Show your evidence and proof in this thread.
Others can contribute their views.
As I have said previously; The Universe, Itself.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 6:03 amShow your evidence and proof in this thread.
Others can contribute their views.
The empirical is always conditioned upon human experience.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:00 amAs I have said previously; The Universe, Itself.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 6:03 amShow your evidence and proof in this thread.
Others can contribute their views.
How much more empirical evidence do you NEED?
If thee Universe, Itself, does NOT provide enough for you to observe and experience, then I do NOT know what else could.
And, if you do NOT see absolute PERFECTION in the actual living thing as the Universe, Itself, which has created 'you' and EVERY thing else, then you are FREE to observe and experience any thing, anyway you like.
So, to you, a perfect empirical Universe could NEVER exist because 'you', human beings, experience things.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amThe empirical is always conditioned upon human experience.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:00 amAs I have said previously; The Universe, Itself.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 6:03 am
Show your evidence and proof in this thread.
Others can contribute their views.
How much more empirical evidence do you NEED?
If thee Universe, Itself, does NOT provide enough for you to observe and experience, then I do NOT know what else could.
And, if you do NOT see absolute PERFECTION in the actual living thing as the Universe, Itself, which has created 'you' and EVERY thing else, then you are FREE to observe and experience any thing, anyway you like.
Humans are never perfect.
- Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
Whatever is conditioned upon human experience cannot be perfect.
Who has even suggest that it was, when this is written, to know the WHOLE Universe?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amIn addition;
It is NEVER possible to know the WHOLE Universe empirically.
No.
That is what you say, and may well be what you do do, and thus helps in explaining WHY you are so stuck as you are.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amPoint is when we consider the universe empirically we will encounter infinite regression, thus no absolute perfection.
This is just what you BELIEVE is true, and IS only what you can do.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amWhat is real is empirical + rationality + philosophical critical thinking.
The most you can is to THINK of an absolute perfect Universe as an idea which cannot be empirically based.
Again, this is just your confirmation biases allowing you to only see what you have ALREADY BELIEVED is true. You 'try to' formulate arguments to support what you already BELIEVE is true, instead of just LOOKING AT what is actually True AND Real.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amSince an absolute perfect Universe cannot be empirically based, it cannot be real or possibly real.
Re P1Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:16 amSo, to you, a perfect empirical Universe could NEVER exist because 'you', human beings, experience things.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amThe empirical is always conditioned upon human experience.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:00 am
As I have said previously; The Universe, Itself.
How much more empirical evidence do you NEED?
If thee Universe, Itself, does NOT provide enough for you to observe and experience, then I do NOT know what else could.
And, if you do NOT see absolute PERFECTION in the actual living thing as the Universe, Itself, which has created 'you' and EVERY thing else, then you are FREE to observe and experience any thing, anyway you like.
Humans are never perfect.
- Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
Whatever is conditioned upon human experience cannot be perfect.
Well that is one way to LOOK AT and SEE things. But, to me, it is a very irrational and extremely illogical way to LOOK AT and SEE things.
And, if this is HOW you SEE things, then so be it.
Who has even suggest that it was, when this is written, to know the WHOLE Universe?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amIn addition;
It is NEVER possible to know the WHOLE Universe empirically.
No.
That is what you say, and may well be what you do do, and thus helps in explaining WHY you are so stuck as you are.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amPoint is when we consider the universe empirically we will encounter infinite regression, thus no absolute perfection.
When I consider the Universe "empirically" I encounter KNOWING, without infinite regression, AND I also observe absolute PERFECTION.
This is just what you BELIEVE is true, and IS only what you can do.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amWhat is real is empirical + rationality + philosophical critical thinking.
The most you can is to THINK of an absolute perfect Universe as an idea which cannot be empirically based.
But what I do actually, which is way beyond what you believe is true, I EXPERIENCE and OBSERVE an absolutely PERFECT Universe, IN CREATION, which by the way has ALREADY, empirically, been proven to be True.
Again, this is just your confirmation biases allowing you to only see what you have ALREADY BELIEVED is true. You 'try to' formulate arguments to support what you already BELIEVE is true, instead of just LOOKING AT what is actually True AND Real.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amSince an absolute perfect Universe cannot be empirically based, it cannot be real or possibly real.
Your illogical, invalid and unsound argument:
P1. The empirical is "always" conditioned upon human experience.
P2. Humans are never perfect.
C. Whatever is conditioned upon human experience cannot be perfect.
To me, your argument is just FALSE and WRONG.
