@Setanta,
Quote:Carloslebaron is not discussing philosophy. He is simply attempting to forward his prejudices, and tarting them up (in execrable English) with a word salad which attempts (and fails) to sound authoritative. Basically, he is a bigoted theist with pretensions to an intelligence he has never displayed.
Setanta.
I will tell you this... yes, I'm a mother f**ker, and I have no mercy when idiots pretend to be geniuses, still, I can discuss and find more possibilities in philosophy that you can ever imagine.
Tell me, what have you discovered in this life, that is worthy to be at least considered?
What have you reached by your own or with a team, to say that you have participated and found something new?
I do have
"The Perceptional Law", MY LAW (yes, I'm arrogant when I want to be one) and this LAW says that we humans, using with our senses, using our instruments, using whatever we can use, we are just capable to perceive the present, solely the present, and nothing more but the present.
With this Perceptional Law, the whole theories of science which consider that we can "perceive far away objects as they were in their past", such ideas are obsolete, invalid, nonsenses.
And I tell you more, because this MY LAW is a law and not a theory, you can insult me, you can talk trash about me, you can laugh, you can ignore me, you can do whatever you want against my person, but surely you can't deny that MY LAW it does rule YOUR perception of the universe.
Any attempt from your part to discredit MY LAW will be in vain, because The Perceptional Law rules, surely it does.
More than "proud" I'm happy that no flaws can be found with The Perceptional Law, and that no exceptions are allowed.
We do perceive the present of the universe regardless of distance, speed of objects, whatever.
When you are capable to see a far away star, is because that star is right there, in that location, in its present status, simultaneously with your present status and location.
Do you want to discuss about it,
just both of us in another topic in these forums and see how much you can do to discredit MY LAW? ah?!
Listen, I can make you eat dirt with The Perceptional Law, and no master in physics, philosophy, psychology, whatever will help you enough for you to invalidate The Perceptional Law.
Don't use this topic to continue discussing or mentioning anything about The Perceptional Law, I did mentioned it in order to tell you that what you have said about me, it appears to be envy from your part rather than you considering me worthless.
I enjoy patience as well, for this reason I read how many like you say trash about me in these forums, and I just let them do it, after all, there is an old saying (when translated in English can be said), ""Let the dogs bark, the caravan should keep moving ahead".
Oh, and one more thing, when people are thirsty of knowledge, language is not a barrier.
__________________________________________
And about this topic.
The correlation of everything existing in the universe is not something new.
And about the idea of "objects having a kind of life" there is even a hypothesis that planet earth itself is "alive", with the meaning that it has a kind of life as we do. Ancient people called it "Mother earth".
I remember that the magazine
Discover published a decade ago an article about this hypothesis of planet earth as a living thing, and why it exist such a possibility.
If the earth is not inanimate as a rock, then the rock itself is not inanimate as well, and the moon is not inanimate, and so forth.
These ideas are nothing new to put on the table, but are good food to serve and swallow.
Fil is getting into it with a different angle of view, and this make the topic more interesting.
Hope to see Fil can get onto something.