RE: Is nihilism the logical extreme of atheism?
October 12, 2014 at 9:43 am
(This post was last modified: October 12, 2014 at 9:44 am by fr0d0.)
(October 12, 2014 at 8:12 am)genkaus Wrote:lol it's still physically impossible to create something more than you physically compose. Variations leading to perfection have to be less or equal to the creator.(October 12, 2014 at 5:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Losty... humans don't create humans with chemicals not possible to create from themselves. At best all they can do is create copies of themselves. I think you're arguing with someone off point here.
Create *better* copies - which was the point.
(October 12, 2014 at 8:12 am)genkaus Wrote:Everything in it, and anything it has the potential to create. The singularity contained the potential for the entire possible content of the universe. It was potentiality.(October 12, 2014 at 5:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: The nylon eating bacteria might be s new species, but it's not something that the universe didn't already contain the information to spawn, do you see?
Really? What else does the universe already contain information for?
(October 12, 2014 at 8:12 am)genkaus Wrote:With both we're talking potential. You're moving away from philosophy to practical application, which doesn't help crystalise the idea for you, but confuses it.(October 12, 2014 at 5:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Justice. There doesn't _have_ to be justice. Things just work out differently if there were. How? My perspective is different > my moral understanding is different > my quality of life is different.
2 things - Is your moral understanding consistent with your perspective and is the quality of life superior?
(October 12, 2014 at 8:12 am)genkaus Wrote:If humans had it, how would they know? If they can't know that they have it, then they can't know that their judgments are correct.(October 12, 2014 at 5:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Revenge is always immoral for humans IMO. Why? Because we don't have sufficient knowledge to condemn.
How much is sufficient knowledge and why is it impossible for humans to have it?
(October 12, 2014 at 8:12 am)genkaus Wrote:Suffering mentally and physically are a direct result of living in conflict with nature. Don't take your meds: expect the illness to continue.(October 12, 2014 at 5:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I don't want you to suffer in an afterlife. You do in my dogma. Let me say it in a secular way: Do you want to live life in a way that benefits your nature and puts you in harmony with the world, or do you want to be selfish and live in disharmony with nature and suffer mentally and physically as a natural consequence of that? <---- that's all Christianity is saying. If you say that you want to live a full and happy life, then that's the same as a Christian saying that they want to believe in God. Jesus: "I came to give you life in all its fullness".
Like the proposition you presented here, Christianity is based on false dichotomy. Suffering mentally and physically is nit a natural consequence of being selfish or living in disharmony with nature. The same goes for Christianity - it is lying when it says that you need Jesus to live life at its fullness.
For the rest, like I've said, in a faithless reality life is unfair.
(October 12, 2014 at 8:12 am)genkaus Wrote:(October 12, 2014 at 5:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Injustice = reality for you. That's sad.
~Sad, but True.~
Sans faith. Sure.