Philosophy Now Forum

Of the 7+ billion on earth, how many do you think are likely to agree to be a victim of the atrocities below? Wait a minute. "Agree"? If Atheism is true, then nobody needs to "agree" to be abused. It can be done whether they like it or not. If "survival of the fittest" got us here, why would we aba...

Skepdick wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 18, 2019 11:19 pm

You aren't interested in arbitration though?

We're on a new topic, S.

Meanwhile, I'm happy to let my existing arguments stand, in the hope that one day you'll pay closer attention to them, and realize there's something you did not understand. But if not, that's on you. Let's leave it there.

I see you are not familiar with the laws of vibration and as material vibrations increase matter becomes less dense and people begin to call it energy. I'm not sure of the relevance, Nick. But I am curious about something I asked before, and already answered for you: what's your personal "referee,"...

Skepdick wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:29 pm

This is you losing the Mathematical argument.

Let's see if that turns out to be true.

The ONE in relation to the density of consciousness is infinitely small but is greater than all we experience in the relative densities of matter. Yeah, well, that's not science or theology, Nick. It's just poetry. In the East the great cycle is called the Breath of Brahma. Exhaltion is creation wh...

But the accusation is not an assault of your character. It does not matter. It's not relevant to the question, whether you intended it as insult or not. By calling you stupid I am actually pointing your factual inability for Mathematical or Statistical reasoning. "Stupid" means "in a stupor." Not o...

...the probability of our existence is not disputed. As observed - it's 100% certain that we exist. You're only assuming, though, that the reason for our existence is randomness plus infinity. Not only have you not demonstrated that it is, you are in fact wrong about the possibility that randomness...

It is not ad-hominem when it's a fact. Well, that is false, actually. The ad hominem fallacy does not rely on truth or falsehood of the accusation. If you believed me, and based that belief on some claim of my personal wonderfulness, you would be just as ad hominem fallacious in that as you would b...

Seriously dude, if you are going to be defending the indefensible you can't afford to be this stupid. Ah, yes...the ad hominem ...the first refuge of the losing arguer. Well, perhaps you can pretend not to see it, and perhaps you really can't. I can't know that. I can just tell you that you haven't...

But the fact that you and I are here, right now existing - it means that we won it! That's assuming a couple of things we can't assume. Namely, it's taking for granted without further doubt that quantum variability IS the reason for our existence. We don't know that, and can't use the quantum expla...

Skepdick wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 18, 2019 7:27 pm

A limited infinity is not infinity.

Now you've got it!

If you want to have infinite recursions of chances, you would have to arbitrarily limit the variables involved, or you'd never increase your odds.

As you say, "a limited infinity is not infinity."

The anthropic principle necessitates self-observational bias. You can't observe a universe in which you don't exist. The Anthropic Argument is merely circular, and very trivially so. It says, "The reason we can exist and observe the universe is that we couldn't observe the universe if this wasn't t...

However many wouldn’t agree and assert that the universe is cyclical. They are both Biblically and scientifically believing something untenable. The cyclic universe theory is a model of cosmic evolution according to which the universe undergoes endless cycles of expansion and cooling, each beginnin...

You don't understand statistics. Quite the opposite: it seems obvious that you are making a mistake about what infinity plus randomness implies. You're supposing that infinity can increase odds. But you're forgetting randomness. Infinity can only increase odds if the number of possible variables an...

But it is the chain of collectives that have the power. Not necessarily, though we should really worry about that. Collectives tend to do bad things. What usually happens is this: the masses get mobilized around a common cause. A collective is formed. The cause is then put forward with violence or ...