Religion III

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Well, good, then...you have just let the "divine foot" in the door of the universe, since "little" things like intelligence, intentionality, design, purpose, teleology and the like are all behind the creation of "quantum" computers and their programs. Unless, of course, you think computers and programs create themselves.

You accept intentionality, design, purpose, teleology as a (god) given A priori . I and Actor do not. The burden of proof is yours on all of that stuff, and so far you have failed miserably.

In case you forgot what "A priori" is....

A priori knowledge, in Western philosophy since the time of Immanuel Kant, knowledge that is independent of all particular experiences, as opposed to a posteriori knowledge, which derives from experience.

And you keep jumping up and down mindlessly on one foot repeating the same old, same old, ad infinitum.

For the 17 or so years that I have been here reading your inane posts, you have been always wrong about the same nonsense.

Give it a rest.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

You accept intentionality, design, purpose, teleology as a (god) given A priori . I and Actor do not. The burden of proof is yours on all of that stuff, and so far you have failed miserably.

In case you forgot what "A priori" is....And you keep jumping up and down mindlessly on one foot repeating the same old, same old, ad infinitum.

For the 17 or so years that I have been here reading your inane posts, you have been always wrong about the same nonsense.

Give it a rest.

So do you accept "intentionality, design, purpose, teleology" behind the creation of computers and their programs.

You are so dense -- so dead in the dark blackness of your soul and mind that you cannot see that since it takes an intelligent life form to create computers and programs to prove this, that or some other thing about quantum theory, then who can say that an all-powerful Intelligent Life Form didn't create the entire universe in the first place to provide the environment in which lower intelligent life forms would be able to conduct their experiments and create their machines critical to those experiments?

If science is going to prove that the universe came to be entirely on a inherently natural basis, devoid of any and all transcending forces, then scientists cannot become the very thing (the transcending, intelligent life forms) that they're trying to disprove! The high priests of scientism must prove their naturalistic theories of origins, apart from themselves becoming as gods in the things they create! Anything less than this requirement is rather (dare I say it?) self-defeating to their purpose!

Have a nice day.

[TJDave]

Originally Posted by hcap

A priori knowledge, in Western philosophy since the time of Immanuel Kant, knowledge that is independent of all particular experiences, as opposed to a posteriori knowledge, which derives from experience.

Time for the Immanuel Kant joke of the day:

What did Hannibal Lecter say to his Philosophy professor?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by TJDave

Time for the Immanuel Kant joke of the day:

What did Hannibal Lecter say to his Philosophy professor?

Don't listen to Hcap because he always speaks out of the dark ignorance of his heart. The Christian Faith is arational faith built upon true knowledge.

I know God exists and is real from natural revelation, divine revelation and personal, existential revelation.

From Natural Revelation, i.e. God's creation:

Rom 1:18-21
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
NASB

From Divine Revelation:

John 8:32; 17:17b
32 and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free...Thy word is truth.
NASB

And finally from Personal, Existential Revelation:

Rom 8:16
16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,
NASB

And,

1 John 3:24b
And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.
NIV

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

So do you accept "intentionality, design, purpose, teleology" behind the creation of computers and their programs.

You are so dense -- so dead in the dark blackness of your soul and mind that

You seriously think ranting like a religious fanatic and insulting others somehow proves your ridiculous case?

Nothing you have ever posted makes your case, and when you get flummoxed and have no answers to simple questions, winding up painting yourself into a logical corner, you sling mud. As Actor told you evolution, a theory accepted by the vast majority of educated people accounts for man's intelligence.
BTW, bunky FYI roughly eight-in-ten U.S. adults (81%) say humans have evolved over time,

Quantum computing came about because originally Richard Feynman, probably one of the most colorful physicists of the twentieth century, suggested the possibilities when quantum physics was relatively new, and other intelligent men took advantage of sub-atomic properties. Just like humans designed eyeglasses to comfortably perch on peoples noses and ears.

Nature, "god" or evolution did not "design" the arrangement of our facial structure to fit the later human development of eyeglasses

Once again what you accept as a "given", almost all of us don't.
You have yet to convincingly demonstrate any of your pre-17th century nonsense.

So I guess I will get more insults as you continue to stew.

[hcap]

Did I say "flummoxed"?

One picture is worth a thousand words

YouTube (Short URL)

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You are so dense -- so dead in the dark blackness of your soul and mind that you cannot see that since it takes an intelligent life form to create computers and programs to prove this, that or some other thing about quantum theory, then who can say that an all-powerful Intelligent Life Form didn't create the entire universe in the first place to provide the environment in which lower intelligent life forms would be able to conduct their experiments and create their machines critical to those experiments?

Argument From Ignorance!

Originally Posted by boxcar

The high priests of science ...

FTFY!

Originally Posted by boxcar

... must prove their naturalistic theories of origins ...

They have! I've suggested several books. I can suggest more when you finish those.

[hcap]

Hey bunky, does your god sculpt each and every snowflake? You know they are damn complex.

Does he/she/it have enough time before they hit ground or trees?

[Actor]

Originally Posted by hcap

You seriously think ranting like a religious fanatic and insulting others somehow proves your ridiculous case?