To me, your;
P1. The 'empirical' is NOT "always conditioned upon human experience", nor even 'any time' conditioned upon human experience at all. 'Empirical' is just what is based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. So, what it IS, which is verified from observation and experience as being true and real, is empirical, and not just what is thought (to be true). It is 'thought', theory or pure logic, itself, which is conditioned upon human experience, and NOT the 'empirical'. Thought is conditioned upon human experience. Empirical is NOT conditioned upon human experience. Of course, ALL observations AND experiences come from human beings, and is thus conditioned, in some way, by the human being. This conditioning is caused by the previous pre-existing 'thoughts', and this goes without saying, but what is "conditioned" by 'you', human beings, does NOT take away any PERFECTION from the very thing that is being observed AND experienced, by 'you', human beings. When things are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN Mind, and NOT from the already conditioned brain, then the actual Truth of things is observed and SEEN. Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves. The Universe, which is made up of physical things, IS PERFECTION Itself.
P2. I agree wholeheartedly. 'you', human beings, are never perfect.
C. Whatever is conditioned by human beings is the result of previous human experiences. The outcome of human experience is just 'thoughts'. Thoughts, themselves, are NOT perfect. However, the Universe, Itself, is NOT conditioned upon human experience. The Universe, Itself, is a thing of Its own Self, It is NOT conditioned upon human beings and their experiences. A perception of the Universe, Itself, is what is conditioned, upon human experiences.
A Universe is ALREADY obviously based on physical things, this is what the Universe is actually based upon or made up of, which can be observed AND experienced, and therefore the Universe is ALREADY proven True empirically.
Now, absolutely EVERY thing is relative to the observer, so if you observe (and experience) a non perfect Universe, then so be it.
But some, like me, observe (and experience) a Truly PERFECT Universe. A Universe, EXACTLY just like God, which creates EVERY thing.
This absolute PERFECT Universe, which I observe, experience, SEE and UNDERSTAND, is OBVIOUSLY 'empirically based', and so IS real, and NOT just 'possibly real'.
But you are FREE to see whatever it is that you WANT to see.
Point is the above has no basis of justification at all.When things are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN Mind, and NOT from the already conditioned brain, then the actual Truth of things is observed and SEEN. Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves. The Universe, which is made up of physical things, IS PERFECTION Itself.
You are referring to Plato's forms, ideas and universals as thing-in-itself.Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves.
lolVeritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amRe P1Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:16 amSo, to you, a perfect empirical Universe could NEVER exist because 'you', human beings, experience things.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 am
The empirical is always conditioned upon human experience.
Humans are never perfect.
- Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
Whatever is conditioned upon human experience cannot be perfect.
Well that is one way to LOOK AT and SEE things. But, to me, it is a very irrational and extremely illogical way to LOOK AT and SEE things.
And, if this is HOW you SEE things, then so be it.
Who has even suggest that it was, when this is written, to know the WHOLE Universe?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amIn addition;
It is NEVER possible to know the WHOLE Universe empirically.
No.
That is what you say, and may well be what you do do, and thus helps in explaining WHY you are so stuck as you are.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amPoint is when we consider the universe empirically we will encounter infinite regression, thus no absolute perfection.
When I consider the Universe "empirically" I encounter KNOWING, without infinite regression, AND I also observe absolute PERFECTION.
This is just what you BELIEVE is true, and IS only what you can do.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amWhat is real is empirical + rationality + philosophical critical thinking.
The most you can is to THINK of an absolute perfect Universe as an idea which cannot be empirically based.
But what I do actually, which is way beyond what you believe is true, I EXPERIENCE and OBSERVE an absolutely PERFECT Universe, IN CREATION, which by the way has ALREADY, empirically, been proven to be True.
Again, this is just your confirmation biases allowing you to only see what you have ALREADY BELIEVED is true. You 'try to' formulate arguments to support what you already BELIEVE is true, instead of just LOOKING AT what is actually True AND Real.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amSince an absolute perfect Universe cannot be empirically based, it cannot be real or possibly real.
Your illogical, invalid and unsound argument:
P1. The empirical is "always" conditioned upon human experience.
P2. Humans are never perfect.
C. Whatever is conditioned upon human experience cannot be perfect.
To me, your argument is just FALSE and WRONG.
