ambition.

But do any succeed by telling people the truth? That might be a good question to explore.

No one listens to the truth! What is the truth in your opinion?

Why do 'you' NOT listen to the truth?

What is the truth?

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 4:59 pm What is the truth?

The moral truth? The epistemological truth? The scientific truth? The metaphysical truth? The teleological truth? The Incarnate Truth? The truth about Kim and Kanye?

What are you asking?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:08 pm
Heh. Knock yourself out. Have a go.

That is the simple one. If there is a God then this means that there was a point that there was God and nothing else.

If the word 'was' here is replaced with the 'is' word, then this premise here is true.

Or, the 'point' word just refers to HERE-NOW, then the premise here is also true.

Here I am talking about the beginning which deals with creation rather than now which deals with sustaining.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm God then creates everything.

It the word 'creates' here is replaced with the words 'is creating, then the premise here is actually true.

No. I am talking about the beginning rather than now.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm But time is needed for the process of creation, God alone to God plus creation is a temporal process.

But being 'in creation' ALWAYS is a premise which is true.

I am talking about the begininng.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm This means that God has to have time in order to create time too.

Time is NOT a physical thing that is NOR could be created.

Time is a substance. At least within general relativity.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am Also, how the word 'time', and its definitions was created, then what is sometimes referred to as time was passing and so in order 'time', itself, was created is another premises, which is again actually true.

Ok.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm This is a regress.

But what I have said is just a fact, and thus a premise, which is actually true.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm Regress is not acceptable.

Regress can be acceptable, but only when LOOKED FROM thee True and Right perspective.

No. We have been through this in-depth.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm Therefore, the act of creation is impossible.

Creation is actually not just possible but is actuality. Otherwise, how could 'you' or ANY thing else be HERE-NOW.

Yes, we could be here without any intervention.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:47 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:19 pm Therefore, there is no God.

Depending on how the word 'God' is being defined, this will effect whether there is or is NOT a 'God'.

By God I mean the creaotr.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 2:37 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 12:33 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:45 pm Well. I have to confess that I witness a few years of conversation in this forum and I just rarely saw any agreement between debaters. So I was wondering how religion can succeed while we cannot.

Fear and trepidation.
Religion promises something that people think they need, though it does not provide what it promises.
It's called delusion, and people love it.

HOW do 'you' KNOW religion does NOT provide what it promises?

Have you lived for long enough to KNOW and PROVE this?

Also, have you read religious texts 100% accurately to KNOW what is ACTUALLY PROMISED?

Oh fuck the fucking fuck off you fucking brain dead fuckingly fuckerish fuckwitted twat.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 12:33 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:02 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:53 pm
No, actually, it doesn't. It can "require" no time, if time itself does not yet exist! That's the point.


That's the problem. You can't conceive of eternity, so you're trying to make it a kind of "time" in your thinking. But it isn't.

You are evading my argument. Was there a point that universe didn't exist?

NO.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:02 am If yes then God was alone at that point. Otherwise, there is no need for God.

Yes there is and this is because of what 'God' ACTUALLY IS and because of what God is actually creating.

We have been through this in-depth. There was a beginning. What God is is off-topic in here.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 1:46 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 8:37 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 8:30 pm
"Before" and "after" are terms that refer to either space or to time.

So what do you mean by "any act"? It can only mean, "any action within time and space." But Creation ex nihilo did not come from within time and space; in fact, it created both. In eternity-past, there was neither time nor space to precede the Creating event. So there was no "before" in the sense you understand the word "before" -- meaning in the sequence and interval between two material things or events within fixed space.

So there is no before and after in act of creation. This means that there is only one point that is involved in the act of creation. This means that you cannot have any change. So no creation. QED.

But ONLY if you are ASSUMING that there are actually two separated different 'points'. And, if this could be a POSSIBILITY, then HOW?

In here I proved that you cannot have one point in creation.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 2:14 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 9:43 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 9:30 pm
That doesn't change the problem. A state of affairs is also an event in space/time.

By state of affair I meant space+time included.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 9:30 pm
That's what "ex nihilo" means. It means that before the creation, none of the things we call "things" existed. There were no substances, no molecules, no gases, no atoms...nothing at all of what we call a physical nature.

In other words, creation ex nihilo begins with God, the only self-existent Being. That's why the first three words in the first book of the Bible are, "In the beginning, God..."

So if you accept that nothing is before something then this means that we are dealing with two points one comes after another one. For this you need time. This leads to regress since you need time for the creation of time. There is no creation. QED.

Is it POSSIBLE that the 'Creation' word just MEANS or just REFERS to something 'else' other than what you mean and are referring It to here?

No, there are three sorts of acts: 1) Creation, 2) Destruction, and 3) Change. Here we are talking about the first one.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:03 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 4:59 pm What is the truth?

The moral truth? The epistemological truth? The scientific truth? The metaphysical truth? The teleological truth? The Incarnate Truth? The truth about Kim and Kanye?

What are you asking?

The truth that everything else is derived from that.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:39 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:03 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 4:59 pm What is the truth?

The moral truth? The epistemological truth? The scientific truth? The metaphysical truth? The teleological truth? The Incarnate Truth? The truth about Kim and Kanye?

What are you asking?

The truth that everything else is derived from that.

What is your "that," and what is your "everything else" in that sentence? Do you mean the Truth from which all existence proceeds? That's obviously God Himself...

But if you make your question specific, I may be able to give you more of a helpful response...

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:45 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:39 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:03 pm
The moral truth? The epistemological truth? The scientific truth? The metaphysical truth? The teleological truth? The Incarnate Truth? The truth about Kim and Kanye?

What are you asking?

The truth that everything else is derived from that.

What is your "that," and what is your "everything else" in that sentence? Do you mean the Truth from which all existence proceeds? That's obviously God Himself...

But if you make your question specific, I may be able to give you more of a helpful response...

I am talking about the truth that all other truth are derived from. We are interacing minds.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:48 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:45 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:39 pm
The truth that everything else is derived from that.

What is your "that," and what is your "everything else" in that sentence? Do you mean the Truth from which all existence proceeds? That's obviously God Himself...

But if you make your question specific, I may be able to give you more of a helpful response...

I am talking about the truth that all other truth are derived from. We are interacing minds.

That we are "interacing" minds? Do you mean "interacting"? Even if we accept that, it doesn't help a great deal. Everybody agrees we have minds and interact...

Can you put your question in some specific form? What "truth" are you asking about, and saying "what is it"?