RE: Does a God exist?
July 7, 2016 at 9:39 pm
(This post was last modified: July 7, 2016 at 9:41 pm by Ignorant.)
pocaracas Wrote: A thing with matter or energy is defined as existing. it's matter or energy properties imply existence, it seems. [1] So... existence is a "conditional property"(?) [2]
1) Yup. This is hardly surprising when it comes from metaphysical naturalism. In other words, if only 'material' reality exists, then the most fundamental 'kind' of matter is equivalent with existence itself.
Metaphysical Naturalism [straight from wiki]: Metaphysical naturalism is a philosophy which maintains that nature encompasses all that exists throughout spacetime. Nature (the universe or cosmos) consists only of natural elements or natural processes that reduce to natural elements, whose fundamental building blocks are spatiotemporal physical substance—mass–energy LINK
You might find that intellectually satisfying. I don't: What is matter? Are there more fundamental conditions which must exist for matter to exist? For energy? If yes, then matter/energy does not = existence. If no, then matter/energy = existence. The fact that two things are being considered (i.e. matter and energy) is a big clue that we haven't discovered the fundamental condition for reality. But that is just me.
2) Call it whatever you want, as long as you realize that it is a property which describes an action.
Quote:Are you saying that a "conceptual electron" is the same as a "real electron"?
No. I am saying that they differ in the most fundamental respect: the real electron is doing something that the conceptual electron is not, i.e. the real electron is being. It is doing what electrons do.
You say that existence is a property like charge and mass, etc. I am saying that even if existence were a property, it is a radically different sort of property compared to charge and mass. Take away the existence property and nothing is there. Take away the charge property and something is there (a charge-less thing with the mass of an electron), but it is not an electron. The existence property governs the ENTIRE thing, while the charge property seems only to govern the KIND of thing. It is therefore inadequate to describe existence as a property like charge and mass. It is more adequate to describe existence as an act, the most fundamental or 'primary' act of everything.
Quote:All other properties are the same so we can still call it an electron, but there's a difference between the two, wouldn't you say?
Ya... one is existing, the other is not existing. If you won't budge on the property thing, fine. A thing has the property of existence IF it is existing (which is an action).