Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 129

Thread: Stoicism vs. Materialism

  1. #31 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    30,048
    Thanks
    2,791
    Thanked 11,000 Times in 8,370 Posts
    Groans
    41
    Groaned 595 Times in 591 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LiAlSi2O6 View Post
    But the universe is a "special case". Just like Guanilo's critique of Anselm, it doesn't really apply.

    The core question is always going to be: where did the predicate come from? That's how it will ALWAYS play out.
    But it isnt

    I agree but that's a you problem.
    "Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners" - George Carlin

    "Education is a system of imposed ignorance" - Noam Chomsky

    "Leftists actually think everyone is as stupid as a leftist." - Yakuda

    "No, Trump isn't a fascist, tatt boy." - moon

  2. #32 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    58,153
    Thanks
    35,715
    Thanked 50,646 Times in 27,301 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,977 Times in 2,694 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    Well the dilemma isn't Aquinas to fix. The FACT is nothing creates itself yet here we are. So something or someone outside not space and time had to exist. Now as crazy as that idea may be to you its no where near as finding a pencil and thinking, it just happened, yet that's the alternative argument. Or my other favorite argument, it's nature. Lol that one cracks me up almost as much as multiverse.
    I agree that there's a certain logic to observing the lawfulness and mathmatical organization of the universe, a believing it reflects a rational organizing principle, because nothing like that is expected to happen by accident.

    On the other hand, our knowledge of reality is still extremely limited, and I don't necessarily think our only two options are it happened by chance, or it happened by some sort of rational agency. There could be aspects of reality we don't understand, or may never comprehend which is related to origin of the big bang

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    Doc Dutch (02-26-2024)

  4. #33 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    30,048
    Thanks
    2,791
    Thanked 11,000 Times in 8,370 Posts
    Groans
    41
    Groaned 595 Times in 591 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    I agree that there's a certain logic to observing the lawfulness and mathmatical organization of the universe, a believing it reflects a rational organizing principle, because nothing like that is expected to happen by accident.

    On the other hand, our knowledge of reality is still extremely limited, and I don't necessarily think our only two options are it happened by chance, or it happened by some sort of rational agency. There could be aspects of reality we don't understand, or may never comprehend which is related to origin of the big bang
    Oh course you agree it's demonstrably true.

    So you're saying since our knowledge is limited then anything we could possibly conjure up to explain the holes in our knowledge might be true.
    "Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners" - George Carlin

    "Education is a system of imposed ignorance" - Noam Chomsky

    "Leftists actually think everyone is as stupid as a leftist." - Yakuda

    "No, Trump isn't a fascist, tatt boy." - moon

  5. #34 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    58,153
    Thanks
    35,715
    Thanked 50,646 Times in 27,301 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,977 Times in 2,694 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    Oh course you agree it's demonstrably true.

    So you're saying since our knowledge is limited then anything we could possibly conjure up to explain the holes in our knowledge might be true.
    We barely understand 5 percent of what is in the universe - atomic matter and conventional energy - and even some of that knowledge is subject to speculation or revision.

    We don't have any tangible knowledge about what the other 95 percent of the universe.

    Anyone who tells you we have enough knowledge of reality to be 100 percent certain we can nail the origin of the big bang done to two general possibilities is not steeped in the scope of human knowledge.

  6. #35 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    137,797
    Thanks
    47,245
    Thanked 69,374 Times in 52,417 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,513 Times in 2,470 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    Well the dilemma isn't Aquinas to fix. The FACT is nothing creates itself yet here we are. So something or someone outside not space and time had to exist. Now as crazy as that idea may be to you its no where near as finding a pencil and thinking, it just happened, yet that's the alternative argument. Or my other favorite argument, it's nature. Lol that one cracks me up almost as much as multiverse.
    I agree that there's a certain logic to observing the lawfulness and mathmatical organization of the universe, a believing it reflects a rational organizing principle, because nothing like that is expected to happen by accident.

    On the other hand, our knowledge of reality is still extremely limited, and I don't necessarily think our only two options are it happened by chance, or it happened by some sort of rational agency. There could be aspects of reality we don't understand, or may never comprehend which is related to origin of the big bang
    The fact the Universe is orderly and has understandable rules, even if we don't know or understand them all, does give credence to a creative force behind its existence.

    OTOH, looking at the Infinite Monkey Theorem, if an infinite number of universes were created, then some would make sense, such as ours, while others would be gibberish, rules that don't work. DEAD. There'd be everything in between such as some that struggled along before failing.

    While that doesn't answer the question "Is there a creator?" it does point out that our Universe may not be unique simply because it works. We might simply have been lucky, not "blessed". Random chance vs. deliberate action.

    Simulator
    https://tennessine.co.uk/monkey/
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Doc Dutch For This Post:

    Cypress (02-26-2024)

  8. #36 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2023
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    828
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 104 Times in 80 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    So you're saying since our knowledge is limited then anything we could possibly conjure up to explain the holes in our knowledge might be true.
    It's not an unrealistic position. But it is also a position that holds zero value by any metric. Just because something is not shown to be impossible does not mean it is even marginally likely. This would be like some sort of inverse of "God of the Gaps".

    I find a lot of people take the "weirdness" science presents and use it to justify whatever their imagination allows. It's why "quantum" is so popular in the New Age movement. It leverages something no one really groks on a fundamental level to justify whatever woo woo beliefs feel good to the believer. Does NOT mean that they are wrong, but also doesn't mean they are right either.

    When it comes to origins of the universe I honestly cannot think of a way to know the real answer. As such any answer is just as good as another. And all are equally valueless.

