xris
 
  2  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2008 08:05 am
@Aedes,
Why do i have to get up in the middle of the night for a wee....it may seem a mundane question but in the middle of the night its more important than this question..theory of a relativity..everything is relative...why is that?
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2008 08:32 am
@Deftil,
Deftil wrote:
Can the existence of a god be proven or disproven?


One or the other might be capable of being proven, but that needn't mean that it can be proven to you. There is a difference between "proving" and "proving to" (some individual).
span.jajahWrapper { font-size:1em; color:#B11196; text-decoration:underline; } a.jajahLink { color:#000000; text-decoration:none; } span.jajahInLink:hover { background-color:#B11196; }
0 Replies
 
Solace
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2008 09:30 am
@Whoever,
Whoever wrote:
You actually met a solipsist? That's interesting. I can't imagine a worse way of losing ones reason. Under the circumstance manic depression seems a perfectly rational response.


Actually he's a close friend. I don't know that he'd classify himself as Solipsist, he doesn't like labels, (except "God" maybe :rolleyes:) but I'd say he is Solipsist, or was anyway. He went through a long period of manic depression, but he met a girl recently who, well, I guess she showed him that he really is just a man, after all. Very Happy So now he's happily married and not damagingly introspective like he used to be.
0 Replies
 
TickTockMan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2008 12:04 pm
@jknilinux,
jknilinux;34218 wrote:
So you think...

The truth is, though, that the only reason why you say it exists is because of inductive logic. So, you can't know it exists with 100% certainty. Ha HAA!!


Zing! You got me there! I guess I have no choice but to go have a cup of coffee and watch the clouds go by.
0 Replies
 
TickTockMan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2008 12:26 pm
@Aedes,
Aedes;34221 wrote:
The infinite regress of causality is a figment of human imagination. Energy is transferred as a function of time, the resulting state comes about probabilistically. This exists. Cause and effect do not, they are just human abstractions.


Make that a cup of coffee and an apple fritter.
0 Replies
 
jknilinux
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2008 03:14 pm
@Deftil,
Wait a second Aedes...

How can you say you know causality doesn't exist, either? Everything you "know" you found through induction.
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2008 01:09 pm
@Deftil,
It is usually, yes, with dice and so forth, but I thought that in QM it was assumed to actually be the situation. Radioactive decay for example. Where probability is a function of our state of knowledge then causation is not an issue, as you say. But where probability is built into the universe itself, where it can be observed in the behaviour of phenomena, then it seems to me that it must be caused. If it is not caused then the statistically predictable behaviour of these phenomena becomes a miraculous coincidence.

Perhaps it could be argued that QM is a problem of philosophy.
0 Replies
 
jknilinux
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2008 01:31 pm
@Deftil,
How do you know about QM?
0 Replies
 
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2008 01:49 pm
@Deftil,
That's an odd question. By reading about it and discussing it. I'm not a physicist if that's what you're asking.
0 Replies
 
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Nov, 2008 12:45 am
@jknilinux,
jknilinux;34308 wrote:
How can you say you know causality doesn't exist, either? Everything you "know" you found through induction.
Knowledge and learning, all processes, are still the product of physical mechanisms whether or not we choose to apply a word like "knowledge" or "induction" to a common theme. Photons radiating from my computer screen are refracted through my lenses, trigger the rods and cones in my retina, induce neurotransmission, etc, etc and eventually we take a step back, look at the big picture which is that I've learned something by reading the screen.

It all comes down to physical processes. Applying a descriptor like "cause" has only to do with how we logically organize them.

But there is no argument in the world that doesn't eventually become circular, so I'm not going to contend to you that I somehow can prove any of this. What should be kept in mind is that something that exists only metaphysically is probably just a human cognitive label for a set of physical processes that share a theme.
0 Replies
 
jknilinux
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Nov, 2008 12:57 am
@Deftil,
Whoever-

you miss my point. Reading, etc... are inductive processes.
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Nov, 2008 01:05 am
@Deftil,
I must miss your point -- in fact I don't see that there is a point. You asked "how could you say you know..."

Well, first, I didn't say "I know" -- and secondly I reserve the right to make an argument that's based on verifiable evidence about the things we call cause when my interlocutors are trying to turn human cognitive concepts like "cause" into things unto themselves.

I'm simply making the case that "cause" is a concept applied broadly based on a human inference about grossly heterogeneous physical phenomena. And thus "cause" is not a physical concept, it's not a thing, it doesn't exist independently of our application of it to such phenomena.
0 Replies
 
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Nov, 2008 09:21 am
@Deftil,
Can I just apologise for my last post appearing out of sync and therefore not making much sense.
0 Replies
 
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Nov, 2008 09:24 am
@jknilinux,
jknilinux wrote:
Whoever-

you miss my point. Reading, etc... are inductive processes.

Well, I'm now confused about who's making what point. Mine was about causality.

In what way is reading an inductive process?
0 Replies
 
pieceoftheworld
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Nov, 2008 08:12 am
@Victor Eremita,
Hey i'm new so I want to give it a go:

What are we, the saviors of Earth or the ensurers of doom to Earth?
xris
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Nov, 2008 08:16 am
@pieceoftheworld,
pieceoftheworld wrote:
Hey i'm new so I want to give it a go:

What are we, the saviors of Earth or the ensurers of doom to Earth?
Parasites destroying the host..i just hope nature developes a cure...
pieceoftheworld
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Nov, 2008 08:19 am
@xris,
xris wrote:
Parasites destroying the host..i just hope nature developes a cure...


Could be a possibility, but I think people should just realize what they're doing. I do agree that is as good as impossible.
0 Replies
 
pieceoftheworld
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Nov, 2008 08:21 am
@jknilinux,
While I'm at it, here's another one:

Can humans be called robots? If so, were we evolved or created?

I saw a movie with robots and thought of how similar robots and humans are. Humans have a lot of complex things that fit so well together, it's almost like we were designed. Like robots.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Nov, 2008 08:53 am
@pieceoftheworld,
pieceoftheworld wrote:
While I'm at it, here's another one:

Can humans be called robots? If so, were we evolved or created?

I saw a movie with robots and thought of how similar robots and humans are. Humans have a lot of complex things that fit so well together, it's almost like we were designed. Like robots.
it depends on your belief system anyone who can claim for certain are very foolish..pretty good robots....self servicing ..self manufactured..but for what purpose as robots are manufactured for a reason by a certain manufacturer..
pieceoftheworld
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Nov, 2008 08:58 am
@xris,
xris wrote:
it depends on your belief system anyone who can claim for certain are very foolish..pretty good robots....self servicing ..self manufactured..but for what purpose as robots are manufactured for a reason by a certain manufacturer..


If i'm right, you are trying to say that say we are manufactured, that the greatest quetion would be: Why are we manufactured and for what purpose?

That was also a question I had in mind.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/20/2017 at 06:52:51