My Argument For God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-01-2015, 02:03 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 01:57 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  
(14-01-2015 01:52 PM)pablo Wrote:  How does physics prove a non-physical entity?
At best you have a flawed hypothesis.

Im using physics not to prove god, but to prove consciousness #1 is the thing that really exists…#2 is infinite and eternal. If it is infinite then so are you, and you have eternity to fill in the details and answer your questions about if god is or is not real. Perhaps you will find the answer upon death, or you won't and you will cease to exist for infinity.

Consciousness is a non-physical entity.
It is produced a by a physical brain, when the brain dies the consciousness ends.
Show me consciousness independent of a physical brain.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like pablo's post
14-01-2015, 02:15 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 02:00 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  
(14-01-2015 01:56 PM)DLJ Wrote:  ...
EDIT: Actually, it's probably more accurate to describe consciousness as the self-monitoring system's self-monitoring system. Big Grin

Ok, I'm trying to decipher your question. It seems to me you're going on the belief that your consciousness is not actually real and is an illusory self-monitoring system for a non-conscious being??

It's real in the sense that ideas are real.

And, yes, I suppose that if we didn't have the 'consciousness software' installed, we would be non-conscious... by definition.

Wink

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2015, 02:16 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 01:37 PM)pablo Wrote:  
(14-01-2015 01:24 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  No, sir. What i said wrote had no deception whatsoever. You are confused because you are utterly ignorant about quantum theory and the technical terms and definitions. Look up what i said on the internet. Cross-check it. This is somebody who knows their stuff and has taken courses beyond high school science and some youtube documentaries.

Point out where I am wrong. I need specifics here. Not "i didn't understand a damn thing" doesn't refute what i said.

You're right, I am ignorant of quantum physics, as many people are, that's why you use it to argue such a simple question. To decieve.
When you can't prove existence, you try to redefine it to fit your conclusions.
It's sneaky, and dishonest and you know it.
We are not here to refute you, you have the burden of proof and have failed.

just tell him to give us the damn peer reviewed papers that have been accepted by at least 90% of scientists who are involved in the scientific field the paper is based on, if he can't produce the papers then he's just wasting everyone's time
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Ace's post
14-01-2015, 02:18 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 02:03 PM)pablo Wrote:  
(14-01-2015 01:57 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  Im using physics not to prove god, but to prove consciousness #1 is the thing that really exists…#2 is infinite and eternal. If it is infinite then so are you, and you have eternity to fill in the details and answer your questions about if god is or is not real. Perhaps you will find the answer upon death, or you won't and you will cease to exist for infinity.

Consciousness is a non-physical entity.
It is produced a by a physical brain, when the brain dies the consciousness ends.
Show me consciousness independent of a physical brain.

You are still assuming that the brain creates consciousness, there is no proof whatsoever that this is true and in my original post i explained why. Other states of consciousness such as sleep anesthesia etc. are just perceptions.

If you are an artifact of the physical universe, then you are an artifact of a thing that is finite and does not truly exist (zero), and you therefore do not exist (an artifact of zero).

You and the physical universe cannot be co-artifacts of each other. One is finite, the other is not. This mathematical condition is necessary in order for either one to exist, given the fact that one is known to be bound on both sides and therefore finite. Also, keep in mind that the boundaries of 'you' are completely unknown and not even a solid speculation has been presented to date to explain 'you' as any phenomenon suitable within the common frameworks of science, philosophy, or religion, but remains the most elusive of all things to define.

You cannot 'fit' an infinite (eternal) thing (you) inside of a finite system-this universe. You are not here. You are merely observing phenomenon in a finite domain, not actually confined to that finite domain. This is not ideological but based on the simple mathematical axioms regarding limits at infinity. These formal axioms state unambiguously that this is the case.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2015, 02:24 PM (This post was last modified: 14-01-2015 02:28 PM by TheBear.)
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 01:47 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  what would you like me to clarify, id be happy to.