To me, your;
P1. The 'empirical' is NOT "always conditioned upon human experience", nor even 'any time' conditioned upon human experience at all. 'Empirical' is just what is based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. So, what it IS, which is verified from observation and experience as being true and real, is empirical, and not just what is thought (to be true). It is 'thought', theory or pure logic, itself, which is conditioned upon human experience, and NOT the 'empirical'. Thought is conditioned upon human experience. Empirical is NOT conditioned upon human experience. Of course, ALL observations AND experiences come from human beings, and is thus conditioned, in some way, by the human being. This conditioning is caused by the previous pre-existing 'thoughts', and this goes without saying, but what is "conditioned" by 'you', human beings, does NOT take away any PERFECTION from the very thing that is being observed AND experienced, by 'you', human beings. When things are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN Mind, and NOT from the already conditioned brain, then the actual Truth of things is observed and SEEN. Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves. The Universe, which is made up of physical things, IS PERFECTION Itself.
P2. I agree wholeheartedly. 'you', human beings, are never perfect.
C. Whatever is conditioned by human beings is the result of previous human experiences. The outcome of human experience is just 'thoughts'. Thoughts, themselves, are NOT perfect. However, the Universe, Itself, is NOT conditioned upon human experience. The Universe, Itself, is a thing of Its own Self, It is NOT conditioned upon human beings and their experiences. A perception of the Universe, Itself, is what is conditioned, upon human experiences.
A Universe is ALREADY obviously based on physical things, this is what the Universe is actually based upon or made up of, which can be observed AND experienced, and therefore the Universe is ALREADY proven True empirically.
Now, absolutely EVERY thing is relative to the observer, so if you observe (and experience) a non perfect Universe, then so be it.
But some, like me, observe (and experience) a Truly PERFECT Universe. A Universe, EXACTLY just like God, which creates EVERY thing.
This absolute PERFECT Universe, which I observe, experience, SEE and UNDERSTAND, is OBVIOUSLY 'empirically based', and so IS real, and NOT just 'possibly real'.
But you are FREE to see whatever it is that you WANT to see.
I have already present to you in my earlier post on 'what is empirical' from the philosophical, scientific and general perspective;
Your own self-definition of 'empirical' is not in line with the norm and not acceptable.
- Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
You have obviously MISSED things again, or are purposely 'trying to' deflect and/or be deceptive.
YOUR definition you provided is for the two words 'empirical evidence'. Just because you bolded only the one word 'empirical' does not detract from this.
If you have copied the definition EXACTLY how it was provided to you, then we would not be saying that you could purposely 'trying to' be deceptive here.
Now, MY definition that I provided is for the one word 'empirical'.
Your usual, "Your own self-definition (of 'empirical') is not in line with the norm and not acceptable", quote is, besides being absolutely and stupidly incorrect, is a so CLOSED and BIASED CONFIRMED view and statement that just about could be possibly given.
You obviously MISSED what I was saying about how your version of 'empirical' being conditioned upon human experience is just a twisted and distorted way of SEEING the Truth of things. You have even distorted things from the DEFINITION that you, yourself, provided.
'Empirical evidence' is NOT just what you, alone, SEE and BELIEVE is true. 'Empirical evidence' is what can be PROVEN through observation and experience.
'PERFECTION' is a totally subjective viewpoint, and thus is NOT 'empirical evidence' at all.
Point is the above has no basis of justification at all.When things are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN Mind, and NOT from the already conditioned brain, then the actual Truth of things is observed and SEEN. Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves. The Universe, which is made up of physical things, IS PERFECTION Itself.
Once again, you are just doing what you do when you are STUCK.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amA schizophrenic or mental case can make the same claim as above and many of the mental-cases has done so.
I am NOT referring to any form at all.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amYou are referring to Plato's forms, ideas and universals as thing-in-itself.Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves.
There are no real thing-in-itself.
A thing-in-itself is an transcendental illusion.
Who cares.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amNote my argument there is no such thing as a perfect circle [drawn] or in a marble.
But you BELIEVE there is NOT one. So, there is NOTHING in the Universe that can SHOW you what you BELIEVE does NOT exist.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amShow me a perfect marble or any physical thing-in-itself that is perfect.
Thee Universe no matter how imperfect It IS claimed to be, is in REALITY PERFECT, which can easily be shown when the Universe, Itself, is just viewed and observed from the Truly OPEN Mind.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amAny marble no matter how perfect it is claimed is in reality imperfect which can easily be shown when the marble surface is viewed with a electron's microscope.
