a union of opposites — Thinking
A God would be a being that has the power and knowledge to create a specific universe. — Philosophim
Actually as far as solipsism goes that is pretty much it. I think therefor I am. That's all, there is a reason it's called a dead end. — Darkneos
I think that's close. Interesting that it's a discovery of mathematical physics, isn't it? — Wayfarer
One question I would ask is this: is there anything that exists that does not have a temporal beginning and ending (i.e. begins and ends in time) and is not composed of parts? — Wayfarer
find common ground — Benj96
A needle in a haystack — Michael McMahon
we'd have to say that it really wasn't random — Metaphysician Undercover
"Natural Selection" — Gnomon
I didn’t have the chance hearing of a religion (or religious doctrine) that doesn’t have rules to be obeyed by believers/its followers. — KerimF
I came to the conclusion that "all is mind" by inference from the modern scientific theory that "all is Information". Einstein determined by theoretical reasoning that Matter is a form of Energy. Then Shannon determined mathematically that Information content can be measured by its degree of Entropy (negative energy). Which means that "Information" is equivalent to positive Energy. Therefore Information = Energy = Matter. Ironically though, the term "Information", prior to the 20th century referred only to the contents of minds, i.e. knowledge & concepts. Hence : Information = Mind. — Gnomon
Time doesnt ezist — Gregory
can't generate itself — smartguy
I sometimes consider poetry to be a form of philosophy. — Gregory
we reach a point in which there are no rules of prior necessitation, only the unyielding result of the existence that is there. — Philosophim
or – if always existed – how and mostly why is there something rather than nothing. — philosophience wordpress com
The theory presents a mechanistic account of consciousness. — Malcolm Lett
The existence of the feedback path is the explanation for why we have awareness of our thoughts — Malcolm Lett
That is one way to imagine the hypothetical fundamental non-entity I call "G*D". — Gnomon
Covariant Quantum Fields seem to be more than to 'imagine', since Quantum Field Theory (QFT) has a basis and gives us the Standard Model of particles.
It's like a continuous unbounded unlimited Field of Potential (BEING), within which particles (worlds) emerge -- as-if by magic -- and then disappear again, without diminishing the Power of the Field. — Gnomon
This is not a traditional anthro-morphic deity, but a philosophical hypothesis to explain how our natural world seemingly emerged, complete with laws & energy, from nothing --- nothing but infinite Potential. Nothing is more "fundamental" than Existence (BEING). — Gnomon
PS__Don't you think this concept of BEING has poetic potential? :cool: — Gnomon
There's a gap — Malcolm Lett
How does one understand the whole without understanding the parts? The very definition of a whole is that it's made up of parts. — TheMadFool
If God created us then who create god?
Why does God has the chance of being God?
Why does Evil exist?
And a lot more... — philosopher004
What is going on? — Benj96
Timeless existence must support change but the only type of change we know of is within time. This is the issue I am roadblocked on. — Devans99
Timelessness is a mighty puzzle - it maybe unsolvable. — Devans99
dipolar God — 3017amen
The idea of superposition - that one thing could sort of be in two places at the same time - does not sit well with me. I prefer to think as matter as a spread out wave of energy that collapses to a very small wave when we measure it. Something being in two places at the same time - no way is that possible is my gut reaction. — Devans99
Gee, well, something exists!! LOL — 3017amen
what would it take for us to be accurately perceiving the present moment? — Bartricks
I am not following you. Presentism is, as I understand it (and I am not at all sure I do), the view that only those things that have presentness actually exist. So it is not really a view about time, as such, but a view about existence. — Bartricks
Anyway, can you explain how the view that only present things exist would show that our perceptions of the present are accurate and not systematically mistaken? — Bartricks
I don't see how the view I have expressed is 'presentism'. — Bartricks
And so on. — Bartricks