That's what he believes. He never thinks.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Actor

That's what he believes. He never thinks.

All of what he needs to begin to understand modern thought is available on the web..

He is willfully ignorant and proud of it.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

You seriously think ranting like a religious fanatic and insulting others somehow proves your ridiculous case?

Nothing you have ever posted makes your case, and when you get flummoxed and have no answers to simple questions, winding up painting yourself into a logical corner, you sling mud. As Actor told you evolution, a theory accepted by the vast majority of educated people accounts for man's intelligence.
BTW, bunky FYI roughly eight-in-ten U.S. adults (81%) say humans have evolved over time,

Quantum computing came about because originally Richard Feynman, probably one of the most colorful physicists of the twentieth century, suggested the possibilities when quantum physics was relatively new, and other intelligent men took advantage of sub-atomic properties. Just like humans designed eyeglasses to comfortably perch on peoples noses and ears.

Nature, "god" or evolution did not "design" the arrangement of our facial structure to fit the later human development of eyeglasses

Once again what you accept as a "given", almost all of us don't.
You have yet to convincingly demonstrate any of your pre-17th century nonsense.

So I guess I will get more insults as you continue to stew.

Hey...permit me to remind you: You're the one who doesn't make any distinction between existences, for you have boasted about being a non-dualist, thereby unwittingly leaving the universe's door wide ajar for a divine foot to enter therein. I was the one who asked you if the those mighty fine "quantum" computers and programs by which they receive their instructions were creations of natural or supra-natural forces, remember?

You are the one who has fatally shot to death the few remaining live brain cells you had.

Let me draw a great analogy for you because I'm really good at those.

Did you know that those wily, clever, inscrutable Chinese have created their very own sun? (If you didn't, Google it.) Well...since behind that creation is intelligence, intentionality, design, purpose and teleology and the like, then those Chinese scientists, like you, have unwittingly gone a very long in proving that all the suns of this universe were likely created by an intelligent being who designed them and had purpose for them, etc. All the suns of this universe are no more the mere accidental products of chance or randomness than their created sun machines.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Argument From Ignorance!

FTFY!

They have! I've suggested several books. I can suggest more when you finish those.

.

No, they haven't. Neither you or Hcap can tell us if the universe is infinite or finite -- apart from absurd equivocations. If the universe had a beginning, you have to explain to us how a thing can exist and not exist at the same time and in the same sense in order to create itself.

On the other hand, if the universe is infinite, having no beginning or end, then you need to show us how something that is pure existence can change by going out of existence, which violates the Law of Identity. A cannot be non-A. The universe cannot be finite and infinite!

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

All of what he needs to begin to understand modern thought is available on the web..

He is willfully ignorant and proud of it.

I have something infinitely better than "modern thought", which is the mere product of the minds of the walking dead: It's called Eternal Truth. It's timeless. It always existed and will never cease to exist.

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall never pass away" (Mat 24:35).

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Hey...permit me to remind you: You're the one who doesn't make any distinction between existences, for you have boasted about being a non-dualist, thereby unwittingly leaving the universe's door wide ajar for a divine foot to enter therein. I was the one who asked you if the those mighty fine "quantum" computers and programs by which they receive their instructions were creations of natural or supra-natural forces, remember?......................................... .....................
.................................................. ...........

You make absolutely no sense.

I did not boast about anything, just told you outright. Do you understand what pantheism is, and how it is not dualisticc?

One of the closest western forms to my eastern Hindu, Buddhist and Taoist views are....Einstein who believed in the pantheistic god of Spinoza. He did not believe in a personal God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings, a view which he described as naïve. Spinoza believed that god is “the sum of the natural and physical laws of the universe and certainly not an individual entity or creator”.

I did tell you your "divine foot" is leaden when it wears the shoes of organized religion. I am still discovering the universe in it's infinite variety.
As I believe we all should be.

Need I remind you of Socrates and his observation that we really don't know, although we all claim that "privilege", and the Indian fable about 4 blind men all arguing about the same elephant (in the room), that they are all trying to describe to each other.

There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

You make absolutely no sense.

I did not boast about anything, just told you outright. Do you understand what pantheism is, and how it is not dualisticc?

One of the closest western forms to my eastern Hindu, Buddhist and Taoist views are....Einstein who believed in the pantheistic god of Spinoza. He did not believe in a personal God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings, a view which he described as naïve. Spinoza believed that god is “the sum of the natural and physical laws of the universe and certainly not an individual entity or creator”.

I did tell you your "divine foot" is leaden when it wears the shoes of organized religion. I am still discovering the universe in it's infinite variety.
As I believe we all should be.

Need I remind you of Socrates and his observation that we really don't know, although we all claim that "privilege", and the Indian fable about 4 blind men all arguing about the same elephant (in the room), that they are all trying to describe to each other.

There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy

Pantheism is a self-defeating philosophy. It's no wonder you have suddenly appealed to it. You're drawn as easily to these kinds of of worldviews easier and faster than flies are to horse manure.

https://jashow.org/articles/pantheism-part-4/