Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

MagicBag Grow Bags
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Cosmological Argument *DELETED*
    #9097573 -

Post deleted by maudlin

Reason for deletion: eh


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: maudlin]
    #9097936 -

Cause and effect break down on the microscopic level, and thus you cannot trace occurrences backwards.  What we interpret as 'cause and effect' is just the inherently probabilistic outcome of many microscopic random occurrences summed up to the macroscopic observation that appears to be an effect.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9097968 -

Moreover, cause and effect don't even exist on the macroscopic level.  What we deem as causality is only our observation of two spatiotemporally contiguous events occurring right after each other.


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: maudlin]
    #9097978 -

Big Bang, or something else, but then the question becomes, what came before?

For me, God is found within experience. God is found within that which humbles me, that which teaches me. Left to my own ego, I'm not much. I find it odd that a person who fails many times can find the strength to succeed when they ask for help from God, real or not. Perhaps God is a placebo, but when treated as such, it's not very helpful. So, call it consciousness, God, the higher self, etc. an appeal to a higher power can be very useful, and I think this is the primary reason people create a relationship with God, which is perhaps different from a belief in God.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: deCypher]
    #9097987 -

Quote:
The Cypher said: What we deem as causality is only our observation of two spatiotemporally contiguous events occurring right after each other.



Sounds like you're taking "correlation does not imply causation" to its extreme end...  any evidence for that, or just armchair philosophy?  :tongue:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9097995 -

Evidence?  Suppose you say that event A causes event B.  How do you know this, exactly?  The only reason why you assume this is because every time event A happened in the past, event B followed--but this is no hard proof that B will always follow A.  There is no logical inference in jumping to the conclusion that A causes B, apart from a reliance upon tradition (and a belief that our Universe tends to be orderly.)

Hume had some pretty good writings on this.


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: maudlin]
    #9099639 -

maudlin said:
I'm sure most of you are familiar with the content of it, but for those who are not, the idea is that when you trace the causes of various physical Universal occurrences backwards you end up at a point where there is a colloquial first cause that is in itself eternal and uncaused. Many also view this as justifying belief in the existence of God.

Discuss.


These are just speculative subjective beliefs. Usually this kind of thing is based in emotional security issues. The truth is we don't know any thing about first cause.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument *DELETED* [Re: deCypher]
    #9101561 -

Post deleted by maudlin

Reason for deletion: eh


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: maudlin]
    #9102180 -

Quote:
maudlin said: Hume is right that we can't assume that we know what about event A causes event B based on our experience that B follows A in every observable situation, but there is some repeated element of A that is leading to B in every instance.


Up until now... but this gives us no hard proof that B will happen the next time A occurs.  Can you prove that the Sun will rise tomorrow?


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: deCypher]
    #9102296 -

Statistically impossible is 'hard proof' in my (and others) opinion.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9102302 -

DieCommie said:
Statistically improbable


Fixed.  :wink:


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: deCypher]
    #9102306 -

No, I meant statistically impossible.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9102316 -

Oxymoron.  Even if the chances are extremely low, it's still possible.


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument *DELETED* [Re: deCypher]
    #9102341 -

Post deleted by maudlin

Reason for deletion: eh


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: deCypher]
    #9102343 -

Thats not what that phrase means.  At least, not how Ive seen it used and used it myelf.

If something is so improbable that we wont ever see it in an enormus time, like flipping ten goggles worth of heads in a row that is statisticlly impossible.  There is a small finite probability that it could happen, but because of statistics it is by all practical purposes impossible.  Thats what statistically impossible means.  And that is sufficient for something to be proven.  At least in my world thats how it works...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9102350 -

Trick question, the sun never "rises," it's just an illusion caused by the earth rotating around it.

Myth: Busted


--------------------

Edited by learningtofly (10/20/08 01:15 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9102357 -

DieCommie said:
Thats not what that phrase means.  At least, not how Ive seen it used and used it myelf.

If something is so improbable that we wont ever see it in an enormus time, like flipping ten goggles worth of heads in a row that is statisticlly impossible.  There is a small finite probability that it could happen, but because of statistics it is by all practical purposes impossible.  Thats what statistically impossible means.  And that is sufficient for something to be proven.  At least in my world thats how it works...


Eh, the terminology is not philosophically coherent then.  Impossible, by definition, implies an event will never happen.

This is why I stick to the nice abstraction-land of philosophy.  :tongue:


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: deCypher]
    #9102368 -

The Cypher said:
Impossible, by definition, implies an event will never happen.


And flipping ten googols worth of heads in a row will never happen.  :grin:  (and neither will the sun not rising in our lifetime)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9102372 -

Just wait till 2012.

:psychsplit:


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Cosmological Argument [Re: DieCommie]
    #9102374 -

How do you know it won't happen? I already proved that not only will the sun never rise in our lifetime, but ever because the Sun never actually rises.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? Epigallo 2,051 19 05/20/07 08:45 PM
by AlephOne
* The Argument for Unconditional Love *DELETED* ny2casports89 966 6 04/28/08 01:31 PM
by Chronic7
* An ontological argument for absolute truth. shroomydan 2,104 13 02/11/07 11:55 AM
by shroomydan
* cosmology mm. 654 1 02/19/02 05:08 AM
by Amoeba665
* Modern Cosmology is a religion? OrgoneConclusion 956 15 10/21/08 08:09 PM
by Arden
* psychology and statistical methods.... TameMe 668 5 11/08/07 06:10 PM
by Icelander
* Conservapedia most viewed statistics.
( 1 2 all )		 TheHateCamel 2,150 32 11/24/07 11:39 AM
by Redstorm
* Getting Offended by: "Statistical Profiling"........ PhanTomCat 964 4 04/29/07 04:23 PM
by SneezingPenis

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,045 topic views. 0 members, 14 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 18 queries.