Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! No angles on a round pin head Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Here we go Jan your description .... In the case of the ugly duckling, life started for the little Swan when he came to the realisation he wasn't a duck, but a swan. Its such a loverly story Jan and like most fairey tales written for children mind you I do know of a great book of fairey tales for adults who have the mind of a child. Here is a vid you will like https://in-vid.net/video/bible-proof-of-the-flat-earth-truth-cApXPTrOf7A.html Alex
True just countless angels. I wonder what dances they like...deep. Take a peek at the vid I put up for Jan it contains proof that the Earth is flat, like real proof in the bible. Please take the time to watch all of it as it gives you a hint into their interesting flat world...apparently there is more to it then being flat but I will stop and let you watch ... we tend to dismiss stuff like it and miss what they are on about but its an eye openner for sure. Alex
I tried to watch it I really did - but seriously 4 minutes in I had to close it down I kept thinking of some of the patients I looked after in rubber padded walls Truly they were making more sense than the video Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
What am I describing? You should have realised by now, the answer is not the world. To be fair you did say etc... So I'm holding to see what else it is you think I'm describing. Obviously if you don't answer, I will be forced to think you're talking nonsense. I'm begining to see the validity in the subject of my latest thread. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Jan
If Musika is arguing that, then he/she isn't alone. This is from the article on Occasionalism from the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, which interestingly is reproduced on an Islamic philosophy website here: http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/K057.htm "Occasionalism is often thought of primarily as a rather desperate solution to the problem of mind-body interaction. Mind and body, it maintains, do not in fact causally affect each other at all; rather, it is God who causes bodily movements to occur 'on the occasion of' appropriate mental states (for example, volitions), and who causes mental states, such as sensations, on the occasion of the corresponding bodily states (for example, sensory stimulation). This characterization, while correct so far as it goes, is seriously incomplete. Occasionalists have seen the lack of real causal influence between mind and body as merely a special case of the more general truth that no two created beings ever causally affect each other. The one and only 'true cause' is God, with created beings serving as the occasions for his causal and creative activity, but never as causes in their own right. (The one possible exception to this is that created agents may themselves bring about their own acts of will... Is occasionalism simply a historical curiosity, or does it have the potential to become a viable position for present-day theists?... there are two principal arguments for occasionalism, based respectively on the critique of natural causality and on the pre-emptive causality of God. The argument from the critique of natural causality proceeds as we have already seen in al-Ghazali and Malebranche. Various criticisms are employed (many familiar to us through Hume) to argue that causality as we experience it in nature is not the necessary, genuinely productive relationship that we ordinarily take it to be..." And for Hume on causality (and before atheist knees jerk, Hume is widely assumed to have been an atheist. albeit of a skeptical sort), see the IEP here: https://www.iep.utm.edu/hume-cau/ Hume divides all possible objects of knowledge into two classes that he calls "relations of ideas" and "matters of fact" (this is known as Hume's fork). By 'relations of ideas', Hume seems to be thinking of logic and mathematics. By 'matters of fact' he is talking about what is and isn't true in the natural world. And being a good empiricist, he argues that we can only know about the latter matters of fact through sensory experience. Regarding causation, Hume argues in a sort of modal logical way that it doesn't violate any of the principles of logic to imagine that particular causal relations don't hold. We can imagine counterfactual 'possible worlds' in which the causal principles of physics take different form. The IEP picks up the story: "We must therefore follow a different route in considering what our impression of necessity amounts to. As causation, at base, involves only matters of fact, Hume once again challenges us to consider what we can know of the constituent impressions of causation. Once more, all we can come up with is an experienced constant conjunction. Of the common understanding of causality, Hume points out that we never have an impression of efficacy. Because of this, our notion of causal law seems to be a mere presentiment that the constant conjunction will continue to be constant, some certainty that this mysterious union will persist... For Hume, the necessary connection invoked by causation is nothing more than this certainty."
