Our universe is contingent

[bahman]

In 'what' universe is it that "God is the creator out of nothing?

God did not exist in any universe before creating everything out of nothing.

So, to you, God NEVER existed in ANY universe, before God created absolutely EVERY thing out of absolutely NO thing.

Okay. And, as I was saying and showing the ABSURD becomes MORE and MORE ABSURD and RIDICULOUS the further you 'try to' back up and support your previous claims.

If a universe existed before act of creation out of nothing then the act of creation is not creation out of nothing since a universe already exist.

Now, WHERE was God BEFORE It created absolutely EVERY thing or this Universe?

Nowhere. I told you that I don't think that such a God exist.

WHEN did God create this Universe? And,

People and not me think at the beginning of everything.

WHAT is God, EXACTLY?

All-powerful, all knowledgable, etc. Simply the creator.

What is 'this', EXACTLY, which we have, SUPPOSEDLY, been through?

That the creation out of nothing is logically impossible.

I KNOW. But WHY is it 'you', "bahman", who keeps saying God created EVERY thing out of NO thing.

I didn't say so.

What is 'A God', which you are referring to here?

Any creator.

So, the one creating these words here is 'A God'.

No, it is a god. A God is all-powerful, all-knowing, etc.

Also, WHY do you STILL NOT KNOW what 'God', IS, EXACTLY?

I know what God is by definition.

What is 'God', to you, EXACTLY, by definition?

Simply a mind with the ability to create but S/He defers from us because S/He knows everything.

I have contact with supernatural beings but this is off topic.

So, WHY THEN did you bring this up and mention it here?

Let's forget this.

So, to you there are MANY 'minds', which the WHOLE One Universe is sustained by, correct?

Yes.

And, once again, what we have here is ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE of this becoming MORE and MORE ABSURD and RIDICULOUS when 'trying to' back up and support its ALREADY made CLAIMS.

Whatever.

You have also claimed that the WHOLE Universe, Itself, excluding 'minds', themselves, is sustained by 'minds'.

What, to you, is 'Qualia', EXACTLY?

Qualia is a substance that can be experienced and created by the mind.

Besides your "arguing" being illogical, unsound, invalid, and unreasonable here it is also VERY, VERY DEFECTIVE with your 'circular reasoning'.

Which part is illogical?

[Age]

We do not control animals' bodies and minds. We just have control over our bodies. So I disagree that animals' minds are contingent upon humans' minds. Mind, in general, is not contingent otherwise we are dealing with a regress.

If you speak of control, obviously animals' mind are not contingent upon humans' mind.

As I presented the syllogism above and following therefrom,

• 1. Reality as all-there-is cannot be independent of human minds.
  2. Animals' mind are part and parcel of reality.
  3. Therefore animals' mind cannot be independent [so are contingent] of human minds.

Show me what wrong with the above syllogism?

I don't like P1. Prove me that it is correct.

What does what you 'like' and/or 'dislike' have to do with what IS ACTUALLY True or NOT?

Why do you NOT just say what you do NOT like with P1 instead?

[bahman]

If the 'we' here does NOT control animals' bodies and minds, then who or what EXACTLY does control human animals' bodies and minds?

The human mind only controls the human body.

But there is NO so-called "human mind". And, until you come to REALIZE this Fact, you will continue on saying the Truly ABSURD and RIDICULOUS things that you do here.

By the way, who or what do you want to now say controls the so-called "human mind"?

So, again you with your theory of thee Mind.

If 'we' do NOT control animals' bodies, but 'we' have control over 'our' bodies, and the 'we' refers to 'you', human beings, then 'you', human beings, are NOT animals. So, if to you human beings are NOT animals, then what are 'you', human beings, then, EXACTLY?

Don't you make the distinction between humans and animals?

YES. The human animal is VERY, VERY DIFFERENT from ALL of the other animals.

WHY do you say these COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC REMARKS, which I OBVIOUSLY NEVER even IMPLIED, let alone said?

