:up:Then you wouldn't be an atheist about anecessary entityand you wouldn't commit the contradiction.
— Hallucinogen
You are misusing the term "atheist". An atheist is someone who believes that no deities exist [outside of the heads of true believers]. — Michael
:100:It appears to me that you [@Baden] miss the point. Physicalism is a metaphysical theory, not a scientific theory. All coherent metaphysical theories are unfalsifiable. It's certainly reasonable to remain agnostic to metaphysical theories ... — Relativist
:up: :up:Metaphysical naturalism (or physicalism) fills in the gap that scientism leaves. Of course, it's not necessarily true, but it does defeat the claim (of some theists) that we "need" supernaturalism to account for aspects of the world.
21 days until Roevember election day (i.e. the Harris-Walz blowout).Roevember 21
— 180 Proof
What does this mean? — Mikie
I.e. existence (reality) is the all-encompassing – eternal, unbounded – brute fact. As a pandeist, I concur :100: :up:Rationality and its language of logic therefore are contained within the continuity_continuum of existence. The continuity_continuum of existence being the sine qua non prerequisite for reason, it can make no start outside the material theater of action. Given this fact, there can be no rational explanation for existence-itself-in-general. — ucarr
:sparkle: :pray:If man is imago dei
and if the devil is imago hominis,
then god is imago diaboli;
ergo imagoes est. Amen.
We shall see soon enough.... a ridiculous unsupported prediction. — Baden
I'll live in the US struggling against a neofascist regime while you and the rest of the world will be wagging your fingers and saying "I told you so." :mask:I'm just sayin' I'll do that if you're right about the national polls; what'll you do if I'm right that you're completely wrong? — Baden
:ok: You stick with those MAGA-GOP talking points and I'll stick with my 22Sept24 prediction¹ that Harris-Walz will win the upcoming Roevember 5th presidential election. :victory: :party:Sorry 180 Proof. I’ll put money on it. — Mikie
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/05/harris-trump-lichtman-election-prediction.html [2]Harris will beat Trump, says election prediction legend Allan Lichtman² :victory: :cool: — 180 Proof
I (technically) have won this bet but lost the other one that Diaper Don wouldn't be the GOP nominee. The latter, however, no doubt contributed to the former. :up:Also, when you say it won’t be Joe Biden as the nominee — care to bet on that too?
— Mikie
Like taking candy from a baby. :yum: — 180 Proof
:up: :up:[Y]our arguments apply (at best) only to your concepts [ ... ] The discussion seems to be about an uncaused first cause, and that's an unbreakable oxymoron. As such you can only have it if you first grant it. But then you [@Hallucinogen] have proved exactly nothing. All this worked out millennia ago. If you're just working it out for yourself, some credit to you. But the argument has long been a dead letter. — tim wood
:Period. :100:Atheism is the rejection of theism. — DingoJones
Another trollish non sequitur ...However, if that is ↪180 Proof's definition of Deism ... — Gnomon
Speaking for myself, I respect every pro-Isreal Jew who openly, vigourously denounces and opposes the mass murdering, ethnic cleansing, apartheid policies of the US/Nato-backed Netanyahu regime.And is there a certain type of pro-Israel Jew that you do respect? — BitconnectCarlos
:clap: :sweat:[T]he plain bald fact of the matter is that if you [@Gnomon] do not know what it means, then your education is lacking. And not only just because you don't know what it means, but also because you don't seem to recognize that it's meaningful, or that you can easily look it up. It also means you're unfamiliar with books that commonly have comments in them in Latin, Greek, German and so forth. So while it does not say, "You're an idiot," you yourself have instead said, "I'm an idiot," and apparently proud to be. — tim wood
:100: :up:The only real solution here is equal rights for Palestinians, and for Israel to become a normal, modern state where multiple ethnicities can coexist. — Tzeentch
Instead of learning from his interlocuters here, who aren't exactly dumb, he [@BitconnectCarlos] chooses to drink right wing Israeli cool aid. — Benkei
So what? "Mathematical relationships" are mere abstractions (i.e. tautologies – truth, not "being") and not events, forces, facts or things.I could point out that eternal mathematical relationships (e.g., Pythagoras' theorem) don't change as everything else changes ... — Hallucinogen
Yes, rather you are a body (i.e. metacognitivrly self-aware, decaying flesh & bone; once an unviable foetus and not yet a rotting corpse) at the very least.I don't have a body. — Kurt Keefner
:clap: :fire:... 'person' is derived from 'persona' which were the masks worn by actors in Greek drama. It corresponds to 'ego', which is, we can say, the self's idea of itself, and refers to what we are consciously aware of as ourselves, who we ourselves think that we are. — Wayfarer
:100:I think "mind" is what the brain and body does ... — BC
It's both, and nothing I've writtrn here is inconsistant with that.Analytic philosophy is a toolkit and not a school of philosophy? — Leontiskos
Whatever else is meant by (ontologically) "necessary", this modality also implies unchangeable. The only way X is unchangeable in relation to every other changing Z (i.e. non-necessary Z) is that X itself is simultaneously X & not-X, or always in a state of all of its possible relations/modes; thus, self-contradictory.Also a "necessary being" is a contradiction in terms insofar as for it to be "necessary" means that "being" is unchangeable (i.e. both being and not-being simultaneously). — 180 Proof
– IFF "a necessary entity" is not itself a contradiction in terms, which it is as I've pointed out.The point is that denial of a necessary entity entails a contradiction. — Hallucinogen
DEAR GOD,
FREE PALESTINE
FREE ISRAEL
FROM THE PARTIES OF GOD. NOW!
Yes, that's entropy. :fire:Modernsociety is destroying itself. — Carlo Roosen
And a hand cannot grasp itself just like eyes cannot see themselves and a brain cannot perceive itself. Big whup. But thinking often works, that's all we need to know. "Non-thinking" – autopilot – is involuntary therefore easy, whereas thinking (i.e. learning, creating, reflecting) is voluntary and difficult. The contrast is reflectively instructive. Read Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow.Thinking cannot be understood by more thinking.
You have come to the right place, Carlo, for such delusions of grandeur to be ridiculed. :smirk:Yesterday I wrote that I not only have to build this SHAI to save the world, I also have to get philosophy back on track.