What or who is it that knows it's receiving the sensation of an empirical world of patterns, colour, behavior and all other data through experimentation?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amEmpirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.
You are just stating the bloody obvious. It's like saying a mountain is a mole hill seen from far away, but at close range it's everest.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 am Any marble no matter how perfect it is claimed is in reality imperfect which can easily be shown when the marble surface is viewed with a electron's microscope.
The Universe that exists is absolute and perfect inasmuch as it is ALL THAT EXISTSVeritas Aequitas wrote:
The most you can is to THINK of an absolute perfect Universe as an idea which cannot be empirically based
Since an absolute perfect Universe cannot be empirically based it cannot be real or possibly real
VA wrote: Re P1
I have already present to you in my earlier post on 'what is empirical' from the philosophical, scientific and general perspective;
Your own self-definition of 'empirical' is not in line with the norm and not acceptable.
- Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
You have obviously MISSED things again, or are purposely 'trying to' deflect and/or be deceptive.
YOUR definition you provided is for the two words 'empirical evidence'. Just because you bolded only the one word 'empirical' does not detract from this.
If you have copied the definition EXACTLY how it was provided to you, then we would not be saying that you could purposely 'trying to' be deceptive here.
Now, MY definition that I provided is for the one word 'empirical'.
Your usual, "Your own self-definition (of 'empirical') is not in line with the norm and not acceptable", quote is, besides being absolutely and stupidly incorrect, is a so CLOSED and BIASED CONFIRMED view and statement that just about could be possibly given.
You obviously MISSED what I was saying about how your version of 'empirical' being conditioned upon human experience is just a twisted and distorted way of SEEING the Truth of things. You have even distorted things from the DEFINITION that you, yourself, provided.
'Empirical evidence' is NOT just what you, alone, SEE and BELIEVE is true. 'Empirical evidence' is what can be PROVEN through observation and experience.
'PERFECTION' is a totally subjective viewpoint, and thus is NOT 'empirical evidence' at all.
Point is the above has no basis of justification at all.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:19 amWhen things are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN Mind, and NOT from the already conditioned brain, then the actual Truth of things is observed and SEEN. Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves. The Universe, which is made up of physical things, IS PERFECTION Itself.
That the perfect empirical circle is impossible to exists are real is one example representing all empirical things.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:19 am lol
Is thee Truth that what I have said has "NO basis of justification at all" or that it just counters or opposes what you, yourself, say?
Point is 'you', veritas aequitas, are just about, literally, unbelievable.
The way that you can twist things around so much to suit your own BELIEFS is nearly unbelievable, to me. Your 'confirmation biases', however, provide a PERFECT example of how the brain works, from the BELIEF-system.
Once again, you are just doing what you do when you are STUCK.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amA schizophrenic or mental case can make the same claim as above and many of the mental-cases has done so.
Writing absolutely IDIOTIC and STUPID responses.
Also, it is getting very tiresome that you LOOK AT people and 'trying to' criticize them, instead of LOOKING AT the words, and critiquing them.
Why do you NOT just stay focused on the points AND counter them, if you can.
I am NOT referring to any form at all.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amYou are referring to Plato's forms, ideas and universals as thing-in-itself.Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves.
There are no real thing-in-itself.
A thing-in-itself is an transcendental illusion.
I am just providing MY own views on things.
Who cares.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amNote my argument there is no such thing as a perfect circle [drawn] or in a marble.
The title of this thread is; The Perfect Empirical God Exists.
If a perfect circle exists or not, has absolutely NOTHING to do with A PERFECT God existing or not.
The Universe, which, to me, is thee PERFECT God, OBVIOUSLY EXISTS.
But you BELIEVE there is NOT one. So, there is NOTHING in the Universe that can SHOW you what you BELIEVE does NOT exist.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amShow me a perfect marble or any physical thing-in-itself that is perfect.
'you', veritas aequitas' are a PRIME EXAMPLE of one that is SO CLOSED.
You can NOT even SEE the Universe, which is HERE NOW in front of you, staring you in the face.
Thee Universe no matter how imperfect It IS claimed to be, is in REALITY PERFECT, which can easily be shown when the Universe, Itself, is just viewed and observed from the Truly OPEN Mind.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amAny marble no matter how perfect it is claimed is in reality imperfect which can easily be shown when the marble surface is viewed with a electron's microscope.
By the way, how many people do you KNOW that claim that there is a PERFECT marble (or even circle)?
And IF there is even any, then WHY NOT discuss that WITH THEM.
How about you just stick to the thread title, and to the points I have GIVEN and SHOWN, which counter what you say and allege is true?
Note the counter argument there is nothing that exists as a mind independent phenomenon.surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:16 pmThe Universe that exists is absolute and perfect inasmuch as it is ALL THAT EXISTSVeritas Aequitas wrote:
The most you can is to THINK of an absolute perfect Universe as an idea which cannot be empirically based
Since an absolute perfect Universe cannot be empirically based it cannot be real or possibly real
Anything which is defined as such has to by default be absolute and perfect because it cannot be anything else
This Universe therefore cannot be a non empirical idea as it already exists as a mind independent phenomenon.
That is because its almost I4 billion years old whereas human beings have only existed for a mere I00 000 years
If humans are never perfect, then your argument cannot be perfect...nor science, reason or understanding.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:52 amThe empirical is always conditioned upon human experience.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 7:00 amAs I have said previously; The Universe, Itself.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 6:03 am
Show your evidence and proof in this thread.
Others can contribute their views.
How much more empirical evidence do you NEED?
If thee Universe, Itself, does NOT provide enough for you to observe and experience, then I do NOT know what else could.
And, if you do NOT see absolute PERFECTION in the actual living thing as the Universe, Itself, which has created 'you' and EVERY thing else, then you are FREE to observe and experience any thing, anyway you like.
Humans are never perfect.
- Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
Whatever is conditioned upon human experience cannot be perfect.
In addition;
It is NEVER possible to know the WHOLE Universe empirically.
Does the WHOLE Universe has a boundary?
Point is when we consider the universe empirically we will encounter infinite regression, thus no absolute perfection.
What is real is empirical + rationality + philosophical critical thinking.
The most you can is to THINK of an absolute perfect Universe as an idea which cannot be empirically based.
Since an absolute perfect Universe cannot be empirically based, it cannot be real or possibly real.
"Where one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:37 amNote the counter argument there is nothing that exists as a mind independent phenomenon.surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:16 pmThe Universe that exists is absolute and perfect inasmuch as it is ALL THAT EXISTSVeritas Aequitas wrote:
The most you can is to THINK of an absolute perfect Universe as an idea which cannot be empirically based
Since an absolute perfect Universe cannot be empirically based it cannot be real or possibly real
Anything which is defined as such has to by default be absolute and perfect because it cannot be anything else
This Universe therefore cannot be a non empirical idea as it already exists as a mind independent phenomenon.
That is because its almost I4 billion years old whereas human beings have only existed for a mere I00 000 years
This is is the philosophical anti-realists' views, e.g. Kant, Nietsche, later Wittgenstein, et.al.
It is true in one perspective that there were 'things' that existed since 14 billion years ago till human beings emerged.
We can say it is 'fact' the sun, moon and planet Earth pre-existed human beings.
But that fact is only one perspective which is a 'human' perspective, thus such a fact and reality is independent of human conditions.
It is a very subtle counter and the point is humans are co-creators of the Universe whilst humans are emergence. Thus in this subtle perspective there is no thing creating another.
One point is, it is impossible to take the human conditions out of the equation of 'what is reality'.
Other than that, here is Wittgenstein stated;
“Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”
This meant one must totally shut up and not jump to conclusion there is a mind-independent universe.
Now, what I have been arguing is,
why human beings jumped to conclusion 'there is a mind-independent universe' is due to one's psychology.
While human beings are a part of observable reality they are not at all responsible for its creationVeritas Aequitas wrote:
It is a very subtle counter and the point is humans are co creators of the Universe whilst humans are emergence
One point is it is impossible to take the human conditions out of the equation of what is reality
why human beings jumped to the conclusion there is a mind independent universe is due to ones psychology
Are you joking?Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:19 amVA wrote: Re P1
I have already present to you in my earlier post on 'what is empirical' from the philosophical, scientific and general perspective;
Your own self-definition of 'empirical' is not in line with the norm and not acceptable.
- Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
You have obviously MISSED things again, or are purposely 'trying to' deflect and/or be deceptive.
YOUR definition you provided is for the two words 'empirical evidence'. Just because you bolded only the one word 'empirical' does not detract from this.
If you have copied the definition EXACTLY how it was provided to you, then we would not be saying that you could purposely 'trying to' be deceptive here.
Now, MY definition that I provided is for the one word 'empirical'.
