The End of Firefox

sprinkles said:
No. In reality. Reality must determine what is possible in a non-abstract sense.

I'm speaking of physical possibility, not abstract potential. There's a difference between what might theoretically be possible and what is physically possible in reality.

If something is not physically possible in reality then you cannot do that thing. Physical impossibility necessarily prohibits in a very physical and very real way. By logical inversion something that is possible must not be physically prohibited and thereby it is a reality.
Click to expand...

But physical possibility is totally irrelevant in our discussion of free will.
All what I was arguing until now wasn't about physical possibility, neither abstract, but ontological possibilities, that which can be possible with regard to the nature of reality.
So the physical element is but a tiny aspect in comparation to the problem of possible worlds in philosophy.
 
It's fascinating to see you guys argue. The ones who keep arguing, the way they go about it, how it's so systematic and yet those who choose to argue with the other somehow seem to have not figured out what they're doing, how they're doing it and with how they do it so often... *fascinated*
 
LucyJr said:
But physical possibility is totally irrelevant in our discussion of free will.
All what I was arguing until now wasn't about physical possibility, neither abstract, but ontological possibilities, that which can be possible with regard to the nature of reality.
So the physical element is but a tiny aspect in comparation to the problem of possible worlds in philosophy.
Click to expand...

Metaphysics is not my thing. Either we have capacity in reality, or we do not. We debate this because it is physically possible to do so. If it were not, we would not.

If it were not possible to conceive of ontological possibility as a concept then you'd not be able to identify ontological possibility yet would still be governed by real possibility (or rather impossibility) without realizing it. I'm sorry but ontological stuff is usually mental fappery to me.
 
sprinkles said:
Metaphysics is not my thing. Either we have capacity in reality, or we do not. We debate this because it is physically possible to do so. If it were not, we would not.

If it were not possible to conceive of ontological possibility as a concept then you'd not be able to identify ontological possibility yet would still be governed by real possibility (or rather impossibility) without realizing it. I'm sorry but ontological stuff is usually mental fappery to me.
Click to expand...

You see it more from the subjective point, in terms of our possibilities and capacities. But this is insignificant in comparation with the possibilities of the Universe, of the existence, of the reality.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Ok. I see everyone as equal. This is just another part of religious doctrine I will never understand. I will leave it at that.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, the concept that Jews are the "chosen ones" is not in any way worn as some sort of badge of superiority. It is more of a humble calling from god to set an example of kindness and love. It all started back with Abraham being the first human to recognize that everything came from one Source (this being the beginnings of Judiasm.) With this recognition came the responsibility of spreading God's message of goodness. He may have tasked us (Jews) with this job, but that doesn't make us "special" or better than anyone else in any way. We were just chosen as the vessel in which God chose to spread his word in the beginning and thereafter.

Yes, I'm Jewish. :m171:
 
CrazyBeautiful said:
Just to be clear, the concept that Jews are the "chosen ones" is not in any way worn as some sort of badge of superiority. It is more of a humble calling from god to set an example of kindness and love. It all started back with Abraham being the first human to recognize that everything came from one Source (this being the beginnings of Judiasm.) With this recognition came the responsibility of spreading God's message of goodness. He may have tasked us (Jews) with this job, but that doesn't make us "special" or better than anyone else in any way. We were just chosen as the vessel in which God chose to spread his word in the beginning and thereafter.

Yes, I'm Jewish. :m171:
Click to expand...

This is something you practice? You seem open minded to "belief" systems in general.
 
LucyJr said:
You see it more from the subjective point, in terms of our possibilities and capacities. But this is insignificant in comparation with the possibilities of the Universe, of the existence, of the reality.
Click to expand...

No, that's still just physical reality. It's just very big and complex. The principle still applies here. If something is possible for us it necessarily is possible in reality as well since we are part of reality. What we're doing now is a subset of universe events.

Besides, the universe is not the focus. The alleged design of humans is.
 
Eventhorizon said:
This is something you practice? You seem open minded to "belief" systems in general.
Click to expand...

