Comments by "nameless" (@nameless-yd6ko) on "Let's Talk Religion"
channel.
-
Is This The Best Argument For God's Existence?
~~~ No.
All the common pro-God arguments presented fail terribly when examined in critical thought, they are filled with logical fallacies.
What these arguments will do is to provide food for a growing belief. A belief infection is very un-particular regarding it's dietary habits, whereas philosophical critical thought is very particular and doesn't allow the fallacies and errors that belief infections feast upon! ;)
It is much simpler to offer and sustain the argument/theory that everything exists!
Wanna know how easy that would be?
To Exist is to be perceived. To be perceived means to Exist.
Nothing exists that is not perceived, nothing is perceived that does not exist!
Thus, Existence is ALL-inclusive!
Reality is predicated upon Existence!
Thus, Reality is ALL-inclusive!
Truth, being predicated on Reality must, also, be ALL-inclusive!
Now, unless one can sustain a valid argument against what seems to me a Universal definition (Occam at his finest ;), it is no longer reasonable to question whether (fill in the blank) does or doesn't exist. Everything exists!
Thus, logically, God Exists.
And Faeries, and unicorns, and dreams, and.... everything else! ;)
"Logic will get you from A to Z; Imagination will get you everywhere!" - Albert Einstein
Now, why are these 'arguments for God's existence'?
The Faithful, the Saved/Enlightened/Mystic certainly don't need them.
I think that these are fodder for the Faithless believers, the unSaved, and all these theories/proofs will never take the place of Faith. Feeding the belief virus with them is about all they're good for.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Is This The Best Argument For God's Existence?
~~~ No, it fails logically in the same manner as all the other 'proofs' of God's existence! The 'causality/creation' theory fails philosophically and scientifically!
There is only one logical 'proof' of God's (or anything's) existence, and this and the rest on youtube aren't it! They all fail!
The purpose of all these 'proofs' are as fodder for the Faithless, the unSaved/unEnlightened! And all these spurious 'proofs' will never fill the hole that lack of Faith/Salvation/Enlightenment leaves!
If the 'theory' of causality is correct, then every moment of existence is both a 'cause' and and 'effect'. Simultaneously!
So, even if this 'theory' is correct (it ain't), what is the point? You cannot identify any distinction between a 'cause' and an 'effect' because(?) there is none. So again, any essential distinction between the two is illusory, a matter of perspective, but it is pragmatic under certain circumstances/Perspectives. Like making the kiddies believe that a demon will gobble them up if they go down the old abandoned mine. The illusion makes their lives a bit more comfortable.
A good scientific reason why 'causality' is not possible is;
"The Laws of Nature are not rules controlling the metamorphosis of what is, into what will be (ie; Karma). They are descriptions of patterns that exist, all at once... " - Genius; the Life and Science of Richard Feynman
All 'eternity' at once; Here! Now!!
Reality is not linear, it is Holistic! ;)
1
-
@bleazertm7698 Does God exist?
~~~ All the common pro-God arguments presented fail terribly when examined in logical critical thought, they are filled with logical fallacies.
What these arguments will do is to provide food for a growing belief infections. A belief infection is very un-particular regarding it's dietary habits, whereas philosophical critical thought is very particular and doesn't allow the fallacies and errors that belief infections feast upon! ;)
It is much simpler to offer and sustain the argument/theory that everything exists!
Wanna know how easy that would be?
To Exist is to be perceived. To be perceived means to Exist.
Nothing exists that is not perceived, nothing is perceived that does not exist!
Thus, Existence is ALL-inclusive!
Reality is predicated upon Existence!
Thus, Reality is ALL-inclusive!
Truth, being predicated on Reality must, also, be ALL-inclusive!
Now, unless one can sustain a valid argument against what seems to me a Universal definition (Occam at his finest ;), it is no longer reasonable to question whether (fill in the blank) does or doesn't exist.
Everything exists!
Thus, logically, God Exists.
And Faeries, and unicorns, and dreams, and.... everything else!
