If Newton could have been rid of faith, humanity would have gained even more genius.
Lies are impossible without faith.
Nevertheless, defenders of faith try to lie.
It’s funny.
Now this is a truly anti-rational expression of faith, belief.
The anti-faith rhetoric here, which is all it is, relies heavily on unreasonable faith - on unproven ideas, on misrepresentation, on disregarding examples, or on fanciful assumptions about these examples…
Where is there anything against rationality here? Newton was a believer. If, by some miracle, he were rid of faith, he would have been more rational. Pure logic. But your logic is one of faith.
I’ll offer an analogy for your thinking: “On Newton’s left buttock, there was a mole. Without the mole, Newton wouldn’t have been a genius.”
Who among us is irrational?
Faith is the same “mole.” The difference being that faith cripples reason.
1 Like
That is what YOU said,
Not me.
Answer your own question.
For fun, I will write what the “law of gravity” would be like if Newton had not been a believer but had known God.
The world is in a state called Order. Therefore, there is no “gravity” or “attraction,” but there is a law of Order—everything is in its place in motion.
You would now be bleating about this very law.
How much of Newton have you read? Part of me wants to say something sarcastic along the lines of … if Newton had any arguments for the existence of God, he probably got them from Leibniz. But I won’t say that.
P.s. I really liked all that stuff you said about faith being trust.
You let the “demon” Bugs Bunny you. Don’t feel bad. I do that to myself without outside help, lol.
Knowledge is justified, true belief. Belief is not necessarily anti-rational. Without belief you cannot care about (value, trust… because sound judgment) gathering/sorting evidence (reasoning), or accepting the truth and demolishing falsehood (understanding).
Belief in Newton hinders the work of the intellect. It is impossible to understand what Order is, how everything is in its place in motion, when a person believes.
Everything is in its place in motion.
How difficult it is to understand this when “Newton” exists.
The concept of the theme can be written even more specifically.
People who have been reduced to an animal state by faith are unable to understand what it means that “everything is in its place in motion.” For fools, this is a contradiction. Everything in its place is static. And motion is motion.
How do you explain to educated and scientific morons that statics is nonsense? What the hell is static if there is time? What is static if everything is changing? The planet is rotating, where is the static in that? How do you prove to degenerates that science is fundamentally false?
How can I explain to you that photons and quanta are the same thing? That consciousness and existence are the same thing. How to explain to educated and scientific morons that God is God and cannot be known through faith. How to convey the idea that power and its servants are parasites? It is easier to destroy you than to humanize you and turn you into people.
You’re so weird. You’re like the mirror image, as in reverse, of someone I semi never knew who was a fideist, but believed that you cannot conclude God’s existence through reason and evidence.
Wrong.
Faith creatures = schizos.
Animals do not have faith, they simply see what’s in front of them. Animals have neither faith nor logos.
Faith creatures have some kind of flawed logical reasoning where they are programmed by whatever is taught to them, and they don’t question it.
If you want to talk about Quantum we can talk about Quantum.
I think the way people use the word “photon” is commonly wrong, and is somewhat annoying.
They always use the word “photon” as if its a particle, flying through space.
I think instead we need to just define light as a “probability wave” flying through space. There is no such thing as a photon. The probability wave, if it has an energy of 1, then activates some random atom somewhere, creating quantum physics.
I do believe we are in a simulation. All explanations of quantum physics are woo and scifi sounding, simulation is woo as well but seems to be the most “Occam” explanation so far. I am looking for a more “reasonable” or “Newtonian” explanation to quantum though.
A simulation of what?
1 Like
To be human is to be able to overcome instinct, with consciousness. Awareness vs Instinct. Conscious vs Subconscious. This is what defines one as an animal versus ‘civilized’ or human.
Take note that when humans conquer a less “civilized” culture, they always say “We were more civilized” which can be translated to, we know or understand more things, we are more aware, therefore we used such awareness to conquer.
Typically with industrialism and science tech.
True power sets free.
True, but not in the way meant in that christian jamboree brochure you got at church. Only in the way of reducing obstacles and resistances so that there is more freedom to act. But this is not metaphysical freewill. ‘Setting free’ only means ‘you’re so strong you’re free of having to worry about x’.
And since power is only the capacity to act, the greater the range of action a thing has, the more powerful it is.
True power is through true wisdom, and true wisdom may seem sometimes like it does not grant freedom but it does, it provides more opportunity, through understanding of knowledge, which an understanding is then knowledge becoming applicable to a situation. Knowing is only half of wisdom.
I still remain of the mindset that free will and determinism both exist and one is necessary for the other, just because one is necessary for the other does not make it any less true.
Determinism, determines the will free. That is what wisdom and consciousness itself are in my view. I learn and I grow and I have more options available. The fact that not everyone chooses a path of wisdom /or/ ignorance, solely.. shows a freedom in decision.
And if you use the argument of moving toward greater satisfaction then please do explain, is life /really/ more satisfying than death or non existence?
What if we say it’s about a third? There’s doing (motion) and there’s valuing (emotion, satisfaction, happiness/blessedness, joy). Without valuing, we’re just going through the motions. Because we’re not free. But if we’re free because we value, that can reframe/baptize (recruit, if you will) every motion. And if there is neither doing nor valuing, then what do we even know/understand about it… whatever it may be? Not a whole lot.
Three kinds of reason/knowledge… you need all three distinctly:
reasons you show something is the case (how you test out it’s true)
reasons you trust something (why you want it to be true)
reasons you identify/recognize to be true (what is your reality)
Death (if by it you only mean the cessation of life) and nonexistence do not have any satisfaction associated with them. They’re nothing.
Transition and transformation are necessary for growth.
There was never nothing. There will always be (has been, is) something (life). Forever unfolding more to those who seek.
And if there is no satisfaction from non-existence of life or death, then where does it enter? is it a system that is only regarding the living? How can life become about “satisfaction” and determinism when there was not this system, prior to life?
Again, what is more satisfying… the non-existence of life, or life. If there is no system one has to play the rules by or subject their living self to, would that not be more satisfying, ironically?
And can it still be considered satisfaction, if not conscious to it? You see, there’s a contradiction there and if the system that is Determinism itself has a contradiction then it should only prove the point that a will that is free can operate off of and from it, through a constantly evolving system.
You are correct in saying there was never ‘nothing’.. even nothing is still something, anything that can be fathomed, comprehended, imagined.. if you can visualize it in your mind and see it or think about it… Context = Image, then it is something. True nothingness as well as infinity is not able to be actually comprehended.