  9. #37 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    58,153
    Thanks
    35,715
    Thanked 50,646 Times in 27,301 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,977 Times in 2,694 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Dutch View Post
    The fact the Universe is orderly and has understandable rules, even if we don't know or understand them all, does give credence to a creative force behind its existence.

    OTOH, looking at the Infinite Monkey Theorem, if an infinite number of universes were created, then some would make sense, such as ours, while others would be gibberish, rules that don't work. DEAD. There'd be everything in between such as some that struggled along before failing.

    While that doesn't answer the question "Is there a creator?" it does point out that our Universe may not be unique simply because it works. We might simply have been lucky, not "blessed". Random chance vs. deliberate action.

    Simulator
    https://tennessine.co.uk/monkey/
    I think the multiverse is a wonderful thought experiment.

    But I tend to not favor explanations that require us to get extremely lucky and win the lottery, so to speak.

    It's possible that someday we might find a universal principle that shows the natural laws and universal constants can't be any other way than the way they are. The problem with that is it doesn't rule out a purposeful organizing principle underlying reality.

    I agree with you that there is a kind of logic in believing there is rational or purposeful agency to the lawfulness of the cosmos. I can't laugh that off as a possibility.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    Doc Dutch (02-26-2024)

  11. #38 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    30,048
    Thanks
    2,791
    Thanked 11,000 Times in 8,370 Posts
    Groans
    41
    Groaned 595 Times in 591 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    We barely understand 5 percent of what is in the universe - atomic matter and conventional energy - and even some of that knowledge is subject to speculation or revision.

    We don't have any tangible knowledge about what the other 95 percent of the universe.

    Anyone who tells you we have enough knowledge of reality to be 100 percent certain we can nail the origin of the big bang done to two general possibilities is not steeped in the scope of human knowledge.
    Completely irrelevant.

    No one but you had even hinted that anyone knows 100% about anything. What's illogical is to observe the extreme complexity and precision of the universe and suggest it just happened or wasn't designed. If we found a pencil on the ground and had no idea what it was or how it was used we couldn't conclude it just appeared. Maybe we could conclude that but wed be wrong and we are smarter then that even though we understand very little of what is.
    "Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners" - George Carlin

    "Education is a system of imposed ignorance" - Noam Chomsky

    "Leftists actually think everyone is as stupid as a leftist." - Yakuda

    "No, Trump isn't a fascist, tatt boy." - moon

  12. #39 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2023
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    828
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 104 Times in 80 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    What's illogical is to observe the extreme complexity and precision of the universe and suggest it just happened or wasn't designed.
    So where did the designer come from?

  13. #40 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    58,153
    Thanks
    35,715
    Thanked 50,646 Times in 27,301 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,977 Times in 2,694 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    Completely irrelevant.

    No one but you had even hinted that anyone knows 100% about anything. What's illogical is to observe the extreme complexity and precision of the universe and suggest it just happened or wasn't designed. If we found a pencil on the ground and had no idea what it was or how it was used we couldn't conclude it just appeared. Maybe we could conclude that but wed be wrong and we are smarter then that even though we understand very little of what is.
    I've never said I favor the idea that the lawfulness and organization of the universe happened to blink into existence by random chance.

    That seems highly unlikely to me.

    An underlying rational organizing principle is one type of reasonable approach to the question.

    I also think there might be other possibilities for the origin of reality our chimpanzee brains can't concieve of. Orangutans can't do integral calculus, and there may also be some upper bound on the human brain to concieve and formulate abstract or transcendental concepts.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    Doc Dutch (02-26-2024)

  15. #41 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2023
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    828
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 104 Times in 80 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Orangutans can't do integral calculus
    How does anyone know this?

  16. #42 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    137,797
    Thanks
    47,245
    Thanked 69,374 Times in 52,417 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,513 Times in 2,470 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    Completely irrelevant.

    No one but you had even hinted that anyone knows 100% about anything. What's illogical is to observe the extreme complexity and precision of the universe and suggest it just happened or wasn't designed. If we found a pencil on the ground and had no idea what it was or how it was used we couldn't conclude it just appeared. Maybe we could conclude that but wed be wrong and we are smarter then that even though we understand very little of what is.
    The Infinite Monkey Theorem vs design theory. https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...23#post5913123
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Doc Dutch For This Post:

    Cypress (02-26-2024)

  18. #43 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    137,797
    Thanks
    47,245
    Thanked 69,374 Times in 52,417 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,513 Times in 2,470 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LiAlSi2O6 View Post
    How does anyone know this?
    No worries, Perry. You're free to believe orangutans can do integral calculus. I don't, but I could be wrong.

    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  19. #44 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    58,153
    Thanks
    35,715
    Thanked 50,646 Times in 27,301 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,977 Times in 2,694 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Dutch View Post
    No worries, Perry. You're free to believe orangutans can do integral calculus. I don't, but I could be wrong.

    In a quarter century of internet forum posting I never would have predicted someone wanted to debate whether orangutans know calculus.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    Doc Dutch (02-26-2024)

  21. #45 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    137,797
    Thanks
    47,245
    Thanked 69,374 Times in 52,417 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,513 Times in 2,470 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    In a quarter century of internet forum posting I never would have predicted someone wanted to debate whether orangutans know calculus.
    You need to hang out in the mentally ill forums more and stay away from those intellectual ones to find people like Perry.
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

Similar Threads

  1. Can materialism explain human experience?
    By BidenPresident in forum Religion, Philosophy, and Ethics
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-01-2024, 07:06 AM
  2. Epicureanism vs. Stoicism
    By Cypress in forum Religion, Philosophy, and Ethics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-03-2021, 05:10 PM
  3. Pope Francis condemns world of materialism and poverty
    By moon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-25-2018, 10:17 AM
  4. Black Friday and materialism
    By Norah in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 10-13-2016, 08:18 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •