God or Nothing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-05-2012, 12:43 AM
RE: God or Nothing
(20-05-2012 12:18 AM)TheArcticSage Wrote:  
(19-05-2012 11:55 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You still have not explained how consiousness can proceed in a non-temporal environment. Doesn't "consiousness" imply the processing of information? If not, it's dead. No ?
If that is your definition of consciousness doesn't that make certain computers alive?


No it doesn't. Consciousness requires processing, (and therefore time in which to do that). Processing does not imply consciousness. (Although there are theories that at certain levels of complexity, processing might be conscious). We will shortly find out.

If consciousness implies processing, that consciousness can't be the creator of the dimensions required for it's existence.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2012, 02:52 AM
 
RE: God or Nothing
(19-05-2012 11:55 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You still have not explained how consiousness can proceed in a non-temporal environment. Doesn't "consiousness" imply the processing of information? If not, it's dead. No ?



Unsure Are you talking to me? You want me to answer a question but aren't you the one who calls me "That one who must not be named?"

The answer to your question is obvious. In fact, it's very simple. But I don't feel I need to be disrespected by you, so I'm not going to respond. If you want me to respect you, then you have to respect me.


(20-05-2012 12:23 AM)Vosur Wrote:  That argument seems inconsequential to me. By explaining the existence of our universe with the existence of God, you're not gaining anything and just raising further questions. In other words, if you claim that the universe couldn't have come into existence without something causing it, then it's irrational to explain it's origin with a creator who has not been created himself.


Actually, it's even worse: If God is eternal, then no matter when he creates the universe, there is no point in time when the universe was created. In other words it has both come into being and always existed at the same time. This is a paradox. And this applies to any form of God or even if there is no God.
Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2012, 03:46 AM
RE: God or Nothing
Nothing by definition is everything. This thread title in itself is a paradox.

I'm not seeing any need for a god. I think therefore I am. Isn't that enough?

What attracts you so much to the idea of a god? For example you don't need a god to craft a narrative where once higher lifeforms die their conciousness ascends to a plane of pure energy and conciousness where they gather and exchange information. They might even be able to communicate/exist across different universes. Once one universe dies a new one pops up. The amount of energy stays the same so the law of thermodynamics isn't violated.

No proof for this of course like with any other narrative. Just making an example.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DeepThought's post
20-05-2012, 04:06 AM
RE: God or Nothing
(20-05-2012 02:52 AM)Egor Wrote:  Unsure Are you talking to me?

Yeah, I'm talking to you.

One of the jobs of the prophet - I found out the hard way - is to name god. When he first showed up on the jobsite, I knew who the fuck he was, "creator of the universe" in quotation marks. Later when I started talking about him, "creator of the universe" in quotation marks as a form of address got old with the quickness. God, obviously.

Then there was the return to math after a nine year hiatus. Then there was drama. Then there was me calling the Almighty the Little Creep. Cause he is a little creep. Read that book, see how he treats his prophets. Anyhoo, I knew that was gonna cause problems, and it did. Then there was the Pauline Israelite hypothesis...

Know why Little Creep works among Christians who would argue otherwise, cause they think one can disrespect god? Because Christ is the Infinitesimal. Nothing new in Eastern philosophy, to associate God with Void; Westerners, just fucking dumb.

God is Love, Love is Void, and me and Penrose may be the only two motherfuckers on the planet, know how the universe got created. It didn't. Not in terms that we can understand. And you wanna understand everything.

Ever study algebra? Look ahead to calculus, and go, wtf? We can't be "of something" and understand "nothing," it's simple math. You wanna think the wheels turn back into an Egor someday, that's all you. I'm more thinking a collective consciousness kinda thingy; I don't hafta be any part of it.

I did my time, I sang of my Gwynnies, I got the fuck out, knowwhutimsayin' ?

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
20-05-2012, 04:12 AM
RE: God or Nothing
(20-05-2012 03:46 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  Nothing by definition is everything.

[Image: designall.jpg]

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2012, 05:27 AM
RE: God or Nothing
(20-05-2012 02:52 AM)Egor Wrote:  
(19-05-2012 11:55 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You still have not explained how consiousness can proceed in a non-temporal environment. Doesn't "consiousness" imply the processing of information? If not, it's dead. No ?



Unsure Are you talking to me? You want me to answer a question but aren't you the one who calls me "That one who must not be named?"

The answer to your question is obvious. In fact, it's very simple. But I don't feel I need to be disrespected by you, so I'm not going to respond. If you want me to respect you, then you have to respect me.


(20-05-2012 12:23 AM)Vosur Wrote:  That argument seems inconsequential to me. By explaining the existence of our universe with the existence of God, you're not gaining anything and just raising further questions. In other words, if you claim that the universe couldn't have come into existence without something causing it, then it's irrational to explain it's origin with a creator who has not been created himself.


Actually, it's even worse: If God is eternal, then no matter when he creates the universe, there is no point in time when the universe was created. In other words it has both come into being and always existed at the same time. This is a paradox. And this applies to any form of God or even if there is no God.


God is not eternal. Eternal means endless time. Therefore it exists in endless time, and cannot be the creator of the dimensions required for it's own existence.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2012, 05:32 AM
RE: God or Nothing
(20-05-2012 05:27 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Eternal means endless time.

Eternal means timelessness. Forever is the sum of all time. The first is the space between Planck time, the second is ridiculous. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2012, 05:39 AM (This post was last modified: 20-05-2012 07:25 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: God or Nothing
(20-05-2012 05:32 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(20-05-2012 05:27 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Eternal means endless time.


Eternal means timelessness. Forever is the sum of all time. The first is the space between Planck time, the second is ridiculous. Wink


"Space between" is the rub. Doesn't matter if Plank or 15 billion years. The fact is a CHANGE invalidates/contradicts the definition : "timeless". Plank 1 -> Plank 2 is not "timeless". If Plank at all, (unless you are saying Plank "0", then why Plank at all ?). The fact that there might be "Plank 2", (ridiculous or not) means a change has occured. One is still measuring, "something". And "god" cannot be creator. He is still just evading inconvenient questions. Zebra-stripes. (Also has never defined precisely "consciousness")

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
20-05-2012, 05:47 AM
RE: God or Nothing
Yeah, bub. It's like the massless particle that can never travel less than the speed of light. It's like the limit of information at the speed of light. Where we are now, intelligent means, don't fucking know. Ghost got that bit right... but don't tell him. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2012, 06:16 AM (This post was last modified: 20-05-2012 02:53 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: God or Nothing
e·ter·nal

adjective
1.
without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing
Out. Something still changing in the middle.
2.
perpetual; ceaseless; endless: eternal quarreling; eternal chatter.
Out. Still "doing" something. Requires time.
3.
enduring; immutable: eternal principles.
Out. "enduring" means same from Plank 1 -> Plank 2. Immutable not "conscious". "Principle" means "act of comparision to". Requires time to compare.
4.
Metaphysics . existing outside all relations of time; not subject to change.
Maybe. Would agree IF one property is named of "existence" or "consciousness" not requiring temporal. No one can cook.

(BTW re " "but I don't feel I need to be disrespected by you, so I'm not going to respond).
Waa waa. Took ball home months ago. Don't play in that part of town. Respect is earned.
Nonsense here, nonsense "there", nonsense everywhere.

One's subjective interpretation of experiences, which are not submissible to testing, are not now, nor ever will be "evidence". There is an elephant in my pool.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: