You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Devans99

Comments

It is sort of like Pascal's Wager. But unlike believing in God, it costs real money out of your pocket. On the likelihood of it succeeding, using gues...
March 26, 2019 at 18:29
Biotech-based solutions seem to offer somewhat extended rather than indefinitely extended longevity we might get from a computer-based solution. So th...
March 26, 2019 at 15:41
I get the impression it is a long way off in everyday terms. We don't even understand how the neuron works. But I'd think we'd have a good shot at it ...
March 26, 2019 at 15:18
I am proposing a timeless, eternal, first cause because that is the only model that fits the facts. We can't have time stretching back endlessly in an...
March 24, 2019 at 09:01
https://simple.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/god So 'God' is capitalised when used in the singular and lower case in the plural. Nothing is prior to the first...
March 23, 2019 at 13:44
It's just a convention that the g in God is capitalised. I mean nothing further by it. Well the first cause argument is sound I think: Time has a star...
March 22, 2019 at 21:28
Well there is a tendency with traditional religion to assign unbelievable abilities to God (the 3 O's). That is not the sort of thing I am talking abo...
March 22, 2019 at 21:11
I think there is quite a difference between giving a probability that a creator exists and saying categorically that God exists. So I am actually agno...
March 22, 2019 at 20:47
From reading the description of it, I'm not convinced Baye's theorem is the calculation applicable to what I am doing. But assigning a % likelihood co...
March 22, 2019 at 20:43
I am not rationalising. No-one can be sure if there is a creator or not. A step removed from that is a probability analysis. This is a more refined vi...
March 22, 2019 at 20:17
No it is for simultaneous occurrence of two events when you multiply. I am combining evidence which is an additive process. I can if I want to perform...
March 22, 2019 at 20:12
Well at least I'm systematic about it, unlike you - you are just using gut instinct / taking a wild guess. I am calculating.
March 22, 2019 at 19:45
Well I start at 50% probability, and then consider each piece of evidence for/against the proposition, modifying the probability for the proposition a...
March 22, 2019 at 19:43
I did not say a 97% chance of God. I said a 97% chance of a creator. There is a difference. The chances of that creator also complying with the tradit...
March 22, 2019 at 19:33
A probability analysis is one step away from being made up on the spot.
March 22, 2019 at 19:05
Here you would be resorting to the Weak or Strong Anthropic Principle? BTW, it is possible to estimate the chance of the existence of a 'creator of th...
March 22, 2019 at 18:54
Fair point, but the argument is strong enough to have one allowing for the possibility of God. So its a pretty good argument. I think really the argum...
March 22, 2019 at 18:10
But it's impossible for a numeric property to take on a non-numeric value; the age of the universe must be a number. We could for example have a clock...
March 22, 2019 at 17:35
If you agree infinity is not a number then you must also agree that properties of reality of a numeric nature (such as age of the universe) cannot tak...
March 22, 2019 at 17:30
The argument of the first cause follows just from cause and effect. I fail to see what is illogical about it. The argument from design holds today; th...
March 22, 2019 at 17:28
What is wrong with that? For example, an infinite number of particle collisions, extending into the past, can be represented by the numeric sequence: ...
March 22, 2019 at 17:00
You are agreeing with me. Infinity is not a number so it cannot stand in for 'number of events' because that expression requires a numeric value.
March 22, 2019 at 16:51
I did not set out to prove the prime mover; I set out just by observing that presentism leads to an impossible infinite regress. So I just set out in ...
March 22, 2019 at 16:49
For any infinite regress, you can number off the events sequentially so there is no error. I think a main consequence is that there is a timeless, pri...
March 22, 2019 at 14:16
I think actually I have made an error with my proof that an infinite regress is impossible - sorry. Amended version below: 1. The number of events in ...
March 22, 2019 at 08:29
But there is an actual physical property of the system, the age of the universe, which takes a numeric value. It must have some value. That value has ...
March 22, 2019 at 08:19
But the events have happened, they are in the past. And I know whatever finite number I pick, it is smaller than the number of events. The only conclu...
March 22, 2019 at 08:00
I'm using it in the way of meaning a logical contradiction. To quote the op: So here we have something that is a number but greater than any number. T...
March 21, 2019 at 22:34
The only way for something to 'exist always' is for it to exist timelessly; otherwise you have an infinite regress which is impossible. Points 1-6 in ...
March 21, 2019 at 21:54
Yes it is. It leads to an infinite regress which is impossible, so it's incoherent. At least Eternalism is logically possible. - 'stuff either exists ...
March 21, 2019 at 17:08
You are trying to make an actual infinity (past eternity) into a potential infinity. That's not possible, past eternity actually happened; implying wh...
March 21, 2019 at 17:02
Presentism is incoherent too though.
March 21, 2019 at 15:36
Yes, you have to come to the conclusion the age of some moments is greater than any number which is a contradiction. You cannot have past eternity wit...
March 21, 2019 at 15:34
I would not say I'm 100% sure of my position but there seems to be more evidence in favour of eternalism. Impacts on the human condition depend what t...
March 21, 2019 at 15:27
The more intense the gravity the slower times runs I should of said. There are probably questions we can't answer (maybe 'why is there something rathe...
March 21, 2019 at 10:24
Step 4 is just steps 2 and 3 repeated an infinite number of times. If you object to step 4, you should object to something in steps 2 and 3. I don't s...
March 21, 2019 at 10:04
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation
March 20, 2019 at 16:45
Thats many people's gut instinct on time, 'only now exists'. My point is time is unintuitive and you actually have to work through the logic to see th...
March 20, 2019 at 16:36
But even an anti-realist must have an opinion on whether sensory input data from the past/future actually exists in the same sense as 'nows' sensory i...
March 20, 2019 at 16:22
If time is not progressing at some speed, that would seem to lead directly to eternalism? How would you then counter my argument in the OP that time h...
March 20, 2019 at 16:11
I guess so. A universe where 2+2!=4 is a universe with no information in it: A. 2+2=5 B. Implies 0=1 C. Implies True=False D. Implies no information A...
March 20, 2019 at 14:40
Logic involves information; truth values are either 1 or 0 in the case of boolean logic or somewhere in-between for fuzzy logic. The truth values from...
March 20, 2019 at 11:22
But the world appears to follow logical (if not intuitive) rules; hence all the progress in science has been possible. I see no reason why the start o...
March 20, 2019 at 10:18
But something coming from nothing, including no time? Sounds unbelievable to me. There is a strong argument for a start of time here: https://thephilo...
March 20, 2019 at 10:03
I don't think presentism and a start of time are compatible. What would come before and cause the start of time? There is nothing to do that, so it se...
March 20, 2019 at 09:46
I gave a proof: Or think of it this way. Each event in an infinite regress has a predecessor so each event makes sense on its own, but the series as a...
March 20, 2019 at 08:11
It is a weakness of standard eternalism that the present has no privileged status, whereas it does for us. There is also a variation, moving spotlight...
March 19, 2019 at 18:13
So you mean the universe has never been completely at rest? Yes I agree, an at rest universe would be a dead universe. There is the quantum eraser exp...
March 19, 2019 at 15:38
F=ma, e=mc^2, etc... when have we not caught the universe doing sums? It seems to follow purely mathematical rules. And thats what you'd expect; logic...
March 19, 2019 at 15:17
But logic predates, transcends and governs the universe, so yes, the universe has to behave logically. Any time we find absurdities (infinite regresse...
March 19, 2019 at 14:52