I know this makes me look ignorant. I mean, I know the whole Hitler thing obviously. Growing up and young my mother taught me about...religion but I always felt so.. out of place. She would say things like, dont use the lords name in vain. I always felt sick, like something was wrong with me for asking the obvious questions.

Errr... sorry just finished a bottle of wine.

Do your best to find happiness and try not to effect anyone else in the negative. That should be the religion of the world.
 
Eventhorizon said:
This is something you practice? You seem open minded to "belief" systems in general.
Click to expand...

I celebrate and attend temple on high holidays, but I don't consider myself a "practicing" Jew. And yes, I like to keep an open mind to them all.
 
Love the thumbs down with no explanation for an honest question. Keep it coming. [MENTION=731]the[/MENTION]
 
sprinkles said:
No, that's still just physical reality. It's just very big and complex. The principle still applies here. If something is possible for us it necessarily is possible in reality as well since we are part of reality. What we're doing now is a subset of universe events.

Besides, the universe is not the focus. The alleged design of humans is.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree, but philosophy tends to...philosophise everything, even what you consider physical.
 
LucyJr said:
Yes, I agree, but philosophy tends to...philosophise everything, even what you consider physical.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Descartes says "cogito ergo sum" and people go crazy and Kierkegaard comes along and says "you're doing it wrong".

That's just how it goes.
 
Eventhorizon said:
[MENTION=9401]LucyJr[/MENTION] I have to ask. Is there some class or initiation where people of one religion or another, are set forth into the world and given the task of converting at least one person they come into contact into their religion? Religious people, from my perspective, seem to love to speak of their religion and tell people not of their religion how they are wrong for thinking any other way.

I am actually interested for many many reasons. One of which is a cousin I have who seems to have disowned me because I was honest with him and told him I will never believe in his god. Now that I think of it, a good family friend who was basically like a second mother to me, disowned me as well all because of religion. This saddens me to no end. In my mind I think, I should be more important as a living breathing human to them when compared to that of a purely imaginative friend. Both of them, will always be more important to me regardless of any friend I fabricate in my head.

Understand please that when I say I believe your God is nothing more than an imaginary friend to you this is not a put down. I fully believe this. While you and others like you clearly believe it is something more substantial, I do not. Is it considered offensive by you that I call your God an imaginary friend?
Click to expand...
I didn't reply to this one, so here it is...
No, not at all. We call "illusion" a false understanding or perception of reality. There are two possibilities: either I am not realist, either you aren't realist. But there is a old saying, if you haven't heard it..."The Christian is the true realist."

But still I want to tell you something: God as a creative being that is the ground of existence, can be easily proved by what its called natural theology, or just a little 'soulish' philosophy. You just sit and think about the world and existence. You don't have to be super smart to find God in Creation, you just have to be interested only. Everything which is in philosophy is not hard to understand for the averarge man. Even math, in general concepts, can be understood by a averarge intelligence (and by this I don't imply you are averarge of course;)
God can be seen in causation, in order, in beauty, in reason and logic, in morality. Those are all just basic things. Its not the string theory of Hawkings or something like that.
 
LucyJr said:
I didn't reply to this one, so here it is...
No, not at all. We call "illusion" a false understanding or perception of reality. There are two possibilities: either I am not realist, either you aren't realist. But there is a old saying, if you haven't heard it..."The Christian is the true realist."

But still I want to tell you something: God as a creative being that is the ground of existence, can be easily proved by what its called natural theology, or just a little 'soulish' philosophy. You just sit and think about the world and existence. You don't have to be super smart to find God in Creation, you just have to be interested only. Everything which is in philosophy is not hard to understand for the averarge man. Even math, in general concepts, can be understood by a averarge intelligence (and by this I don't imply you are averarge of course;)
God can be seen in causation, in order, in beauty, in reason and logic, in morality. Those are all just basic things. Its not the string theory of Hawkings or something like that.
Click to expand...

One of the better arguments you have given in MO. So we are not in disagreement here. I believe a God could exist, just not one as described in the bible. Whether or not said god has humanities best interest at heart is a completely different discussion.
 
My favourite old saying: he who smelt it, dealt it.

and:

“Don’t condemn me to the prison of your bullshit.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top