First order logic, set theory and God

[Belacqua]

Drone - You are an idiot.

As an idiot you probably don't know the definition of an idiot. Ask an adult to look it up for you.

As such, you are no longer worth my time.

In the simplest terms I tried, but that didn't work.
I can only conclude that you are incapable of understanding and thus you are an idiot.

Idiot:
synonyms: fool, ass, halfwit, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, cretin, moron, imbecile, simpleton

And on the off chance you didn't understand any of that, let me say it even clearer.

You are stupid.

Could you type out a clear argument as to why you think he's an idiot? 

He starts out with a clear logical argument. I can say that the first half makes sense. The second half, where he starts using notation, is less clear to me -- but that's just me. 

Just now I re-read the whole thread. No one makes a coherent argument against what he's saying. At the beginning Reltzik makes a reasonable objection, and dr0n3 clarifies properly. Then Polymath replies intelligently, and dr0n3 explains some more. 

No one else deals with what dr0n3 has said. There is some off-topic stuff where people choose to address something other than the argument, and there's a lot of content-free insult. But there are no solid objections that have gone unanswered.

By repeating a lot of insults without any content it looks as if you're just trying to use force to make him shut up, since you certainly aren't adding to any rebuttal. But if you have reasons for your objection you could always spell them out.

---

6. The argument from "cause" is also flawed as it assumes that ultimate reality is intuitively logical. It's not.
Relativity, Uncertainty, Quantum Mechanics, and the math of Dirac (tensors) among other things, are not "logical".

Actually, there is quite a bit of recent discussion about similarities between Aristotelian notions of act and potency and quantum mechanics.  

Taking Heisenberg’s Potentia Seriously

While I have only scanned the article, it seems to align with something I have speculated about a lot lately. That is, the apparent irrationality of the quantum level is exactly what one would expect from potency prior to having order imposed upon it by actualities. Also I have often explained that the mind/body problem simply does not exist in Scholasticism. This paper seems to confirm that understanding.

Thank you for posting this paper. 

It's always a pleasure to see that serious people like the authors of this paper, and Heisenberg, are open minded enough to learn from Aristotelian and other classical concepts. Basic ideas like act and potency are still useful and far from refuted -- yet people reject them in a kind of knee-jerk reactionary way.

There is something very odd about people who circle the wagons and defend themselves against ideas which may actually help them.