(March 18, 2015 at 11:06 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(March 17, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Nestor Wrote: It's hard to fathom why "god" should be bound to the laws of logic just as it is to conceive that the Universe truly operates on principles that our brains in one insignificant corner of an ordinary galaxy evolved to mimic. After all, logic is only an operating system of sorts by which the content of our senses becomes eligible for intelligibility after being disseminated into names and definitions. There's probably a lot of phenomena that remains hidden in the translating process that begins when an object becomes an image in the senses and is then apprehended in dialectic. What could be more counter to logic than the notion that space-time began from a Singularity with a burst of perpetually revolving forces that take shapes which then contemplate their existence?

So you really think that the Earth and plant life was created before the SUn and the Moon and all of the stars in the universe?

How the hell did you get that from Nestor's post?

Ha ha...that's Hilarious.

---

(March 18, 2015 at 11:08 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(March 18, 2015 at 11:06 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: So you really think that the Earth and plant life was created before the SUn and the Moon and all of the stars in the universe?

How the hell did you get that from Nestor's post?

Fat, stop being so racist!

(March 6, 2015 at 10:05 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: What prevents God from being capable of logically impossible feats?

---

From an Atheist's perspective, it just seems like the nature of all existence carries with it some inherent conceptual restrictions. And at a minimum, in order to understand things in this universe, we need a way of identifying them as either "it" or "not-it". But if you pull all of us out of the universe, surely God wouldn't need to rely on the same simple rules that we use. And he certainly shouldn't be required to abide by them, right?

So, is God bound by the same things as all nature? If not, what's your move from here? Just wonderin'...

---

Himself?

(March 6, 2015 at 10:05 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: What prevents God from being capable of logically impossible feats?

So, is God bound by the same things as all nature? If not, what's your move from here? Just wonderin'...

If I knew what "all nature" was, I might take a stab at it. But it seems as of late, even nature is throwing us some logical curve balls. I only need to cite quantum mechanics as an example. When the operation of our cell phones requires that we believe an object can be at two places at the same time, I get a little glazey-eyed and realize what a dufus I am. But it is not without hope. If we assume that human thought is a product of evolution, then there is something beyond "thinking" that is also part of "nature as we don't know it." So maybe it is time to look at those things that challenge thought itself...(just a thought...; ).

(March 18, 2015 at 6:59 pm)daver49 Wrote:

(March 6, 2015 at 10:05 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: What prevents God from being capable of logically impossible feats?

So, is God bound by the same things as all nature? If not, what's your move from here? Just wonderin'...

If I knew what "all nature" was, I might take a stab at it. But it seems as of late, even nature is throwing us some logical curve balls. I only need to cite quantum mechanics as an example. When the operation of our cell phones requires that we believe an object can be at two places at the same time, I get a little glazey-eyed and realize what a dufus I am. But it is not without hope. If we assume that human thought is a product of evolution, then there is something beyond "thinking" that is also part of "nature as we don't know it." So maybe it is time to look at those things that challenge thought itself...(just a thought...; ).

I'm fascinated to see where you go from here! I'm familiar with quantum entanglement, but it seems you are under the impression that cellphones rely on that in some way to function? And your understanding of this combined with the fact that creatures evolved with an ability to think has given you an excuse to not answer my question?..and then winky-face me?! You've got some explaining to do, sir.

(March 18, 2015 at 7:18 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: [quote='daver49' pid='901434' dateline='1426719589']


I'm fascinated to see where you go from here! I'm familiar with quantum entanglement, but it seems you are under the impression that cellphones rely on that in some way to function? And your understanding of this combined with the fact that creatures evolved with an ability to think has given you an excuse to not answer my question?..and then winky-face me?! You've got some explaining to do, sir.

---

(March 18, 2015 at 7:18 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: I'm fascinated to see where you go from here! I'm familiar with quantum entanglement, but it seems you are under the impression that cellphones rely on that in some way to function? And your understanding of this combined with the fact that creatures evolved with an ability to think has given you an excuse to not answer my question?..and then winky-face me?! You've got some explaining to do, sir.

Well, I am glad to add some fascination to your day. But I think it is unwarranted. The comment on cell phones came from a Wired magazine article. I assumed the authors knew more than me about the topic...as do most physicists and high school math students (but then again, we know what assumptions can do.) But semi-seriously, just because I have an ability to do something (i.e. think) does not mean it is the best procedure/process/routine to use to accomplish a given task. Just because I am a marathon runner doesn't mean it is the most efficient way to travel from Chicago to LA. We are all familiar with the phrase, "There is more than one way to skin a cat." So, why is thought so sacred?

And, what is this about smiley-winky things on this forum? You are the second person to bring it up and I have only been a member for a few days.

Oh!!! Thank you for your response. Thanks to your admission, I now realize that you are most likely a child. You have also
demonstrated that you will willingly make irrelevant refereances to articles that you don't know a clue about. Please know that while you have just committed credibility suicude, I will always give a fresh and clean slate to anyone who is capable of acknowledging and admitting where they were wrong. Your move...

(March 18, 2015 at 10:37 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: Oh!!! Thank you for your response. Thanks to your admission, I now realize that you are most likely a child. You have also
demonstrated that you will willingly make irrelevant refereances to articles that you don't know a clue about. Please know that while you have just committed credibility suicude, I will always give a fresh and clean slate to anyone who is capable of acknowledging and admitting where they were wrong. Your move...

Yes, these words are reality.

So you're trying to think of a better way to do things than thinking... By thinking about it?

Thinking is all we got. Chuck that out and we have no tools left.

Sure, we have many limitations, may be getting things wrong and might never realize. But that's too bad really! Terrible shame. All we can do is pool our efforts and come up with the best models we can, reducing any individual's error.

Whatever method we may use to gather information, we can only analyze it by thinking. So if the thinking is buggered, it doesn't matter how amazing the other method was.

(March 19, 2015 at 5:45 am)robvalue Wrote: So you're trying to think of a better way to do things than thinking... By thinking about it?

Thinking is all we got. Chuck that out and we have no tools left.

Yes, that is what we think. It is thought itself that tries to keep you dependent on it by convincing you there is no other way...the old "Cogito ergo sum" black hole. If you stop thinking...Poof! You disappear!