A question to all atheists!
January 30, 2017 at 12:17 am
(This post was last modified: January 30, 2017 at 12:26 am by LadyForCamus.)
(January 29, 2017 at 11:48 pm)Gestas Wrote:(January 29, 2017 at 11:31 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Okay...let's try this a different way. Why don't you start by defining your terms first? Please describe, exactly, what a "timeless state of affairs with zero potentiality" is?
I am only vaguely familiar with possible worlds logic, but I can tell you this: you cannot "logic" facts about nature in and out of existence. Logical arguments are not evidence. Especially if you have no way of demonstrating any of your initial premises to be true, or even possible.
I mean...you haven't even put forth a fully formed logical argument in the first place, lol. If you have one, by all means whip it out!
A possible world is a maximum description of reality that is logically coherent (at the very least). And all I'm saying is I don't see any logical inconsistency with a possible world where the natural world does not exist. And if you're a person who thinks time is part of the natural world, then this possible world would also be timeless. If you think such a possible world could produce a natural world then I'm all ears. I don't see how it could. There would be no matter, energy, or time. That's what I mean by "timeless state of affairs with zero potentiality". And if it's impossible for such a possible world to produce a natural world, then that means we can conclude that the natural world that exists in the actual world has always existed.
So, if you're an atheist, it'd be rational for you to believe that the natural world is eternal.
You're saying you believe "something cannot come from nothing", yes? And, you're attempting to prop this premise up by 'logic'ing 'absolute nothingness' into existence, because without it you wouldn't even be able to get your argument off the ground. Yes...?
I mean...that's fine if you believe that. I'm not here to make any grand claims regarding the nature of existence. I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. How the hell would I know? You're welcome to think what you want.
The thing is, you have no way of actually demonstrating with physical evidence that absolute nothingness is even possible in the first place, so any conclusions you draw from that assertion are completely meaningless with regards to the actual world. I'm not even convinced that human beings are fully capable of describing or conceptualizing such a thing as absolute nothingness.
Again, logical arguments are not evidence.
And I'm still not sure what any of this has to do with God-belief, or lack thereof.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