There you go! ;)
1
-
@ All the common pro-God arguments presented fail terribly when examined in critical thought, they are filled with logical fallacies.
What these arguments will do is to provide food for a growing belief. A belief infection is very un-particular regarding it's dietary habits, whereas philosophical critical thought is very particular and doesn't allow the fallacies and errors that belief infections feast upon! ;)
It is much simpler to offer and sustain the argument/theory that everything exists!
Wanna know how easy that would be?
To Exist is to be perceived. To be perceived means to Exist.
Nothing exists that is not perceived, nothing is perceived that does not exist!
Thus, Existence is ALL-inclusive!
Reality is predicated upon Existence!
Thus, Reality is ALL-inclusive!
Truth, being predicated on Reality must, also, be ALL-inclusive!
Now, unless one can sustain a valid argument against what seems to me a Universal definition (Occam at his finest ;), it is no longer reasonable to question whether (fill in the blank) does or doesn't exist. Everything exists!
Thus, logically, God Exists.
And Faeries, and unicorns, and dreams, and.... everything else! ;)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AlexReynard Alright, rather than this idiotic babble, if you have one particular point with which you disagree, first, make sure that you understand what I'm saying, usually by rational questions, and then if there is still a 'problem, elucidate it.
"If the genuine peace that zen describes was possible, I'd like to see it. But I'm sure as hell not seeing it from you, for instance."
~~~ Hahaha! I hardly have to live up to something (imaginary) that you read or heard about but never experienced. You wouldn't know it if it bit you in the... ankle. Knowledge is experience.
If we cannot have a respectful conversation, we'll have none.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kyloren3587 what's wrong with using the argument that all creation must have a creator?
~~~ The problem with that argument is that merely assuming that everything was 'created' doesn't make it so, and thus, it things aren't 'created', then we need posit no 'creator'.
Positing a 'Creator', if examined, always leads to paradox, like; "Who created the creator?" and; "How can something come from nothing?"
A paradox is a sure sign of logical error, usually in a basic assumption. In this case, the error is in the assumption of 'creation', which is logically and scientifically impossible.
There's lots more, but, this should be a bit of food for thought! ;)
That doesn't deny a 'God', just the notion of a 'creator' God.
1
-
@kyloren3587 It would make sense for a limited object to be created by something and there is nothing in science that denies that.
~~~ I am in awe of someone who is familiar with all branches of science in all ages!
You are so confident in your ignorance, how can I possibly even begin to teach you.
If there were such a thing as 'free-will/choice', I'd exit now.
As for questions that are about the creator himself
~~~ Nope. You just don't get to declare yourself 'right' and continue merrily along. Not with me.
If you'd like to talk of God, feel free, but your imaginary 'creator' is your own dream unicorn, not mine. And you are unlikely to spread your belief infection to me.
it doesn't necessarily have to have an answer that we know. We already have things that our brain can't comprehend, like infinity,
~~~ There is no 'answer' that is not known.
There is no such thing as 'infinity'. Not perceived = not existing.
And whining that "God works in mysterious ways..." is no argument.
so that could easily apply to other things and it also applies to these questions. God has unlimited power and has other things we might not be able to comprehend, so it's not a paradox.
~~~ If God created the Universe, who or what created God? That is the paradox that is evidence that 'creation' is impossible. Except as a strain of belief. Everything exists.
Plus, how would God Almighty have unlimited power but not be able to create something?
~~~ The question is another fallacy.
The error is in the assumption that God "has unlimited power". Exactly what does that mean? Like PG&E? Trump? What, exactly, is this 'power'?
Moving past this, the argument that "if God could, he would" is another logical fallacy, and also leads to paradox; "Can an irresistible God move an immovable God?"
First, you cannot present any evidence that there is, actually, an "anything" "out there" that actually exists. Before worrying if your hallucination can or has been 'created', find out if it is an hallucination or not. The greatest mirage in the desert isn't going to quench your thirst.
Spoiler;
There is nothing out there. There is no out there, out there. No 'time' to 'be', no space or dimension in which to 'be', no motion... Reality ain't like you think. ;)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1