Is part of the REASON to 'try to' DETRACT from the ILLOGICAL, ABSURD, and RIDICULOUS CLAIM you made here about how 'we' do NOT control animal bodies?

You OBVIOUSLY FORGOT the Fact that the human body IS an 'animal body'. So, if as you BELIEVE and CLAIM, that you do NOT control animal bodies, then you OBVIOUSLY also do NOT control the human body.

Like a GREAT DEAL of your "arguments" you end up saying the MOST ABSURD and RIDICULOUS things when I QUESTION and CHALLENGE you.

So you think that we control animals?

A LOT of what you say and claim "bahman" regresses, into oblivion.

Ok, I am not going to discuss the regress with you since we have been through this many times.

AND, BECAUSE you can NOT even substantiate YOUR CLAIMS here.

No, because you don't simply understand the implication of a definition.

[Age]

I said the universe was the necessary ground for all contingencies.
So your responses are completely off beam.
Why don't you read people's responses?

So, what do you mean by "The universe was the necessary ground for all contingencies."? Do you mind elaborating?

Everything that happens in the universe is contingent upon the existence of the universe and other things in it. The universe as a whole cannot be contingent on anything because it is everything. and not contingent thing can exist if it doed not have a ground of existence. The universe is that necessary ground of existence.
Furthur to that. Since all things conform to cause and effect. All contingent actions are caused by antecedant conditions. This all stems from the existence and qualities of the universe. Consequently all contingent events rely on cause and effect and are so the necessary outcome of previous grounding conditions. COnclusion is that all things are necessary.
WOuld you like me to break it down more?

I am not sure you could break this down any more.

Surely even "bahman" would NOT even 'try to' argue against this.

[bahman]

If you speak of control, obviously animals' mind are not contingent upon humans' mind.

As I presented the syllogism above and following therefrom,

• 1. Reality as all-there-is cannot be independent of human minds.
  2. Animals' mind are part and parcel of reality.
  3. Therefore animals' mind cannot be independent [so are contingent] of human minds.

Show me what wrong with the above syllogism?

I don't like P1. Prove me that it is correct.

What does what you 'like' and/or 'dislike' have to do with what IS ACTUALLY True or NOT?

Why do you NOT just say what you do NOT like with P1 instead?

I don't think that P1 is true. It needs a proof.

[bahman]

So, what do you mean by "The universe was the necessary ground for all contingencies."? Do you mind elaborating?

Everything that happens in the universe is contingent upon the existence of the universe and other things in it. The universe as a whole cannot be contingent on anything because it is everything. and not contingent thing can exist if it doed not have a ground of existence. The universe is that necessary ground of existence.
Furthur to that. Since all things conform to cause and effect. All contingent actions are caused by antecedant conditions. This all stems from the existence and qualities of the universe. Consequently all contingent events rely on cause and effect and are so the necessary outcome of previous grounding conditions. COnclusion is that all things are necessary.
WOuld you like me to break it down more?

I am not sure you could break this down any more.

Surely even "bahman" would NOT even 'try to' argue against this.

I already argued against it.

[Age]

So, what do you mean by "The universe was the necessary ground for all contingencies."? Do you mind elaborating?

Everything that happens in the universe is contingent upon the existence of the universe and other things in it. The universe as a whole cannot be contingent on anything because it is everything. and not contingent thing can exist if it doed not have a ground of existence. The universe is that necessary ground of existence.

There are two objections here: 1) I am talking about our universe rather than everything

What is the DIFFERENCE between the misnomer "our universe" and 'everything'.

Until you start CLARIFYING, LOGICALLY, "bahman" you are just looking more and more ABSURD and RIDICULOUS here.

and 2) You need to prove that everything which is constituted of all possible things exists (for example a Sculptor who believe in the contingency of the universe somewhere in everything:mrgreen:).

An eternal AND infinite Universe is ALL the PROOF that is needed for your ABSURD and RIDICULOUS expectation and demand here.

