Hippiekinkster
Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: luckydog1
Hippie, you said,
"Not having a belief in a deity does not exclude believing in beings from other planes of existence which may influence events in this plane.
If a being from another plane influences an event in this plane, is there a direct physical causal chain from the event preceding it? Of course not. (there are other problems with this example, but they are outside the scope of this discussion)
Then the statement "It logically follows that..." is not true. "
Now you say you don't think this, so its just nonsense youthrew out, because you couldn't come up with any vaild way of arguing the point I made? I will keep in mind that your posts are meaningless in the future, if you like. Well, of course it is something I just threw out. If you don't like that, then
"Consider the Universe as having magnitude and duration such that the x-axis is duration amd the y-axis magnitude. Consider also the Universe as a sinusoidal function such that the limit of M as y-->0 is M/infinity (i.e.; the universe becomes vanishingly small). At the precise moment that the slope of the curve goes from negative to positive, the big bang occurs.
Contemplate an infinite number of universes, all expanding/collapsing relative to each other. To help visualize this, think of a stable head of beer where the bubbles re-form, collapse, reappear, expand, ad infinitum."
Your "determinism" (I much prefer the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's discussion of various philosophical concepts;
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/ ) appears to postulate a precipitating "first event" from which all other events flow in an unbroken chain. The "eternal multiverse" idea states that there is no origin; that the universe has always been, in one form or another, in existence for an infinite time. There is, then, no first event, and thusly no causal chain.
quote:
Please find me one scientific athiest who believes there are other planes of existance, with beings in them. There are so many problems with your example. Are these other Planes natural or supernatural? If they are natural, Natural (scientific Law) applies there, and it is just as determined as our lane. Or if the other planes are supernatural...then one believes in the supernatural, and is not an Athiest, but a Thiest.[/quote} I have no idea what a "scientific atheist" is. Furthermore, a belief in a supernatural being does not mean a belief in the existence of a god or gods. (Theism)
quote:
So if there are other planes (with activist beings) believed in by athiests, my statement is not true. But not a single Athiest is willing to stand up and say they believe in beings from other planes affecting events in ours.
But basically I keep asking and no one is going to even attempt to make an answer. Within the context of Scientific Athiesm, what force other than scientific laws causes anything to hapen. Within the Context of SA, what are the thoughts in your but Chemical reactions occuring in predictable ways. How can you or anything have free will (you get the appearance of free will, for practical purposes we seem to have it, but really don't)?
Pages of people getting mad and name calling, but no one will offer up a force that could cause free will. Except for beings from another plane. Is there any evidence that beings from another plane are intervening in your brain...scientifically no, religiously absolutly. Plus if thought is affected by intervention by extra planal beings, it can't be considered free will.
"But a third and growing class of philosophers holds that (universal, exceptionless, true) laws of nature simply do not exist. Among those who hold this are influential philosophers such as Nancy Cartwright, Bas van Fraassen, and John Dupré. For these philosophers, there is a simple consequence: determinism is a false doctrine. As with the Humeans, this does not mean that concerns about human free action are automatically resolved; instead, they must be addressed afresh in the light of whatever account of physical nature without laws is put forward. See Dupré (2001) for one such discussion." (from my previous cite)
Having been a chemist, I have a little familiarity with chemical reactions. Of course reactions are predictable and repeatable. What is not predictable is which particular electron will form a pi or sigma bond with another atom.
Hugh Everett derived from quantum mechanics maths the theory that the macroscopic observer and the atomic observed particle can be described as a continuously evolving wave function and that all solutions to the Schrödinger equation create a new universe for each interaction of an observer with a superposed (from superposition, the mathematical description of an object being in different quantum states simultaneously; i.e., being in position A and position B at time t.) object. For every component of the superposition there is a corresponding universe created; the observer can only see what is in his branch, and thus his universe appears to be deterministic but is, in actually, only one result of the act of observing.
|
RE: Astrology - 
Profile
" 
" 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread