Extreme Atheism - leads to a Proxy God by default.

Status
Not open for further replies.
...........continued
More words related to potential
attainable
adjective. within reach; achievable
budding
adjective. developing, flowering
capabilities
noun. ability to perform
noun. ability to perform
continued........
 
Write4U,
Not many people understand the significance of what you are saying, as it is wrapped up in all sorts of communication problems.
BUT....
YOU are absolutely correct in highlighting the fact that "Potential" is all we really have.
For reasons that even now, you are yet to fathom. Thousands of threads like this one would not even make a dint in in peoples understanding of the truth of what you are somewhat naively suggesting.

Perhaps one could consider that the realization of this truth ( the truth about potential) is what drives your ...uhmmm... difficulty in communicating.

The truth is utterly overwhelming to those unprepared for it....~QQ
 
Almost sounds like your god, no? Except it isn't. No God required. It's a mathematical physical thing. And it can be quantified and qualified. I find it very easy to understand.

"That (latent ability) which may become reality". Worship is not required.
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
Almost sounds like your god, no? Except it isn't. No God required. It's a mathematical physical thing. And it can be quantified and qualified

"That which may become reality"
Click to expand...
My God??
What God?
You seem to have an idea, more so than I, so please explain...
 
Quantum Quack said:
If you had seriously considered the context the OP put forward then you would have saved yourself quite a few postings.
If you have something about the topic to discuss please do so...
It is easy to manipulate words and intentions on the Internet. Bullies and trolls do it all the time...it take courage and maturity to find a way to get productive results that benefit all members of the discussion.

Are you interested in a productive result that benefits all who participate or are you just here to get some perverse satisfaction in the hope of propping up a failing self esteem?

In other words if you can not contribute to the thread then why post?
Click to expand...
Ah right.
You make false claims. Get shown that they're false. Deny making them. Ask for them to be quoted. Get them quoted.
And now you resort to avoiding the subject altogether.
Way to go.
 
Quantum Quack said:
My God??
What God?
You seem to have an idea, more so than I, so please explain...
Click to expand...
You did not qualify your God, so I must assume that you mean the God as described in the Bible, Quran, Book of Mormons.
If your concept is closer to mine than to scripture, welcome. I'd love to explore the implications contained in the definitions and application of universal potentials.

It gets us on the path of scientific exploration and mathematical explanations (equations).

E = Mc^2 is a mathematical expression of Potential.
 
Last edited:
Dywyddyr said:
Ah right.
You make false claims. Get shown that they're false. Deny making them. Ask for them to be quoted. Get them quoted.
And now you resort to avoiding the subject altogether.
Way to go.
Click to expand...
If what you are saying is true, then I can only congratulate my mentor for such profiund teaching... the art of dodge and weave, bait and switch and strawnan use....
Thank you Sensei, I am in your debt.....

You may think that as a backhanded compliment but it's not. Every time I get an irrational response I learn more about the subject at hand. I also learn from rational responses but here at sciforums they are quite rare.
 
Last edited:
Quantum Quack said:
If what you are saying is true, then I can only congratulate my mentor for such profiund teaching... the art of dodge and weave, bait and switch and strawnan use....
Thank you Sensei, I am in your debt.....

You may think that as a backhanded compliment but it's not. Every time I get an irrational response I learn more about the subject at hand. I also learn from rational responses but here at sciforums they are quite rare.
Click to expand...
So, again, you're going to ignore the fact that you made a false claim, were shown to be wrong and just carry on...
 
The contradiction exposed in the scientific fatalist/pre-determinist position can be summed up with the following:

When asked:
What is responsible for all of human suffering, historically, presently and in the future?

  1. If the answer is HUMANS, a position that many if not most atheists would agree with, then self determination and freewill MUST be real and evident.
  2. If the answer is THE UNIVERSES fatalistic determinism leading to pre-determinism, then freewill and self determination MUST be an illusion, and the Universe takes on the responsibility for all human suffering.
If the universe takes on that responsibility then it can be declared a proxy God by default.

Leading to the contradiction of an ( extreme ) Atheist believing in a proxy God.

The very last thing a scientific fatalist wishes, is to be considered a believer in a proxy God but that is where their extremist views on freewill and self determination logically takes them.

And guess what?
They can only blame their proxy God for the contradiction, after all to them freewill is an illusion...:cool:
 
cluelusshusbund said:
I asked the first queston... so if wer'e goin by first... you'r "it" :)
Click to expand...
It's not my job to teach you the stuff you should have learned in highschool....
Do the research demonstrate a basic understanding and then it might be worth discussing things you may be confused about...
wiki is pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading_question

Start a new thread and invite members to participate perhaps:
What is a leading question?
 
Capracus said:
No, I'm saying that the universe and everything in it are all subject to the same deterministic process. The universal process of deterministic interaction is what motivate everything. Nothing acts freely in a deterministic reality.
Click to expand...
So what would be different if there are one or numerous deterministic processes, with zero scope of anything being beyond one or all of them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top