Actual infinities.

[Jehanne]

They are neutral; agreed. [1] But, as Professor Sean Carroll said repeatedly in his debate with WLC, theism is 1) not well defined, 2) given to multiple definitions, and 3) leads to no strong predictions.  Theism is compatible with everything! [2] As with the idea that planets move because there are angles pushing them in a way that conforms to mindless natural forces, so, too, Occam's Razor demands that we reject theism, deism, pantheism, etc., and only accept naturalism, as there is simply no need to postulate anything beyond the natural order. [3]

1) Great!

2) Fair enough.

3) Yes that is true. Angels/"supernatural forces" are unnecessary for explanations about planetary motion or other natural phenomenon. If the god-of-the-gaps theism is the only one you know, then you rightly reject it, but I would hope you would remain open to more sophisticated accounts of theism.

Does metaphysical naturalism suppose/know of some sort of necessary "thing", common to all things, without which nothing-at-all could exist? If it is supposed, why is it supposed? If it is known, what is it?

Do plants grow because fairies water them?  Provide them with nutrients?  Physics is complete:



We don't need to look beyond it, even if there are things, such as consciousness, that are not irreducible.

---

If there are infinite amounts of measurements between spaces, then wouldn't the same be true for any measurement, Eg, time, volume, sound, colour, etc.
Sorry, but it sounds like a load of rubbish, even though it is quite interesting.

Cantor proved it -- between any two points on the real number line, there are an actual infinite of points.  If space and/or time is continuous, like the real number line, ergo, actual infinities exist and we transverse between and through them constantly, as does everything else in the Cosmos.