That is an interesting topic! And perhaps one I'll make after this dies down. There are a few claims that could be made that I think are interesting. ...
But an omnibenevolent being would never choose to do wrong, even if they could. That's part of the contradiction of the problem of evil. if God choose...
As I stated before, you were the second person to interpret that the wrong way. That tells me I need to revise this section to be more clear. The way ...
When you stated premise, I assumed you spoke about the OP. Our previous conversations seemed to lean to the idea that you found the solution uninteres...
I'm not claiming a thing can have both an unknown cause and no cause at all. That which has an unknown cause is a Y. That which has no prior cause, is...
A priori knowledge is that which is independent from experience. You cannot conclude that everything must have a prior explanation for it being based ...
Then your point will not matter. This sentence is nonsense. If you want your point to matter and make sense, use your example and point out where the ...
I have not stated that there could not be a chain of infinite causal regression. All I've stated is there can be no prior reason as to why there exist...
There is a difference between not knowing if there is a cause, versus knowing there is not a cause. At one time atoms were thought to be the smallest ...
No, this is not knowledge at all. That is belief. For it to be knowledge, you must demonstrate that all changes you observe have causes. It is a stron...
Please demonstrate how this is false. I can go around saying a lot of things are false, but it must be shown to be false, not merely believed to be fa...
I fail to see this. Mind using this to demonstrate how this dismantles the OP? Anything can be claimed, but for it to matter, it must be logically sho...
Lets clarify what necessity and possibility are. Logical necessity is a logical conclusion that cannot be contradicted within the system. For example,...
I don't think that's quite correct. What I did was take cause up to its logical conclusion. There are only two alternatives. If one is logically elimi...
I'm glad you're enjoying the challenge! If I've given you something to think and wonder on, whether it ends up holding true or false in the end, it is...
I remember years ago in a current continental philosophy class, being was described as that which could interact with another. I remember this struck ...
No good! I know it might not help much, but I think you're a pretty cool person who's kept this forum interesting. I hope it settles down soon, and yo...
My short answer to this is people can say anything they want when there are no consequences for it. "I would sacrifice my life and run into a burning ...
I think the biggest issue with this is you need to condense and clarify your points. When you define something such as autonomous morality, you should...
Its not science, its philosophy. Philosophy helps us come to logical conclusions apart from application, so we can let our mind wander to possibilitie...
No, I am saying that we don't know. Perhaps there is an X for a Y, or perhaps there is not. If there does not exist for a particular Y, then that Y is...
Let me clarify the point. I am saying "if" there exists an X. If there does not, then the infinite regress's cause for existence, is the fact that it ...
I much appreciate the discussion Bob. Do not worry about being concise! I understand. I wrote another paper here which examines knowledge using basic ...
My apologies Bartricks, I had logged in this forum a couple of days ago under the wrong email, and did not realize I had an old account I had forgotte...
If cause and effect cannot accurately represent reality, then they are unicorns that do not exist. Cause and effect is a 4D measurement of states over...
No, and I thank you for pointing that out. I should detail that explicitly. Y is an object that we believe has an X, but we do not know if it does. Th...
This is fair. "First cause" is simply a label for the underlying concept. And that concept is that every chain of causality must end. The end point lo...
Fair question. If it turns out that all of causality is infinitely regressive, what caused it to be that way? If you introduce an X, or a prior explan...
That's not really the same thing as the OP's points. Really, my best example of what the OP is trying to do, is the OP itself. But perhaps a better ex...
I'm just trying to speak in the terms you were using. I don't value anything more than another. Real means what exists. What is not real, does not exi...
A force collides with an object and causes it to move 1 meter per second upon impact. What caused the object to be in the state of velocity of 1 m/s? ...
Cause and effect are four dimensional measurements of the world. They are representatives of the world, just like words and math are. But, we can have...
Yes, an excellent point. We can only have faith that the rules of causality were the same billions of years ago as they are today. But perhaps they we...
I think this is incorrect. Hume was talking about predicting the future. Hume couldn't deny we could figure out cause and effect in the moment. His po...
So here are some cool things to consider. If there are no rules as to what should be self-explained, then it seems like there are no limitations as to...
In general, yes I do. Based on what evidence? We can believe and have opinions on all sorts of things. I'm not asking for personal beliefs or opinions...
I may not have understood the question then. Could you try to rephrase it to make it more clear? Are you asking what's in between the cause and effect...
First, thank you for your passionate and thoughtful response! There are many good points here. Absolutely true. The OP is an argument of abducto ad ab...
A good idea and a great gesture. Causality is not perceived, it is concluded. Try holding your breath. Try living without taking another breath. You w...
I mentioned earlier to one of the posters that cause and effect are more than fiction, as evidenced by your ability to post a reply. If we did not hav...
Intentional or not, you are. How many seconds prior to the explosion should I consider? What scale of forces should I evaluate? Are we talking about t...
Fair, I have no idea what I'm talking about then, and am not interested in getting further away from the OP at this point. To that end, do you have en...
Since you are trying to convey Bell's theory, lets go with that then. I see some problems with the thought experiment. But its not the thought experim...
No, I can't. That's because probability requires a certainty of certain facts for formulation. As soon as you said, "I might not be necessarily being ...
Comments