The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of God

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:29 pm

JohnJBannan wrote:Ecmandu,

I believe evolution is true. Evolution is the only known process for creating life. If you wouldn’t consent to evolution, you couldn’t exist to withhold your consent.


I don’t deny that abiogenesis occurred. I do deny that it’s necessary for life.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:48 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
JohnJBannan wrote:Ecmandu,

I believe evolution is true. Evolution is the only known process for creating life. If you wouldn’t consent to evolution, you couldn’t exist to withhold your consent.


I don’t deny that abiogenesis occurred. I do deny that it’s necessary for life.


Well, there is no other method of creating life but via evolution. So, your denial is hollow.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:00 pm

JohnJBannan wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:
JohnJBannan wrote:Ecmandu,

I believe evolution is true. Evolution is the only known process for creating life. If you wouldn’t consent to evolution, you couldn’t exist to withhold your consent.


I don’t deny that abiogenesis occurred. I do deny that it’s necessary for life.


Well, there is no other method of creating life but via evolution. So, your denial is hollow.


You walked right into that one! You mean god cannot exist without abiogenesis or evolution ?!?!

How hollow is my claim now? That god has to create only beings that obey evolution and abiogenesis!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Fri Jul 31, 2020 10:23 pm

God isn’t a material being subject to evolution.

How can you consent when you don’t exist?
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jul 31, 2020 10:46 pm

JohnJBannan wrote:God isn’t a material being subject to evolution.

How can you consent when you don’t exist?


For one, you ignored me when I said that god could create beings without evolution. Even more to the point, you claim that god always creates beings to be lesser than god forever! Sound like god has an inferiority complex! But let’s move on!

You can’t consent if you don’t exist. I have no clue why you’re asking me that question!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:09 am

Ecmandu,

God is uncaused. God doesn’t need evolution to exist. All life is the result of evolution. This is the way!

You can’t complain about lack of consent when you didn’t exist to be asked.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:13 am

JohnJBannan wrote:Ecmandu,

God is uncaused. God doesn’t need evolution to exist. All life is the result of evolution. This is the way!

You can’t complain about lack of consent when you didn’t exist to be asked.


Actually, like every possible being in existence, god needs otherness to exist. This means that god is dependent upon other uncaused being in order to exist.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:05 am

You got that completely opposite. Otherness needs God to exist.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:18 am

JohnJBannan wrote:You got that completely opposite. Otherness needs God to exist.


No. It factually doesn’t work that way. If there is nothing outside or inside of a being, this being cannot perceive its own existence. It’s a non existent being.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sat Aug 01, 2020 10:44 am

It’s an uncaused being. It doesn’t need otherness. Otherness needs it.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:42 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
JohnJBannan wrote:You got that completely opposite. Otherness needs God to exist.


No. It factually doesn’t work that way. If there is nothing outside or inside of a being, this being cannot perceive its own existence. It’s a non existent being.


John also wrote: It’s an uncaused being. It doesn’t need otherness. Otherness needs it.

You’re just asserting the same thing and so am I.

Problem is, mine is a fact. Any being that has zero internal and zero external cannot exist.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sun Aug 02, 2020 3:21 pm

Ecmandu,

That is not a fact. The Cosmological Arguments show how an uncaused cause is real and does not require otherness to exist.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Aug 02, 2020 3:46 pm

JohnJBannan wrote:Ecmandu,

That is not a fact. The Cosmological Arguments show how an uncaused cause is real and does not require otherness to exist.


Otherness is uncaused. That’s where we’re butting heads.

You cant even say it without calling it “uncaused cause”. Two words! Otherness!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Meno_ » Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:35 pm

Have You guys tried another spin? Caused and uncaused, like two sides of a single coin may meet somewhere, somehow?

In case of the coin, the Christ splendidly demonstrated, that we should give credence to Caesar, and to Man that, which belongs to their respective domains?

If that proposition is senseless, then primary on its respective substantial faces, they are only imprints on a piece of metal. The imprints are not real in the sense of 'something is real that was caused by the pressing of a substance against a substance.

But if the force it took to produce an image, it had to represent the image that force produced.

The metal is where the figure produced by the force becomes the image, literally.

It's odd to say of the substance and the image that they meet somewhere, but in another sense they do.

