Why We Are, and Forever Will Be, Imperfect

[fr0d0]

Welcome back Rabbit - nice to see you!

No one said anything about final proof. Quite the opposite. Man made definitions can be perfect to the standard man can set them. We're not talking about a definition from anyone else's perspective, for then you would be right - how could we know?

You said: "It truly leaves without explanation how imperfect beings with imperfect knowledge and imperfect faculties could ever lead to something perfect in an absolute sense."

Which is what the theological argument postulates.. perfection comes from the source. The source has to be the most perfect for everything to have emanated from it. Imperfection doesn't lead to perfection. Perfection leads to imperfection.

I agree, we can see how theology has evolved.

[Purple Rabbit]

Welcome back Rabbit - nice to see you!

No one said anything about final proof. Quite the opposite. Man made definitions can be perfect to the standard man can set them. We're not talking about a definition from anyone else's perspective, for then you would be right - how could we know?

You said: "It truly leaves without explanation how imperfect beings with imperfect knowledge and imperfect faculties could ever lead to something perfect in an absolute sense."

Which is what the theological argument postulates.. perfection comes from the source. The source has to be the most perfect for everything to have emanated from it. Imperfection doesn't lead to perfection. Perfection leads to imperfection.

I agree, we can see how theology has evolved.

Hi there fr0d0, I see you have had a little makeover with the hair and such...very nice ;-)

Some interesting points there too. How can perfection lead to imperfection? It seems like some error crept in somehow? Isn't satan according to christian tradition an offspring from perfection? And why should perfection have any dynamic properties at all such as we witness in our little universe.

[fr0d0]

Ah thanks yeah - IMO I'm a looker!

We assume that if there were a starting point, that it would be pure potential. Potential is all dynamism.

Would you agree that we observe things produced to be less than what created them, and not more? Or do you believe the opposite? Is there any evidence either way?

[Purple Rabbit]

Ah thanks yeah - IMO I'm a looker!

We assume that if there were a starting point, that it would be pure potential. Potential is all dynamism.

Would you agree that we observe things produced to be less than what created them, and not more? Or do you believe the opposite? Is there any evidence either way?

Potential seems another word for incompleteness and imperfection to me.

Is there any sense in comparing the painter with the painting?
Surely the painter is not very good at being a painting.

Also, whatever created the universe, the universe does not seem to get lesser by time. Indeed observation shows that we live in a runaway universe getting bigger all the time.

What seriously is in the way of any serious discussion of this question is a definition of perfection itself. It isn't by any chance a tautology for your god, is it?

[fr0d0]

Yet the painter is the painting in a sense. But also much more at the same time.

Isn't the expanding universe also dispersing? Isn't the only thing getting bigger the volume, and not the content? Are black holes dense.. is nothingness dense?

A tautology of my god?

[Purple Rabbit]

Yet the painter is the painting in a sense. But also much more at the same time.

Then anything goes...in a sense.

Isn't the expanding universe also dispersing?

Spacetime is not dispersing, the mean density is getting less.

Isn't the only thing getting bigger the volume, and not the content?

How much does god weigh? And is his weight perfectly zero?

Are black holes dense..

Black holes are as dense as dense can get.

is nothingness dense?

Empty space is not the same as nothingness and nothingness has no characteristics such as density.

A tautology of my god?

I the following sense: "whatever perfection is, my god is perfection"
It says nothing at all, and that is just perfect for some...

[fr0d0]

Yet the painter is the painting in a sense. But also much more at the same time.

Then anything goes...in a sense.

hmm.. maybe

Isn't the expanding universe also dispersing?

Spacetime is not dispersing, the mean density is getting less.

Right. Thanks

Isn't the only thing getting bigger the volume, and not the content?

How much does god weigh? And is his weight perfectly zero?

lol

God is perfectly unweighable of course

Are black holes dense..

Black holes are as dense as dense can get.

is nothingness dense?

Empty space is not the same as nothingness and nothingness has no characteristics such as density.

K thanks

A tautology of my god?

I the following sense: "whatever perfection is, my god is perfection"
It says nothing at all, and that is just perfect for some...

Right thankyou again. No I wouldn't agree with that statement. I agree it says nothing.

[Purple Rabbit]

God is perfectly unweighable of course

If god is unweighable then he is lacking the property "weight", i.e. being susceptible to gravity . Since some matter in the universe IS susceptible to gravity, god cannot have created it without violating the ex nihil, nihil fit principle often put forward by the religious (theologians and lesser gods of religion who of course don't know shit what the theologian jibberish is about) when attacking evolution. This means you are left with limited options: god goes or ex nihil, nihil fit goes or both go. What is your favourite flavour?

[fr0d0]

God goes - as God isn't 'existent' but simply 'is'.

[Purple Rabbit]

Right. God goes. Is this the conversion thread??

We now have the somewhat enigmatic result that God does not exist, but just IS.

Like a fantasy IS, I reckon.