EugeneW

There is very good evidence, I might say. We understand most parts of the universe, so why not the fundaments? What we will never understand is where ...

If you don't make this assumption you will never hit rock bottom. It's physical reality though that is the arbiter. We know when nature says that you ...

What would be the contradiction if they universalised the categorical imperative to steal pocketbooks from old ladies, which would force everybody to ...

It's a proof of the gap argument. The assumption it can be closed is more reasonable than that it can't be closed.

God, like us, is not subjected to laws and processes that determine thinking, choice, and action. Those laws and processes are the a priori for free w...

What about this necessity argument: 1. There is a gap between what we know and the fundamental laws of the universe. 2. This gap can be closed. 3. Thi...

I'm a theist. God created one kind of matter only. Or better, two basic massless matter fields, longing for or fleeing from each other by means of gau...

Good done God!

In particle physics, no two identical particles share the same location. Identical particles can take each other's place at most. We never know which ...

Then explain me!

The old trick of people out of rational argument. Show them their failing grammar or spelling.

God can't show his omnipotence. So he's not omnipotent.

Even the finest cook has moments. What's your point with urine bread? What you want me to conclude after I receive pissed bread?

No. I was pulled out. But you were saying gods plonked us in. They didn't. They plonked the universe into existence. PLOINK!

No. I would conclude the chef is drunk or has a grudge against me. Since I don't know the good man, I'd say he's drunk. So were the gods when they cre...

Who says people are plonked into this world? I like arguments but false assumptions don't get my thumb up.

Read my word, dear Tricks. If the gaps are closed there is nothing other to conclude the universe is created. I closed the gaps. My conclusion: Gods e...

Goddamnit Bartricks! Are you comparing me with a urine soaked piece of bread? What kind of argument is that? The chef might not have created that piec...

WTF is lil D-ker?!?

I just don't understand why not being omnibenevolent means being a sadist, 180booze. :chin:

If that rule was universalised by pocketbook stealers, wouldn't it still be wrong? What if you had to steal pocket books from old ladies and stealing ...

Yeah it's confusing. In German "Bewustsein" ,(litterally "aware being")cmeaning consciousness or awareness, and "Bewust", aware, are two different thi...

Aware means conscious. Consciousness is conscious being. It's a small but important difference. Your view of the chair is being conscious of the chair...

Likewise, I find it fascinating that something that feels like obvious sense to me cannot be believed by so many people

I'm convinced. Go ASAP! Call him or her now you still show some signs of sanity.

I think having an argument with you isn't good for my healh. I only can say, if the universe coexists eternally with the gods and they haven't created...

You must go see a doctor... You clearly show the signs...

They only created the universe. Not the people in it.

Why not? Tell me your thoughts... I'll listen. Don't worry.

That's all personal opinion, while I know they created the world.

Are you omnibenevolent? If not, are you a sadist?

They created the universe. So indirectly me. We all evolve(d) in the universe.

Indirectly.

Again, an unwarranted assumption. Which makes the argument invalid. And suddenly I understand the atheist. It's the OOOO character that makes him repu...

Because God made me have a mouth.

But why can't it be changed? Is there just one imperative possible? Is changing the maxim against the imperative?

This is an unwarranted premise. Which makes 2. a triviality and 3. a false conclusion.

If God is omnipotent he can do anything. That includes creating minds that are not created. He can be self contradictory and do contradictory things.

All things in formation in the physical world have a potential counterpart in our brain. The brain is a micro version of the macroscopic universe, act...

What if the theist believes God had created matter only? But matter with a special property, namely containing a special ingredient? Is it still matte...

Couldn't he have adjusted his maxim, after he saw stealing and killing could be done without punishment?

Interpretation assumes that there is something to be interpreted. But that something is an interpretation too. There is no escape. It's all interpreta...

Then it's slipping. On the other hand, time evolving to lower entropy is still time. Maybe the question is ill-stated. Time doesn't move forward or ba...

Aren't we all involved in one long short story? His story? They spoke the words and the story began. It's all logos evolving.

Unless that man wants to enforce his imperative categorically and relentlessly to the people.

Love thinking about love. Or the two love chameleons.

A sensible idea! :rofl:

That's just an idea, another neurological process running around. Their definition of an idea seems to harbor envy for people with real ideas. It's li...

Because that's the way a wheel rolls. But it can roll in two directions. So can time. Why isn't the begin situation of the universe situated at the en...

Love can never take over the color of love. Love identifying with love is deemed to stay invisible perpetually, in eternal confusion.