Status:
Joined:
November 13, 2015
Last Seen:
1 year
user id:
394062
Location:
West Coast, North America, Earth, Sol System, Milky Way, our local galactic cluster, my Hubble radius, the unknowable
Gender:
M
Depression is a way of savoring certain emotions. Wallow in them and know life, but just remember, if you go through with it, you'll never experience anything else ever again.
I wish I hadn't included the sentence, "The worst torture of life might be the knowing that you'll die." That pinpoints the topic in the way that a pin pinpoints the surface of a balloon. It lets all the air out of the paragraph. It would have been so much more clever and artistic to let the reader collect the parts and realize the topic by their summation. Oh, well. Please pretend that I were the kind of writer that had left that sentence out.
If we are just thoughts, that's fine. It's like I say to my friend who suggests we're in a dream, dreams and thoughts are still experience, and experience is real, so it makes no difference to me if my pain and pleasure are dreamed. I still feel them. I know about the double-slit experiments. The results don't surprise me. They just show that the metaphors we learn from our large-scale (human size and above) experience, such as "wave" and "particle", are not sufficient to describe what's going on at the small scale. We need better language.
Exactly. You totally got it. I've heard people say the first statement. It's illogical, and I showed why. My other post about something from nothing doesn't say there's no god, but if there is, as you read between the lines, it would have to come from nothing. Also unwritten there, but hopefully what a reader might be lead to consider, is the next step, which is to realize that if a god can come from nothing, then it should be even easier for the universe, which is presumably less complex than a god would be, to have come from nothing, making a god unnecessary to produce the universe. If a god can come from nothing, certainly, a universe can. Other suggestions simply beg the question, such as, "Something made god." (Where did the thing that made god come from?) "God was always here." (How?) I can't accept "always here" for anything. It's unimaginable. I can imagine always nothing, but it's apparent always nothing isn't what happened.
With that logic there still leaves a possibility of a God existing. Also, it doesn't have to mean that the creator was created. There was fault in the "Believer's" first statement because it can lead to conclusion of a paradox like the Challenger explained. A better statement would be "The creator is infinite and all else was created by it". So it's arguable that the Creator could have came from nothing because "...otherwise there would still be nothing". This isn't really my actual take on it but my explanation based on your terms.
Exactly. You totally got it. I've heard people say the first statement. It's illogical, and I showed why. My other post about something from nothing doesn't say there's no god, but if there is, as you read between the lines, it would have to come from nothing. Also unwritten there, but hopefully what a reader might be lead to consider, is the next step, which is to realize that if a god can come from nothing, then it should be even easier for the universe, which is presumably less complex than a god would be, to have come from nothing, making a god unnecessary to produce the universe. If a god can come from nothing, certainly, a universe can. Other suggestions simply beg the question, such as, "Something made god." (Where did the thing that made god come from?) "God was always here." (How?) I can't accept "always here" for anything. It's unimaginable. I can imagine always nothing, but it's apparent always nothing isn't what happened.