In your world, what does "atheistic beliefs" mean?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2015, 02:24 PM
RE: My Argument For God
That has to be the most assumptions Ever printed in one sentence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2015, 02:24 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 02:16 PM)Ace Wrote:  
(14-01-2015 01:37 PM)pablo Wrote:  You're right, I am ignorant of quantum physics, as many people are, that's why you use it to argue such a simple question. To decieve.
When you can't prove existence, you try to redefine it to fit your conclusions.
It's sneaky, and dishonest and you know it.
We are not here to refute you, you have the burden of proof and have failed.

just tell him to give us the damn peer reviewed papers that have been accepted by at least 90% of scientists who are involved in the scientific field the paper is based on, if he can't produce the papers then he's just wasting everyone's time

Sorry I'm not waiting for the scientific community to go "Hmmm, well um after reviewing your argument it is sound and we concur." that will not happen, science has been spinning their wheels for half a century now and it is because they refuse to except that consciousness is vital in order to understanding how reality functions. The founders of quantum physics i.e. einstein, oppenheimer, Bohr, Schrödinger, Planck etc. tried to make this an irrufable argument, unfortunately they died before that could happen. And the later generation of physicists have made little progress except for string theory which is bandaged head to toe in mathematics which is a sign it is not correct.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2015, 02:26 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 01:57 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  Im using physics not to prove god, but to prove consciousness #1 is the thing that really exists…#2 is infinite and eternal. If it is infinite then so are you

Even if you could prove what you claim, it would not follow that it makes individuals exist infinitely. Just like my body is a temporary arrangement of matter (even if that matter did turn out to REQUIRE consciousness in any way), the part of this universal consciousness that is "me" could be a temporary pattern within the larger whole.

Quote:My solution to the problem is that time and space both do and do not exist; ...

So what I am proposing is that these NDErs have caught a glimpse outside of the box and that their consciousness exists in the domain being described.

...I regard the physical cosmos as an artifact of you and I.

What I hear reading most of your screed is "there's stuff we can't explain so here's a conjecture to explain it". Some of it is interesting but I don't find it compelling. We don't yet have a solid enough grasp of the rules at the quantum level to make the leaps you are making.

Quote:...consciousness is fundamental to the universe and I would even say it ‘paints it into being’. This explanation is consistent with every religion of man. You know it inherently within yourself. You are not an artifact of this physical cosmos. You have an eternal nature that demands an explanation; why are you here, what are you, what ‘here’ is?

Please speak for yourself. I do not have any inherent knowledge of an eternal nature. It makes much more sense to me that "I" am nothing more than a particular arrangement of matter and energy that will not last long before it is dissolved.

The interesting thing to me is that this barely gets you to a deistic god, certainly not a theistic one. Why would consciousness be splintered like it is if it is the substrate for everything else?

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2015, 02:27 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 01:57 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  
(14-01-2015 01:52 PM)pablo Wrote:  How does physics prove a non-physical entity?
At best you have a flawed hypothesis.

Im using physics not to prove god, but to prove consciousness #1 is the thing that really exists…#2 is infinite and eternal. If it is infinite then so are you, and you have eternity to fill in the details and answer your questions about if god is or is not real. Perhaps you will find the answer upon death, or you won't and you will cease to exist for infinity.

The title of your thread should be "My Argument for Consciousness" then not "My Argument for God"

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like JDog554's post
14-01-2015, 02:32 PM
RE: My Argument For God
(14-01-2015 02:15 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(14-01-2015 02:00 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  Ok, I'm trying to decipher your question. It seems to me you're going on the belief that your consciousness is not actually real and is an illusory self-monitoring system for a non-conscious being??

It's real in the sense that ideas are real.

And, yes, I suppose that if we didn't have the 'consciousness software' installed, we would be non-conscious... by definition.

Wink

I doubt he even realizes but no one even knows how our consciousness even works, we simply don't have enough data to explain the whole thing properly as of yet
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: