Necessary Thing

[TheRocketSurgeon]

As you may have noticed, some of us are a shade more caustic than others. Hehe.

[Angrboda]

As to whether I suspect there are only contingent things or not. If naturalism and determinism are both true, then the universe itself would be necessary in that it could not avoid being the way it is. My more general suspicion is that our brains are not equipped to have realistic intuitions about such things. Our notions of cause and effect appear to be modeled on physical interactions and are not geared for making sense of things like quantum entanglement. Failing a way to step outside of myself, my intuition is that all things are contingent. How that works its way out wrt something coming from nothing and eternal pasts, I don't know. I think we may never know.

[Ignorant]

... If naturalism and determinism are both true, then the universe itself would be necessary in that it could not avoid being the way it is...

I certainly agree with that. But, as is evident from your clarification in the final clause, that is an equivocal use of necessary (as opposed to necessary in the sense of non-contingent).

My more general suspicion is that our brains are not equipped to have realistic intuitions about such things. Our notions of cause and effect appear to be modeled on physical interactions and are not geared for making sense of things like quantum entanglement. Failing a way to step outside of myself, my intuition is that all things are contingent.

What do you mean by intuition and why do you think that is an important aspect?

How that works its way out wrt something coming from nothing and eternal pasts, I don't know. I think we may never know.

Which is why I mentioned that your definition of contingency, though not "wrong", may be too narrowly defined in a temporal sense. Do you think it is possible to consider present conditions/contingencies for a particular thing which is currently existing? What are the conditions (if any) for its continuing existence?

In other words, there are certainly the historical/cosmological conditions/contingencies for the present existence of carbon atoms which must have been fulfilled for carbon to exist (e.g. the development of the universe, formation of stars, explosions of stars, etc.). Whether or not that historical sequence of conditioned events is deterministic has no relevance for the presence or absence of conditions for today's carbon atoms. Rather than tracing a chain of conditions/contingencies backwards through time, can we not consider tracing a different and present chain of conditions "downward" through "what" it is (e.g. an animal is conditional upon functional organs, which are conditional upon functional cells, which are conditional upon certain organelles, which are conditional upon molecules, which are conditional upon... etc.)?

[abaris]

Questions, questions.

No answers. Just the usual half baked scientific alusions without fully understanding their meaning.

So, come on, lay your cards on the table and see if they trump our set. Due warning though, we've had thel ikes of you ad nauseam. Still have, actually.

[Ignorant]

No answers. Just the usual half baked scientific alusions without fully understanding their meaning.

Ha! Now there's something I agree with!

[abaris]

Ha! Now there's something I agree with!

Ok, that does it. You're a troll or a sock. Cheerio, motherfucker.

My bet is on True Christian.

[Angrboda]

I'm afraid that I must leave the conversation at this point. I'm not able to meaningfully reply given the limitations of my equipment.

[Ignorant]

I'm afraid that I must leave the conversation at this point.  I'm not able to meaningfully reply given the limitations of my equipment.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! If a future evaluation of your equipment reveals fewer limitations, I'd love to read what you think then. Thanks again.

[Ignorant]

@abaris, For some perspective, here is a compilation of your contributions to this thread, nearly all of them being one-liners. 

"Sure, this isn't a troll or a sock? I mean the join date predates True Christian, but the threads are eerily similar." HERE

"Ah, I see. 95 posts, joined up more than a year ago, and suddenly being on a oneliner thread starter spree. Excuse when I'm being skeptical." HERE

"Yeah, the wiggly dance. Not answering their own questions. I can't quite say why there's that particular troll smell." HERE

"The usual getting their rocks off over leading people on behavior. Hence, troll. And, as I already said, eerily similar to the late and unlamented True Christian." HERE

"Ah, I didn't even look at his self definition so far, since the behavior is irritating enough to give me pause. Not revelaing anything anything about their own ideas, just constantly questioning. If nothing else, it's in bad style." HERE

"I already read it before replying. The quoted part still seemed the most important to me." HERE

"As I said, looks like a True Christian sleeper cell. To be activated after being banned." HERE

"But it's a product of the digestive system, which this thread ultimately amounts to." HERE

"I say to you what I say to anyone else going there. We don't know how the universe works to it's last detail. We also don't know how life came to be, at this point. We know a lot more than we knew a century ago and, given another century, we will know even more. What you're doing is filling the gap with your god. You're uncomfotable with not knowing anything and so there's a gap to fill. You do that with your god as the filler. It's called God of the gap fallacy, actually. It's on the same lines as some caveman staring up to the sun and the moon, not understanding them and calling them god. So, I'm used to call that caveman behavior." HERE

"Maybe, as I said yesterday, say what you're actually aiming at. What's your point? Playing the oracle of Delphy won't gain you any sympathies." HERE

"With posting nonsensical oneliners? Way to go. man." HERE

"Questions, questions. No answers. Just the usual half baked scientific alusions without fully understanding their meaning. So, come on, lay your cards on the table and see if they trump our set. Due warning though, we've had thel ikes of you ad nauseam. Still have, actually." HERE

"Ok, that does it. You're a troll or a sock. Cheerio, motherfucker. My bet is on True Christian." HERE

Compare that to a single post of mine HERE which is longer than all of your posts above (combined), pertains to the thread topic, and is not directed at a person, but rather at ideas. Who is the troll? Am I the only one seeing this?

[downbeatplumb]

Does anything exist necessarily? In other words, is there anything that simply cannot NOT exist?

Without time or space you don't have anything at all.