They meet because the have never disassociated, they merely have always existed, the caused of the imprint and the uncaused of the image meet on another level.

What is that level? Is there that level other then the caused one that resulted in pressuring a force to create that image?

Is there a higher syntax within which the substantial can be included, rather then excluded?

The diamond unearthed used to be a tree, then a rock . The impression brilliance gives was literally a naturally caused process, the realization of that is devolutionary.

Can our entropic psychic process be comparable? Is our harsh insistence on anti-natural explanations which destroyed the basic reasons for our existence an undermining way below the level of that reason, and we are forced to jump into a higher mode of sense, more quickly that the substantial will allow.

We surface too quickly and we loose awareness of what it takes to build it.
Last edited by Meno_ on Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6862
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:49 pm

Ecmandu,

Otherness is clearly not uncaused. It is impossible for otherness to first create order. Can’t happen.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Meno_ » Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:54 pm

out of order, in sure, but I am compelled.

John said,

"Otherness is clearly not uncaused. It is impossible for otherness to first create order. Can’t happen."

Why is it impossible,? Nothing is impossible for God.!
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6862
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:56 pm

Meno_ wrote:Have You guys tried another spin? Caused and uncaused, like two sides of a single coin may meet somewhere, somehow?

In case of the coin, the Christ splendidly demonstrated, that we should give credence to Caesar, and to Man that, which belongs to their respective domains?

If that proposition is senseless, then primary on its respective substantial faces, they are only imprints on a piece of metal. The imprints are not real in the sense of 'something is real that was caused by the pressing of a substance against a substance.

But if the force it took to produce an image, it had to represent the image that force produced.

The metal is where the figure produced by the force becomes the image, literally.

It's odd to say of the substance and the image that they meet somewhere, but in another sense they do.

They meet because the have never disassociated, they merely have always existed, the caused of the imprint and the uncaused of the image meet on another level.

What is that level? Is there that level other then the caused one that resulted in pressuring a force to create that image?

Is there a higher syntax within which the substantial can be included, rather then excluded?

The diamond unearthed used to be a tree, then a rock . The impression brilliance gives was literally a naturally caused process, the realization of that is devolutionary.

Can our entropic psychic process be comparable? Is our harsh insistence on anti-natural explanations which destroyed the basic reasons for our existence an undermining way below the level of that reason, and we are forced to jump into a higher mode of sense, more quickly that the substantial will allow.

We surface too quickly and we loose awareness of what it takes to build it.


Human consciousness is caused by the brain. The universe pre-existed human consciousness. I do not find human level consciousness a persuasive answer for both material, temporal and degree limitations. An uncaused thing cannot be explained because causes are explanations. So, the uncaused cause has no middle ground, because it is inexplicable.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:58 pm

Meno_ wrote:out of order, in sure, but I am compelled.

John said,

"Otherness is clearly not uncaused. It is impossible for otherness to first create order. Can’t happen."

Why is it impossible,? Nothing is impossible for God.!


God is not otherness. Otherness is the contrast inherent in all physical reality.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Meno_ » Sun Aug 02, 2020 5:13 pm

JohnJBannan wrote:
Meno_ wrote:out of order, in sure, but I am compelled.

John said,

"Otherness is clearly not uncaused. It is impossible for otherness to first create order. Can’t happen."

Why is it impossible,? Nothing is impossible for God.!


God is not otherness. Otherness is the contrast inherent in all physical reality.



Again, why can't God be Otherness , as well! I do not think that this van be disproved.

Contrast? Between what and what?

Contrast on both levels, yes, but a delimitation will not work.

It's similar to saying, the cosmos is based on circular impression therefore tautology is a valid form of expression.

That is what I was angling at to paraphrase Jesus re. the Caesar unscripted coin.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6862
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Aug 02, 2020 5:37 pm

John,

You really don’t understand the most basic logic in all of existence!

If there is not internal and/or external, the object/being is non existent. That’s the definition of something that doesn’t exist (no otherness). I’m not even talking physical here, simply spiritual.

It’s ironic that the most basic logic in all of existence is rejected by someone presumably trying to use logic.

Thing is... you abandoned logic when the discussion got real for you!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10458
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby phenomenal_graffiti » Sun Aug 02, 2020 5:41 pm

[Human consciousness is caused by the brain.


