|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:13 pm
Well written. It seems much more educated than 90% of what I see in the arguments over the existence of God. And I love your reference to Descartes, because once we get to his thought "Cogito, ergo sum", the world becomes real, something actually has to exist. And then, the rest is digging on your own end.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:05 pm
This is my favorite argument against the existence of God... even though it's meant to be humor. Quote: 1. The creation of the world is the most marvellous achievement imaginable. 2. The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic quality, and (b) the ability of its creator. 3. The greater the disability or handicap of the creator, the more impressive the achievement. 4. The most formidable handicap for a creator would be non-existence. 5. Therefore, if we suppose that the universe is the product of an existent creator, we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing. 6. An existing God, therefore, would not be a being than which a greater cannot be conceived, because an even more formidable and incredible creator would be a God which did not exist. 7. (Hence) God does not exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:40 pm
Still, its a beautiful argument. Silly flaws in the ontological argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 5:39 pm
Geisterstadt Well written. It seems much more educated than 90% of what I see in the arguments over the existence of God. And I love your reference to Descartes, because once we get to his thought "Cogito, ergo sum", the world becomes real, something actually has to exist. And then, the rest is digging on your own end. Though I dislike Descartes' argument for God, which says that since, basically ,he feels that it was ingrained in him as a soul, it must be true. Of course, this seems to go against his method of trying to disprove everything and see what he can really trust. Though a play on his argument is similar- He plays on things with degrees- If there is grey, then there is black and white, the two opposites. If there is twilight, then there is pure light and pure darkness, those sorts of things. He then reasons that since humans are imperfect, there must be a scale of perfection. And whatever it is on top, he reasons, must be what we call God. While it's not perfect, I like the sentiment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 4:09 pm
divineseraph Lady Merewyn Oh, and an infinite universe nullifies the idea of a creator, as space and time are intertwined... I don't believe in an infinite universe because it brings a mathematical paradox with it that makes everything 0%, or nothing. Literally. For if it takes up any space that can be measured to part of a whole, then there is a total and it is therefore not infinite. Somebody has never heard of what red shifts and blue shifts do......I wish I could bullshit number values like you. Also provide me proof need a accredited source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 4:44 pm
Steven Hawkings divineseraph Lady Merewyn Oh, and an infinite universe nullifies the idea of a creator, as space and time are intertwined... I don't believe in an infinite universe because it brings a mathematical paradox with it that makes everything 0%, or nothing. Literally. For if it takes up any space that can be measured to part of a whole, then there is a total and it is therefore not infinite. Somebody has never heard of what red shifts and blue shifts do......I wish I could bullshit number values like you. Also provide me proof need a accredited source. Over vast distances they show how fast something is traveling by measuring it's light shift. Visual doppler effect. I don't see what that has to do with proof that the universe is infinite. Logically, it can't be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 4:58 pm
divineseraph Steven Hawkings divineseraph Lady Merewyn Oh, and an infinite universe nullifies the idea of a creator, as space and time are intertwined... I don't believe in an infinite universe because it brings a mathematical paradox with it that makes everything 0%, or nothing. Literally. For if it takes up any space that can be measured to part of a whole, then there is a total and it is therefore not infinite. Somebody has never heard of what red shifts and blue shifts do......I wish I could bullshit number values like you. Also provide me proof need a accredited source. Over vast distances they show how fast something is traveling by measuring it's light shift. Visual doppler effect. I don't see what that has to do with proof that the universe is infinite. Logically, it can't be. Because modern theories state that the universe isn't infinite...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:51 pm
Gracchvs divineseraph Steven Hawkings divineseraph Lady Merewyn Oh, and an infinite universe nullifies the idea of a creator, as space and time are intertwined... I don't believe in an infinite universe because it brings a mathematical paradox with it that makes everything 0%, or nothing. Literally. For if it takes up any space that can be measured to part of a whole, then there is a total and it is therefore not infinite. Somebody has never heard of what red shifts and blue shifts do......I wish I could bullshit number values like you. Also provide me proof need a accredited source. Over vast distances they show how fast something is traveling by measuring it's light shift. Visual doppler effect. I don't see what that has to do with proof that the universe is infinite. Logically, it can't be. Because modern theories state that the universe isn't infinite... Modern? Its called EMC2...c.c
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