Furthur to that. Since all things conform to cause and effect. All contingent actions are caused by antecedant conditions. This all stems from the existence and qualities of the universe. Consequently all contingent events rely on cause and effect and are so the necessary outcome of previous grounding conditions. COnclusion is that all things are necessary.

I don't think that all things always conform to cause and effect. For example, a system cannot evolve based on cause and effect when there is a conflict of interests in a system.

Here is MORE PROOF of WHEN a human being BELIEVES some thing, then they will say just about ANY thing in order to 'try to' back up and support their current BELIEF, and this includes saying the MOST ABSURD and RIDICULOUS of things, as PROVEN above.

I have a thread on this topic in here.

WOuld you like me to break it down more?

Oh, no. Thanks. That was long enough.

It would NOT matter how many people SHOWED you, in as many words, nor in as the least amount of words, possible that you are just Wrong here, you still would NOT be able to SEE this NOR understand this Fact. And, this is solely due to the Fact that you BELIEVE, wholeheartedly, otherwise.

[bahman]

Everything that happens in the universe is contingent upon the existence of the universe and other things in it. The universe as a whole cannot be contingent on anything because it is everything. and not contingent thing can exist if it doed not have a ground of existence. The universe is that necessary ground of existence.

There are two objections here: 1) I am talking about our universe rather than everything

What is the DIFFERENCE between the misnomer "our universe" and 'everything'.

Until you start CLARIFYING, LOGICALLY, "bahman" you are just looking more and more ABSURD and RIDICULOUS here.

By our universe, I mean the physical one that human beings can experience. This is one possible universe and it is different from everything possible.

and 2) You need to prove that everything which is constituted of all possible things exists (for example a Sculptor who believe in the contingency of the universe somewhere in everything:mrgreen:).

An eternal AND infinite Universe is ALL the PROOF that is needed for your ABSURD and RIDICULOUS expectation and demand here.

No.

Furthur to that. Since all things conform to cause and effect. All contingent actions are caused by antecedant conditions. This all stems from the existence and qualities of the universe. Consequently all contingent events rely on cause and effect and are so the necessary outcome of previous grounding conditions. COnclusion is that all things are necessary.

I don't think that all things always conform to cause and effect. For example, a system cannot evolve based on cause and effect when there is a conflict of interests in a system.

Here is MORE PROOF of WHEN a human being BELIEVES some thing, then they will say just about ANY thing in order to 'try to' back up and support their current BELIEF, and this includes saying the MOST ABSURD and RIDICULOUS of things, as PROVEN above.

Do you know what is the conflict of interest?

I have a thread on this topic in here.

WOuld you like me to break it down more?

Oh, no. Thanks. That was long enough.

It would NOT matter how many people SHOWED you, in as many words, nor in as the least amount of words, possible that you are just Wrong here, you still would NOT be able to SEE this NOR understand this Fact. And, this is solely due to the Fact that you BELIEVE, wholeheartedly, otherwise.

As you wish.

[Age]

God did not exist in any universe before creating everything out of nothing.

So, to you, God NEVER existed in ANY universe, before God created absolutely EVERY thing out of absolutely NO thing.

Okay. And, as I was saying and showing the ABSURD becomes MORE and MORE ABSURD and RIDICULOUS the further you 'try to' back up and support your previous claims.

If a universe existed before act of creation out of nothing then the act of creation is not creation out of nothing since a universe already exist.

But to even just suggest that there was ANY "creation out of nothing" IS ABSURDITY in the EXTREME. Let alone to go on with ANY of the other ABSURD things you are saying and claiming here.

LOOK, there is ONLY One Universe, which is eternal AND infinite, by nature. And, this is a Fact, which OBVIOUSLY can NOT be refuted. So, there is NO use AT ALL even talking about ANY God thing, creating this Universe, out of NO things. All of this God/big bang created EVERY thing, from NO thing, is just completely AND utterly ABSURD, and to keep going on and on about it is just INSANITY, to the EXTREME.

Now, WHERE was God BEFORE It created absolutely EVERY thing or this Universe?