Thats why I said you can describe "the etc" in an effort to show I understood where you were coming from. I took your use of the fairy tale to parrallel your belief that humans go from one state to another and that in the first state they are generally unaware of the second state. Was that it Jan? Perhaps you should look again and consider the role of the journalst and role of the scientist...neither are concerned with "truth" but one avoids trampling over it and the other does not. Alex
I do think my virtue here is that I know I cant know matters that are the product of speculation by other humans but know that their speculation arises because they dont know and I know they dont actually know despite them using their speculation to assert that they do know when clearly they know any more than me and I dont know. The difference between me and them is I realise the stories are man made, made up, and tell a story that lets us understand man and his creation. The best wisdom I offer is the addmission I dont know other than the God story is made up and that is a fact well established and that single powerful undeniable fact will stand constant review into the future...made up. Made up ... add water and it grows to...Invented by humans being nothing more than a recording of their speculations upon matters they did not understand but nevertheless attempted explaination by employing superstition and created fictional characters....but made up sums it up. And man made up God and man made up that his made up God created the Universe following a step by step process made up by man. You either see it or you dont...☺ Alex
Well thanks for trying. My point is they are so crazy that you do tend to turn them off and it is only by hearing them out that you get full appreciation of how crazy they really are... But they find their evidence in the bible that is the worry as this nonsence has the potential to spread... My point is one really needs to listen long and hard to understand their thought process if you want to understand them...you could say its a waste of time...you may not like cane toads and think reading about their habits etc tiresome but if you are going to manage the problem of cane toads you need to study them closely. Before I thought flat earthers were somewhat individual nutters , just like you could look at a cane toad and say oh its just another frog, but the flat earthers seem tied to this dangerous fundamentalism that says to me they are not just ordinary frogs. This resurgence of employing the bible to find ones science is alarming and it has the potential to spread ... most of these religious folk already have the capacity to believe nonsence...maybe we should catch a couple of them and keep them in cages so we can watch them and study them close up...cane toads I mean☺ Alex
Thought bubble - do you think us atheist non belief is the ultimate Just IS? After all there is no baggage attached If god just is - god becomes baggage - do this, don't do that A not belief is empty Just a thought bubble Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Well I approach stuff on with the words "things just are" to remind myself one need not be drawn into judgement and to avoid qualifying things as either good or bad. "Theists just are"☺ Alex
Problem - just are what? god just is Problem - just is what? Lunch time Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
They just are. What more do you need? God is. I is. You is. Now follow the circle as it decreases in size and you will reach enlightement with self centering and realise that you are indeed yhe center of the universe well the observable universe just as I am the center of the observable universe. Alex
We are all in this together Problem - I don't WANT to be in it with YOU - so piss off Why should I piss off? If you want to leave nothing stopping you Oh ya you'd like that wouldn't you? Voice of Reason - cough cough - can we all just get along? Two voices - SHUT UP YOUR WHINING IS MAKING IT WORSE I just thought WELL DON'T And that ends tonight's episode of Reality in Real Life brought to you in conjunction with What just Happened Y'all take care now and remember It's not what you hear which is important, it's how can I be insulted by that Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
And the basis of your knowledge is.....? Good on ya! At least you appear to be content. I guess that must be a big help with the delusion. So... Plan A - keep telling yourself God is made up. And when that fails to work. You resort to... Plan B - just repeat "I don't know". Are you not aware that plan B is a debate tactic, use by professional atheists like Michael Shermer, Laurence Krauss, etc... Theists are aware that you don't mean it. I can see that you believe it's true, so long as you block everything out, that goes against it. Then you throw in "I don't know". Because you're supposed to? Beats me. Jan.
The word you are looking for is "amazing". Well yes trying to understand your dellusion is far from easy. I only said I dont know to let you think that I may not know everything but I lied ...I do know everything. You are correct I should not say that I dont know when in fact I do know...but with that out of the way we still must face the fact that its all made up. Alex