How? Through the magic of creation ex nihilo?

The universe pre-existed human consciousness.


Is this something you witnessed or an idea you believe?

I do not find human level consciousness a persuasive answer for both material, temporal and degree limitations.


The only thing we experience, and the only thing whose existence can be demonstrated, is human consciousness.

An uncaused thing cannot be explained because causes are explanations. So, the uncaused cause has no middle ground, because it is inexplicable.


This applies also to physical energy, given the 1st law of thermodynamics.

PG
Q: What lies beyond the "Matrix" that is consciousness?

A: The conscious and unconscious mind of God.


Image

Jay Marcus Brewer
Austin, Texas
Email: [email protected]
User avatar
phenomenal_graffiti
Thinker
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:08 pm
Location: Texas

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby promethean75 » Sun Aug 02, 2020 6:02 pm

I've been watching the conceptual confusions and language games in this thread for a couple days now and I gotta say sumthin. It's killing me.

Human consciousness is caused by the brain.

How? Through the magic of creation ex nihilo?


You cant ask 'how' because the statement is meaningless. But a philosopher wouldnt notice this and a huge discussion about nothing would follow.

Wittgenstein and Hacker would tell you that you're talking about - or expecting, rather - the word 'consciousness' to be a thing or an event... and it would have to be for that statement to make any sense. But there is no more meaning to the word 'consciousness' than how it is used to describe some behavior. Nothing could be known about some inner and hidden private self that could be called 'consciousness'.

In different words, you add nothing to the body if you include consciousness.

Further, if you probed the brain, you'd never find where and how consciousness 'emerged' from the matter.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3139
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby promethean75 » Sun Aug 02, 2020 6:18 pm

Hacker in general finds many received components of current philosophy of mind to be incoherent. He rejects mind-brain identity theories, as well as functionalism, eliminativism and other forms of reductionism. He advocates methodological pluralism, denying that standard explanations of human conduct are causal, and insisting on the irreducibility of explanation in terms of reasons and goals. He denies that psychological attributes can be intelligibly ascribed to the brain, insisting that they are ascribable only to the human being as a whole. He has endeavoured to show that the puzzles and 'mysteries' of consciousness dissolve under careful analysis of the various forms of intransitive and transitive consciousness, and that so-called qualia are no more than a philosopher's fiction.


*crickets*
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3139
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby phenomenal_graffiti » Sun Aug 02, 2020 6:31 pm

Nothing could be known about some inner and hidden private self that could be called 'consciousness'.

In different words, you add nothing to the body if you include consciousness.


Consciousness is the only thing that is experienced and demonstrates it exists. Something that is not/is other than a person and that which that person experiences has never been experienced.

Further, if you probed the brain, you'd never find where and how consciousness 'emerged' from the matter.


If you probed the brain, you would find that it is made up of your consciousness [consciousness="your experience of something made out of your experience of it"]; it is not made up of matter [something that is not/is other than your consciousness].
Q: What lies beyond the "Matrix" that is consciousness?

A: The conscious and unconscious mind of God.


Image

Jay Marcus Brewer
Austin, Texas
Email: [email protected]
User avatar
phenomenal_graffiti
Thinker
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:08 pm
Location: Texas

Re: The Fourteen Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of

Postby JohnJBannan » Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:32 pm

Meno_ wrote:
JohnJBannan wrote:
Meno_ wrote:out of order, in sure, but I am compelled.

John said,

"Otherness is clearly not uncaused. It is impossible for otherness to first create order. Can’t happen."

Why is it impossible,? Nothing is impossible for God.!


God is not otherness. Otherness is the contrast inherent in all physical reality.



Again, why can't God be Otherness , as well! I do not think that this van be disproved.

Contrast? Between what and what?

Contrast on both levels, yes, but a delimitation will not work.

It's similar to saying, the cosmos is based on circular impression therefore tautology is a valid form of expression.

That is what I was angling at to paraphrase Jesus re. the Caesar unscripted coin.


God can’t be otherness, because then God would be caused by that otherness. God cannot be caused, or there would be something greater than God. God isn’t Supreme if there is something greater.
JohnJBannan
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:31 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron