12
   

My documentaries, the documentaries that I recommend

 
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Oct, 2021 09:51 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Oct, 2021 11:28 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2021 03:47 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Oct, 2021 02:16 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Oct, 2021 02:50 am
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Oct, 2021 12:23 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  0  
Reply Mon 25 Oct, 2021 12:42 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  0  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2021 03:24 am
Leadfoot
 
  0  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2021 06:06 am
@Albuquerque,
Funny the way he defines 'what is possible' by the realm of 'tasks' which can be described in terms of reliable formulas.

The theory sounds like it boils down to: 'If something happened, then it is possible (presumably by natural processes) which he defines as 'Tasks'' Which sounds logical, but also circular. How ironic that it attempts to replace a 'Creator' with a 'Constructor'.

Very creative, but it still requires a 'task' to be defined to validate the theory. It totally fails in the question of how biological life came about, for example. No help on any of our big questions, even those about physics.. I don’t see the utility in this theory.



Albuquerque
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Nov, 2021 03:18 am
@Leadfoot,
Personally I don't think a talking thinking creator makes any kind of sense as an ultimate reality. Minds make sense in an incomplete epistemic domain not on a final Ontological state of Being on which everything is at rest as everything possible it is already actual.

As I have previously explained in several occasions in my POV or frame of reference minds are problem solvers within spacetime with INCOMPLETE KNOWLEDGE on Reality.

My concept of a final domain of all domains or a Meta domain does not require any problem solving machine which is more or less what the brain does at least as I understand it.

Constructor theory does indeed strip the Anthropomorphised vision of God that people normally have without doing away with the idea of a final Cosmic Order which has been coined recently by Metaphysicians as "Ultimism".

I do find an appeal on the concept of "Ultimism" but try as I might I have yet to see the need for the usual traditional God people allude to.
Maybe it is a failure of my imagination but no one can fault me for being born "blind".

One thing is certain if I don't see the reasoning I don't fake through faith what my mind cannot grasp. That is to mean that in the very least I am as Honest as I can possibly be, even if in the current day and age honesty pays a heavier price to the already high price it always had to be paid for.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Nov, 2021 07:00 am
@Albuquerque,
Quote:
I do find an appeal on the concept of "Ultimism" but try as I might I have yet to see the need for the usual traditional God people allude to.

So who said anything about a 'traditional God'.

'Ultimism' sounds like the oft invoked but undiscovered 'self organizing principle' used to explain the emergence of biological life. It might be believable if we were disembodied consciousnesses, but we have this physical phenomenon in front of us and we know all the combinatorial forces that act on it. In those forces there is no 'self organizing principle' even remotely apparent.

Just the opposite - All systems go from order to disorder in the realm of matter.

I don’t think that the realm of matter and energy is the only one but still, this matter we are made from requires an explanation that 'Ultimism' doesn’t give me.
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 07:08 am
@Leadfoot,
I think you just reminisce into an old education, a brain pattern that dominates your psych, and thus feel the need for "God" to be palpable, palatable, poorer, but sadly "he" is not!

The "thing" you allude to is ALIEN and totally transcendent to any possible pseudo concept homo sapiens can ever come to imagine.

The very idea that Humans can subsume, resume, conceptualize "God" is insulting!
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 07:22 am
@Albuquerque,
If all that is so, how is it you know?

Besides, I don’t want to do any of that stuff to God. I just love him.
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 07:38 am
@Leadfoot,
One does not love truly ALIEN!
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 07:44 am
@Albuquerque,
That’s the trouble with this place. Too many people telling me what I can’t know or do.

Claim a limitation, and it’s yours.
- Richard Bach, Illusions
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 07:52 am
@Leadfoot,
In the more Universal sense of the question "how do I know" not what you know but what humans don't know, all I can tell you about me is that I've spend a lifetime of introspective very honest thinking on these things day and night, well beyond and often over and above, bypassing the establishment, en vogue, on them.

...a willing personal departure to the limits of what the human mind can deconstruct! (Very lonely up here in my mind don't follow)
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 07:58 am
@Albuquerque,
Not a lot of company over here either.
Albuquerque
 
  2  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 08:47 am
@Leadfoot,
If anyone ever tells you that you have a troubled mind, take it as the greatest of all possible compliments, for only the troubled mind was honestly sincere in its thought process while wandering vagrant as a beggar in this dystopian yet necessary world!
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Nov, 2021 12:03 pm
0 Replies
 
htam9876
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2021 06:11 pm
@Leadfoot,
Too many people plotting to set up limitation.
Too many people plotting to replace G* / Lord of creature.
Too many people plotting to CONTROL others.
But seldom people can do something substantial new in science.
That’s the trouble with this world.
That’s why some guys believe there is no much time left ahead for human.
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/29/2021 at 09:11:00