impetuous and mischievous nature — universeness

That's the nature of most gods. Some homonoid gods have lost that. Their aid in creation led to current day shit in the world.

Your theism just gnaws at you more due to your more, in my opinion. impetuous and mischievous nature. — universeness

Atheist panto talk. On the same level as ordinary theist panto talk used by jehova freaks.

No I don't — universeness

Yes you do. You said you think we are the tools of a universe trying to create new ones. That sounds even sillier than God.

By doing so we can give more meaning and purpose to the Universe — universeness

Why should we do that? What meaning and purpose does She demand of you?

Let's try to reduce the amount of repetition between us. — universeness

It's useless. You don't believe they are there. Whatever rows your boat. I know they're there...

By doing so we can give more meaning and purpose to the Universe, instead of assigning such a responsibility to a nonexistent supernatural — universeness

Why should gods imply handing over responsibility? You do the same: in the name of some universal non-existing being, the hydra universa.

That's not how it works, as well you know, (take off that windup merchant hat now and then), your hypothesis has not currently progressed from the posit stage. Your 'faith' in it has limited currency value. — universeness

I know it's true. And it fits exactly the universe needed by the gods. It was a huge effort. The whole of the godkind was involved in finding the right two particles and the space for them to exist eternally and over and over again (where did I hear that before). The particles of love and hate evolving in the almost infinite scala of beings, organisms, creatures.

Why should you be afraid of such gods?

"Strong emergence describes the direct causal action of a high-level system upon its components; qualities produced this way are irreducible to the system's constituent parts."

The high level structures, by definition, cant be reduced to the parts forming the structure. Particles can form a circle, a sphere, an ellipse, a leaf shape, a tree shape, a coffee cup, etc. Like thoughts can. Like the neocortex can influence the center brain and body. The shape of a form can't be deduced from the lower level parts. The structure of shapes is determined by causal forks, directing particles with no mutual interaction.

How about 'to pursue knowledge — universeness

What's the use of that? Or better, the meaning? I already know how the universe works. So? No big deal...

What non-existent beings want has no relevance at all — universeness

If they didn't exist no.

What?? Lions exist, do you fancy a one-on-one fight with one?
Your fists and legs against its teeth and claws? No fear of such eh?
Samson is also a fable — universeness

I mean: why should you fear gods?

Baked into the concept of a maker is a powerful, conscious, intelligent being and a beginning. — Agent Smith

How can creating an eternal and infinite universe have a beginning,‽

Perhaps for you, if you say so but then you are a leg puller, a windup merchant by your own admission so.......:naughty: — universeness

Yes! I even pull the legs of the gods! And they dont mind. What meaning has life without them? And I dont mean loving your fellow men or being happy walking in the park with my dog.

Because humans should care about other humans because we are all humans and we can decide that it should be so, we don't need a god fable to provide our moral code or our ethics. — universeness

Gods dont provide morals. They are just as good and bad as we are.

total BS. Why would I fear that which does not exist? — universeness

Why should you fear something that does exist? They dont want us to behave in any morally prescribed way. They dont want us to believe in them.

That about does it for me EugeneW. I can no longer take your claim to be a theist seriously. — universeness

I don't take gods seriously too. But they give meaning to our existence and the universe.

instead of where it should come from, in my opinion, their humanism. — universeness

Why?

That about does it for me EugeneW. I can no longer take your claim to be a theist seriously. — universeness

This shows your unconscious fear of god!

The brain is a memory device and, roughly speaking, an analytical engine rolled into one. The ability to learn can be reduced to pattern recognition and their storage for future reference. All of these abilities, methinks, are programmable — Agent Smith

The brain isn't programmed like a computer. If you learn by repetition there are just strengthenings of neural connections involved. Parallel path processes are engraved in the brain which is never shut off. In constant motion, the neural currents are, finding, creating, and falling into paths of least resistance (patterned connection strengths). A floating thought is not programmed but falls into trails or establishes new ones.

I think you like the role of Devil's advocate. You may be a leg puller, a windup merchant. — universeness

Now here you might be right! Though I dont believe in the devil.

No, you know I am a fan EugeneW but I am moving towards the opinion that you are naturally mischievous.
You have a good sense of humour but there is a darker side I think.
I think you like the role of Devil's advocate. You may be a leg puller, a windup merchant.
Your theism could well be almost a caricature of theists you have encountered in your past.
You have no religion, — universeness

Your opinion is right. Im naturally mischeveous. But so were the homonid gods! They laugh about me! Not sure what you mean by playing the devil's advocate. I play advocate of the gods.

You have no deference to your god(s). You demonstrate none of the expected theistic behaviors, you merely CLAIM to believe in god(s) but you don't exemplify personal behaviors in support of your claim. — universeness

All my behavior is in support of my claim. Like yours is to. The universe is a carbon copy of infinite eternal heaven. All creatures mortak carbon copies of heavenly gods.

I am therefore left with the thought that you are role-playing/caricaturing, because you get a buzz out of mixing your empirical scientist/theist incompatibility. It may even be a pre-meditated act to caricature communication with god(s) to show how evanhellicals, for example, earn their money.
You may even be doing this subconsciously, without truly realising it.
You will probably claim this is just psychobabble on my part but I am not so sure. — universeness

This is indeed psycho panto babble. The usual "unconscious motives" talk. I dont go for that. How can a message from the gods be premeditated? Theism is compatible with science. Science though offers no real explanation and the things they think explain (fundamental physics, evolution, etc.) are just a description. Not the ream reason why were here or why we do the things we do. My theology answers that. It's mysterious and understandable at the same time and not the science panto babble stories as told by scientists who think they know, but in reality unconsciously deceive themselves. I know better...

To know what a philosopher is we should study them in the free field, engage in an anthropological study. Study their essays, thesis, worldviews, scientific knowledge (not only their babbling about it), expressions, the clothes they wear, the language they speak, their sense of humor, their view on the gods, how they treat their fellowphlosfers, etc.

Philosophy is poorly defined, a collection of notions tied together with loose verbal strings. — jgill

Which comes close to mathematics! :smile:

I think that goes to show that you and I think too differently about the world for this to be a fruitful discussion. — T Clark

Thinking differently about the world is the most fertile ground for a fruitful discussion.

STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) are the master keys to solving ALL our problems. — Agent Smith

On the contrary. They are the cause of all problems. Why is everybody in awe for technology? Even in commerce: "Are you ready for the future? Are you engaging in the new tech? Want helping create it?...and more bs". What is it that makes tech so sexy? Enlighten me, Agent Smith!

take it by homonoid god you mean those who looked like humans as opposed to being all animal or some hybrid of the two but who was 'watching them?' — universeness

I mean the gods of who we are mortal incarnations.

You typed sometimes yes, sometimes no when baker asked you:
Are you grateful to your god/s?
Do you express submission to your god/s?
Your own answer suggests an inconsistent relationship with your gods. — universeness

Why can't a relation be inconsistent? Exactly that yes/no inconsistency deepens the proof of gods. In my theology, that is.

I find your claim that you believe in god(s) less and less convincing. — universeness

On the basis of liking the gods and not liking them?

And obviously, I think the science is fine, I mean, I am not arguing about that. — Constance

Not sure what you are arguing. We can bend space like a stick. If you rotate a heavy object, space is bend in the direction of rotation. Frame dragging.

No. What "bends" is spacetime, which does not have the Euclidean metric in R^4. The Euclidean metric is how we normally measure spacial dimensions. — jgill

No. What bends is space. This is accompanied with the bending of time. Time even is an maginary, giving flat spacetime a pseudo Euclidean metric. The bending of time simply means that clocks run with different paces over bend space.

I've always thought you were a goat. What I didn't know was you're a male also. — L'éléphant

Behehehehe.....

Yes, but you have to spend a really long time to milk cause they produce a very minute amount. — L'éléphant

Coming to think about it... I did push a drop out of my nipple once!

Give me an example of your deference to them — universeness

Deference is to much. I just like it that they created the universe.

At the same time I think that the homonoid-gods should have been watched more carefully, as their part in creation was, how to put it mildly, eeeh..., nosogood!

Explain your inconsistent relationship with that which YOU label god(s) — universeness

What inconsistent relationship?

You should! Sorry for butting in. I really think we should always, as a rule, turn the cheek. Once the 2 on your face are done with, it gets interesting. :lol: — Agent Smith

Agent Smith! :lol:

If in the land of 1,000 solipsists, one of them died, 1,000 didn't care. — L'éléphant

None of them would care really. They all would think the others are not real. They all think only themselves are real. There is no proof the others think.

It does not. What's (so) stupid about solipsisim? Explain your statement, please. Is solipsism something impossible? — Agent Smith

Is milking a male goat possible?

Jesus you're wrong! — L'éléphant

I feel flattered but wont turn my other cheeck!

If in the land of 1,000 solipsists, one of them died, $1,000 didn't care. — L'éléphant

Not sure I understand. Does 1000 dollar ever care?

This doesn't establish the falsity of solipsism — Agent Smith

There you are right. But it displays its stupidity (no offense!).

I have a kill count of roughly 3 million in Rome Total War, excluding those who met their end due to plagues and natural disasters (floods & earthquakes). I'm a genoicidal maniac (hides in shame). Oh shit! ( :sad: ) — Agent Smith

:lol:

Thomas Malthus, eugenics, are alive and kicking! Thin the herd! A quick strum of the harp...

I think you have actually laid consciousness on the table. Don't you feel the tickle in your feet? It resides inside you.

Can’t, actually. — Wayfarer

Why not? I can lay you on that table, tickle your feet, and perform some measurements, look into your brain and body.

Once upon a time, in the land of 1000 solipsists, one of them died. But the 999 left, didn't care.

The cartoon: "Anyone who doesn't want to go to war is gay!" has a ring of truth, doesn't it? — Amity

It's either true or false. I don't wanna go to war. Not for my fucking country, not for the gods, not in the name of science, I just don't want to. I like to fight sometimes but not with science-based technology. I'm nòt gay. So there can't be a ring of truth in the cartoon. But I get your intention. The cartoon should have been called "Most people who don't want to go to war are gay".

Inter alia, I don't like to be alone.

Yeah... We can lay consciousness on the research table in our most expensive labs. Study it and holding it in the bright light of investigation. As if we will find something terribly enlightening and as if we are oh so clever. Pointing at connections in the brain and body, the electric currents that run, testing "the subject" wearing our white research coats that feels so empowering. "We know these currents loop strangely back in this and that brain area, while the neocortical vision area projects into the nuclei...blah blah blah.. But you won't find actual consciousness, nor a way to explain it by looking at brain matter.