Nowhere. I told you that I don't think that such a God exist.

But you keep telling us that some 'mind' thing DID.

WHEN did God create this Universe? And,

People and not me think at the beginning of everything.

So, do you AGREE and ACCEPT that there was NO beginning to Everything?

If no, then what do you think in regards to this?

WHAT is God, EXACTLY?

All-powerful, all knowledgable, etc. Simply the creator.

So, to you, God is EXACTLY simply 'the creator'.

Now, 'the creator' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

And, how, EXACTLY, did God/the creator create this thing or things? And WHERE and WHEN did God create this thing or things?

That the creation out of nothing is logically impossible.

I KNOW. But WHY is it 'you', "bahman", who keeps saying God created EVERY thing out of NO thing.

I didn't say so.

Are you absolutely sure?

Any creator.

So, the one creating these words here is 'A God'.

No, it is a god. A God is all-powerful, all-knowing, etc.

What does 'etc' refer to, EXACTLY? And

Who or what is God, EXACTLY, to you?

I know what God is by definition.

What is 'God', to you, EXACTLY, by definition?

Simply a mind with the ability to create but S/He defers from us because S/He knows everything.

So, to you, there exists "A gendered mind", somewhere.

Are you aware that your attempts at justifying your previous CLAIMS are looking more and more absurd and ridiculous, to us readers?

I have contact with supernatural beings but this is off topic.

So, WHY THEN did you bring this up and mention it here?

Let's forget this.

So, I ask you a CLARIFYING QUESTION about WHY you brought some thing up, which you VERY QUICKLY remarked was "off topic", and you can NOT even CLARIFY this for us here.

Yes.


Whatever.


Qualia is a substance that can be experienced and created by the mind.

Besides your "arguing" being illogical, unsound, invalid, and unreasonable here it is also VERY, VERY DEFECTIVE with your 'circular reasoning'.

Which part is illogical?

The part about;

God is an all-knowing, all-powerful, etc, simple creator mind thing, which is NOT to be mistaken by the 'minds' in 'you', human beings, which are gods, but which only has control over human bodies, but which does not have control over 'you', because 'you', persons or human beings, have control over "your minds".

As well as a LOT of other things you say and claim here.

[Age]

The human mind only controls the human body.

But there is NO so-called "human mind". And, until you come to REALIZE this Fact, you will continue on saying the Truly ABSURD and RIDICULOUS things that you do here.

By the way, who or what do you want to now say controls the so-called "human mind"?

So, again you with your theory of thee Mind.

What, EXACTLY, are you 'trying to' imply here?

I just said what you do NOT YET REALIZE, and what you will continue to do. Which has been PROVED True, ALREADY.

I also just asked you a CLARIFYING QUESTION, which you OBVIOUSLY can NOT answer, without looking STUPID, and so, OBVIOUSLY, you did NOT answer it.

Don't you make the distinction between humans and animals?

YES. The human animal is VERY, VERY DIFFERENT from ALL of the other animals.

WHY do you say these COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC REMARKS, which I OBVIOUSLY NEVER even IMPLIED, let alone said?

Is part of the REASON to 'try to' DETRACT from the ILLOGICAL, ABSURD, and RIDICULOUS CLAIM you made here about how 'we' do NOT control animal bodies?

You OBVIOUSLY FORGOT the Fact that the human body IS an 'animal body'. So, if as you BELIEVE and CLAIM, that you do NOT control animal bodies, then you OBVIOUSLY also do NOT control the human body.

Like a GREAT DEAL of your "arguments" you end up saying the MOST ABSURD and RIDICULOUS things when I QUESTION and CHALLENGE you.

So you think that we control animals?

AGAIN, what can be CLEARLY SEEN here is just ANOTHER ATTEMPT at DETRACTION from the MOST ABSURD CLAIM that "bahman" about how it does NOT control the body that it is within.

Also, 'you', human beings, CERTAINLY DO control some animals, especially when you lock them up in cages or within fences, and fatten them up, just so 'you' can then KILL them, just so you can then EAT them.

