Philosophy Now Forum

Oh, boo-hoo. Having had experience with deep depression and two bouts with cancer, you complaints sound petty. Life wondrous--and death is a part of that.

We all have biases.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:And why won't the classical god go away?

Because it makes sense, and you're doing EXACTLY the same thing Krauss does when he made himself look like an ignorant ass by arguing for and endless series causes the same way an ignorant person might argue "it's turtles all the way down."

It's off topic, but Classical theism "is, historically, the mainstream view in philosophy and is associated with the tradition of writers like Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine, St. Anselm, Maimonides, Averroes and Thomas Aquinas." True, it emphasizes transcendence at the expense of im...

Based on what I've seen, then, I can only conclude that "the classical men in frocks" who taught you were either morons or theologically immature. Why else would Thomistic theologians find Bohm's ideas appealing?

I don't know what you think about Bohm's ideas nor do I care. The point is, your belief that "first cause" points to something even remotely connected to the sequence of events or the first law of thermodynamics is what's invalidated. According to Bohm , you should have added. And classic...

First cause is already invalidated by the first law of thermodynamics... Only if you presume "first" refers to something in a long sequence of events. It does not. It's hierarchical. From the essay I linked to: The holomovement idea stresses two things: wholeness and movement. A few matte...

alpha wrote: did everyone happen to notice how leo conveniently avoids the questions that he can't answer?

His worst habit, I think, is the way he makes inferences from things never said or even implied. I usually just ignore him.

Tell me what you think of the essay I linked to, alpha.

There isn't a scientist in the world who claims that the universe came into existence from nothing. Even Larry Krauss is not actually claiming this, although his agent obviously decided it was a good title for a book. Exactly, but don't don't blame his publisher. He's given lectures he himself call...

Here is an essay that is relevant in this other topics, like philosophy of religion, science or metaphysics:

A Theology Based on David Bohm's Holomovement Metaphysics

alpha wrote:i have no idea what the hell you're talking about!

No one has any idea what the hell Leo is talking about--ever. Not even Leo.

i'd use the word 'existence' instead of 'universe', Please explain the distinction between these two terms. If you claim that there is valid notion of "existence" which applies external to the universe then you are not doing philosophy and should be taking your thoughts off to a theology ...

I posted this in another thread and is just as relevant here, if not more so: "Freewill" implies limitation and coordination. Randomness (freedom) and necessity do not exist independently nor is their coexistence temporal. The former implies limitation, mutability, extension and diversity;...

Please explain how Heisenberg relates to the question. Heisenberg came upon the uncertainty principle by thinking there might be a reality that is not discoverable by experiment or explained by mathematical formalities. This might hurt your 19th century head, but more and more, the universe in whic...

there is no such thing as randomness (actual randomness). Of course. That's exactly what "randomness (freedom) and necessity do not exist independently" implies. Hobbes either: 1) lives in an alternate universe in which 19th century physics still prospers, 2) is willfully ignorant, 3) is ...