RE: Arguments for God's Existence from Contingency
November 28, 2017 at 1:19 pm
(This post was last modified: November 28, 2017 at 1:24 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
In all honesty I thought you were disagreeing with him and agreeing with me here, RR. So I don't think it's a matter of Tizheruk not looking at what he was attacking, because I was confused by what you were trying to say as well :
If you're suggesting that an infinite regress means that times run two ways at once then I have no idea how you reach that conclusion. That seems like a total non-sequitur. Whether the universe is finite or infinite has no bearing over time moves more than one way or not, and if time moves more than one way then we aren't actually talking about what we call "time", what we call time is a concept that speaks of things that happened, are happening and will happen, and those 3 kinds of things (The Happened, The Happening and The Will Happen) are respectively the past, present and future.
No, I'm not confusing the two, an effect is what at least seems to be happening after a cause whether causality is an illusion or not. And what happens next is what happens in the future, and the very idea of time working both ways doesn't make any sense.
What is the MP-MT transposition and how can anything implicitly invoke retrovausality when retrocausality isn't even a coherent concept?
(November 28, 2017 at 12:57 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(November 28, 2017 at 12:54 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: That or time runs two different ways at once
I don't see how you can get away from the above, if you are postulating an infinite regress.
If you're suggesting that an infinite regress means that times run two ways at once then I have no idea how you reach that conclusion. That seems like a total non-sequitur. Whether the universe is finite or infinite has no bearing over time moves more than one way or not, and if time moves more than one way then we aren't actually talking about what we call "time", what we call time is a concept that speaks of things that happened, are happening and will happen, and those 3 kinds of things (The Happened, The Happening and The Will Happen) are respectively the past, present and future.
(November 28, 2017 at 1:18 pm)Khemikal Wrote: It may not be true, but it's not non-sensensical. You're confusing unidirectionality of time for the definition of cause. A cause precedes an effect, by definition..but that doesn't mean that it must precede it in-time, only in it's chain of sufficiency or necessity.
No, I'm not confusing the two, an effect is what at least seems to be happening after a cause whether causality is an illusion or not. And what happens next is what happens in the future, and the very idea of time working both ways doesn't make any sense.
(November 28, 2017 at 1:18 pm)Khemikal Wrote: The MP-MT transposition, a rule of the system we use to determine whether or not something is sensible, implicitly invokes retrocausality any time we try to form a conditional statement regarding orthodox cause in-time.
What is the MP-MT transposition and how can anything implicitly invoke retrovausality when retrocausality isn't even a coherent concept?