Your usual, "Your own self-definition (of 'empirical') is not in line with the norm and not acceptable", quote is, besides being absolutely and stupidly incorrect, is a so CLOSED and BIASED CONFIRMED view and statement that just about could be possibly given.
You obviously MISSED what I was saying about how your version of 'empirical' being conditioned upon human experience is just a twisted and distorted way of SEEING the Truth of things. You have even distorted things from the DEFINITION that you, yourself, provided.
'Empirical evidence' is NOT just what you, alone, SEE and BELIEVE is true. 'Empirical evidence' is what can be PROVEN through observation and experience.
'PERFECTION' is a totally subjective viewpoint, and thus is NOT 'empirical evidence' at all.
Point is the above has no basis of justification at all.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:19 amWhen things are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN Mind, and NOT from the already conditioned brain, then the actual Truth of things is observed and SEEN. Physical things, in and of themselves, are PERFECTION, themselves. The Universe, which is made up of physical things, IS PERFECTION Itself.That the perfect empirical circle is impossible to exists are real is one example representing all empirical things.Age wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:19 am lol
Is thee Truth that what I have said has "NO basis of justification at all" or that it just counters or opposes what you, yourself, say?
Point is 'you', veritas aequitas, are just about, literally, unbelievable.
The way that you can twist things around so much to suit your own BELIEFS is nearly unbelievable, to me. Your 'confirmation biases', however, provide a PERFECT example of how the brain works, from the BELIEF-system.
Once again, you are just doing what you do when you are STUCK.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amA schizophrenic or mental case can make the same claim as above and many of the mental-cases has done so.
Writing absolutely IDIOTIC and STUPID responses.
Also, it is getting very tiresome that you LOOK AT people and 'trying to' criticize them, instead of LOOKING AT the words, and critiquing them.
Why do you NOT just stay focused on the points AND counter them, if you can.
I am NOT referring to any form at all.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 am You are referring to Plato's forms, ideas and universals as thing-in-itself.
There are no real thing-in-itself.
A thing-in-itself is an transcendental illusion.
I am just providing MY own views on things.
Who cares.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amNote my argument there is no such thing as a perfect circle [drawn] or in a marble.
The title of this thread is; The Perfect Empirical God Exists.
If a perfect circle exists or not, has absolutely NOTHING to do with A PERFECT God existing or not.
The Universe, which, to me, is thee PERFECT God, OBVIOUSLY EXISTS.
But you BELIEVE there is NOT one. So, there is NOTHING in the Universe that can SHOW you what you BELIEVE does NOT exist.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amShow me a perfect marble or any physical thing-in-itself that is perfect.
'you', veritas aequitas' are a PRIME EXAMPLE of one that is SO CLOSED.
You can NOT even SEE the Universe, which is HERE NOW in front of you, staring you in the face.
Thee Universe no matter how imperfect It IS claimed to be, is in REALITY PERFECT, which can easily be shown when the Universe, Itself, is just viewed and observed from the Truly OPEN Mind.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:34 amAny marble no matter how perfect it is claimed is in reality imperfect which can easily be shown when the marble surface is viewed with a electron's microscope.
By the way, how many people do you KNOW that claim that there is a PERFECT marble (or even circle)?
And IF there is even any, then WHY NOT discuss that WITH THEM.
How about you just stick to the thread title, and to the points I have GIVEN and SHOWN, which counter what you say and allege is true?
And I have SHOWN you one thing. But you will NOT LOOK AT It.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:19 amI ask you to show me one empirical thing that can be absolutely perfect.
This is invalid, unsound, irrational, illogical, and is also probably close to being perfectly circular. That is; "No empirical thing can be absolutely perfect BECAUSE and SO whatever is empirical as real can not be absolutely perfect".Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:19 amThe principle as I had explained above is;
No empirical thing can be absolutely perfect.
Whatever is empirical as real cannot be absolutely perfect.
I am getting VERY SICK AND TIRED of "noting your argument", AND also getting very sick and tired of THEN having to explain to you, once again, that it is NOT a 'sound AND valid argument'.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:19 amNote my argument;
- 1. Whatever is empirical as real cannot be absolutely perfect.
2. God is an absolute perfect entity
3. Therefore God cannot be empirically real.
Yet some "other" people instantly SEE and also say that the Universe is absolute AND perfect.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:19 amYou have given no justifications supported by evidence nor proof.
LOLVeritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:19 amAll you do is making a personal subjective claim which is similar to what the mentally ills are claiming.
How can such a claim be credible at all?