'you', also, by the way, do HAVE CONTROL over human animals. Although the way you "treat" earth and the environment that 'you' NEED for live, I wonder just how much control 'you' REALLY do have over "yourselves".

From what I am observing and witnessing, the way 'you' are so-called "controlling yourselves", in the days when this is being written, 'you' REALLY do NOT have that much time left on that One and ONLY home you call earth.

Ok, I am not going to discuss the regress with you since we have been through this many times.

AND, BECAUSE you can NOT even substantiate YOUR CLAIMS here.

No, because you don't simply understand the implication of a definition.

LOL

NO one understands YOUR definitions, besides 'you', OF COURSE. But, then again, I wonder sometimes if even you KNOW and UNDERSTAND what you, "yourself", say and claim.

[Age]

I don't like P1. Prove me that it is correct.

What does what you 'like' and/or 'dislike' have to do with what IS ACTUALLY True or NOT?

Why do you NOT just say what you do NOT like with P1 instead?

I don't think that P1 is true. It needs a proof.

LOL
LOL
LOL

How MANY TIMES do you have to be TOLD before you UNDERSTAND that while you MAINTAIN a BELIEF, then there is absolutely NO proof AT ALL that can be given to you for the contrary?

'you', "bahman", just like EVERY other adult human being are NOT able to SEE PROOF if you BELIEVE that NONE exists.

So, as I suggested, in my QUESTIONING to you, if you REALLY think that P1 is NOT true, then WHY NOT just PROVIDE the ACTUAL PROOF you have for this way of thinking. If you PROVIDED that, then there would, OBVIOUSLY, be NO proof for the "other side".

[Age]

Everything that happens in the universe is contingent upon the existence of the universe and other things in it. The universe as a whole cannot be contingent on anything because it is everything. and not contingent thing can exist if it doed not have a ground of existence. The universe is that necessary ground of existence.
Furthur to that. Since all things conform to cause and effect. All contingent actions are caused by antecedant conditions. This all stems from the existence and qualities of the universe. Consequently all contingent events rely on cause and effect and are so the necessary outcome of previous grounding conditions. COnclusion is that all things are necessary.
WOuld you like me to break it down more?

I am not sure you could break this down any more.

Surely even "bahman" would NOT even 'try to' argue against this.

I already argued against it.

Yes you did 'try to', SURPRISINGLY.

And, ONCE AGAIN, if ANY one provides 'an argument', then the ONLY Right reason for doing so is so that "others" can POINT OUT and SHOW, to that one WHERE that their 'argument' is NOT a sound AND valid argument, and NOT really worth repeating AT ALL. And, as I have previously stated, there is NO use in repeating an argument that is NOT a sound AND valid argument. End of story.

ANY and ALL sound AND valid arguments, after all, just express a Fact, which NO one could refute, and so REALLY once an argument SHOWS and REVEALS thee ACTUAL Truth of things, ONCE, then that Truth, literally, just speaks for Itself. As I just SHOWED and PROVED, once again above.

[Sculptor]

So, what do you mean by "The universe was the necessary ground for all contingencies."? Do you mind elaborating?

Everything that happens in the universe is contingent upon the existence of the universe and other things in it. The universe as a whole cannot be contingent on anything because it is everything. and not contingent thing can exist if it doed not have a ground of existence. The universe is that necessary ground of existence.

There are two objections here: 1) I am talking about our universe rather than everything and

RIght here - this is exactly why I think you have no business posting to a philosophy thread. The "universe" IS eveything. If you don't know that then you don't know shit.

2) You need to prove that everything which is constituted of all possible things exists (for example a Sculptor who believe in the contingency of the universe somewhere in everything:mrgreen:).

Furthur to that. Since all things conform to cause and effect. All contingent actions are caused by antecedant conditions. This all stems from the existence and qualities of the universe. Consequently all contingent events rely on cause and effect and are so the necessary outcome of previous grounding conditions. COnclusion is that all things are necessary.

I don't think that all things always conform to cause and effect. For example, a system cannot evolve based on cause and effect when there is a conflict of interests in a system. I have a thread on this topic in here.

WOuld you like me to break it down more?

Oh, no. Thanks. That was long enough.

[Age]

There are two objections here: 1) I am talking about our universe rather than everything

What is the DIFFERENCE between the misnomer "our universe" and 'everything'.

Until you start CLARIFYING, LOGICALLY, "bahman" you are just looking more and more ABSURD and RIDICULOUS here.

By our universe, I mean the physical one that human beings can experience.

Now, what is the difference between the "physical universe" and the "non physical one"?

Also, WHY continue on with that MOST ABSURD term and phrase "our universe", when 'you' do NOT even KNOW what thee 'our' is YET? The 'ego' within 'you', human beings, is relentless.

This is one possible universe and it is different from everything possible.

'you', "bahman", thinking and speaking logically is POSSIBLE, but that does NOT mean that 'it' has existed, hitherto.

Now, what has existed, hitherto, is part of thee One and ONLY Universe that could EVER ONLY EXIST. So, there is NO "other possible universes". And, to ASSUME otherwise is just ABSURD, FOOLISH, and RIDICULOUS, to the EXTREME.

and 2) You need to prove that everything which is constituted of all possible things exists (for example a Sculptor who believe in the contingency of the universe somewhere in everything:mrgreen:).

An eternal AND infinite Universe is ALL the PROOF that is needed for your ABSURD and RIDICULOUS expectation and demand here.

No.

I am getting tired of 'trying to' get you to CLARIFY.

Now, what does this 'no' mean or refer to, EXACTLY, THIS TIME?

I don't think that all things always conform to cause and effect. For example, a system cannot evolve based on cause and effect when there is a conflict of interests in a system.

Here is MORE PROOF of WHEN a human being BELIEVES some thing, then they will say just about ANY thing in order to 'try to' back up and support their current BELIEF, and this includes saying the MOST ABSURD and RIDICULOUS of things, as PROVEN above.

Do you know what is the conflict of interest?

Do you KNOW what is 'cause AND effect'?

And, do you KNOW that it does NOT matter how MANY 'conflicts of interest' there ARE, or to what EXTREME the 'conflict of interest' IS, this will NEVER, and I repeat NEVER, STOP 'cause AND effect' from occurring?

If you did NOT KNOW this, then HOPEFULLY you will starting THINKING about this NOW.

I have a thread on this topic in here.


Oh, no. Thanks. That was long enough.

It would NOT matter how many people SHOWED you, in as many words, nor in as the least amount of words, possible that you are just Wrong here, you still would NOT be able to SEE this NOR understand this Fact. And, this is solely due to the Fact that you BELIEVE, wholeheartedly, otherwise.

As you wish.

What do you mean here by, "As you wish"?

It is 'you', "bahman", with the BELIEFS here, which 'you' do NOT 'wish' to let go of. No matter how Wrong or ABSURD they ARE, 'you' are HOLDING ONTO THEM, with "dear life", as some say. And, this is, literally, because if 'you' did let them go, then 'you' would NOT be 'you', ANYMORE.

[Sculptor]

So, what do you mean by "The universe was the necessary ground for all contingencies."? Do you mind elaborating?

Everything that happens in the universe is contingent upon the existence of the universe and other things in it. The universe as a whole cannot be contingent on anything because it is everything. and not contingent thing can exist if it doed not have a ground of existence. The universe is that necessary ground of existence.
Furthur to that. Since all things conform to cause and effect. All contingent actions are caused by antecedant conditions. This all stems from the existence and qualities of the universe. Consequently all contingent events rely on cause and effect and are so the necessary outcome of previous grounding conditions. COnclusion is that all things are necessary.
WOuld you like me to break it down more?

I am not sure you could break this down any more.

Surely even "bahman" would NOT even 'try to' argue against this.

Since Bahman thinks the universe is not everything, then he's going stay confused.
And btw = he has tried to argue against it.