Refuting "the problem of evil"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-08-2014, 07:25 AM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 06:23 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(24-08-2014 05:50 AM)phil.a Wrote:  Baruch:

Reading your comments, it looks like you had a similar experience to Chas when you attempted to parse my post and make meaning out of it.

Did you get my point, about there being a difference between qualities and quantities, my argument being about the former and your response being about the latter?

Also - you were kind enough to expose your position on beauty/goodness/truth, what did you make of my comments to that post?

In my opinion, the reason you conflated quality with quantity in your response to my ideas is related to the fact that in your reality perceptions, you confer primacy on Truth but depreciate Beauty and Goodness

Phil

DEPRECATE

DEPRECIATE

!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2014, 07:51 AM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 07:15 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(24-08-2014 06:57 AM)Chas Wrote:  Except they're not.

We deprecate the use of obsolete technologies in automobiles.

Your automobile depreciates in value.


"In mainstream English, the infinitive "to deprecate" means, simply, "to strongly disapprove of (something)". It derives from the Latin verb deprecare, meaning "to ward off (a disaster) by prayer". Thus, for a standard document to state that a feature is deprecated is merely a recommendation against using it. It is still possible to produce a program or product without heeding the deprecation; but to the extent that conformance with latest standards is a requirement of the buyer (that is, a condition of payment), it may not be acceptable in that it may fail to conform."
According to Oxford Dictionaries, "depreciate" can mean both "diminish in value over a period of time" and "disparage or belittle." They also list "deprecate" as one of the word's synonyms.

They have different roots and different origins.

The definitions quoted are descriptive, not prescriptive, they reflect the current misuse of the words by the ignorant.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
24-08-2014, 07:52 AM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 07:25 AM)phil.a Wrote:  
(24-08-2014 06:23 AM)Chas Wrote:  DEPRECATE

DEPRECIATE

!!!

Philistine. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
24-08-2014, 11:33 AM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 06:09 AM)phil.a Wrote:  
(23-08-2014 01:00 PM)Baruch Wrote:  Phil - Have you been reading "The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe by Lynne McTaggart" ??? (she tends to use zero energy concepts in a very misplaced new agey wishy washy way._

If you have then this lady knows nothing of physics & completely incompetent at science.

(Her book on medicine may be termed "evil" but that's another story for another day...)

No I have not read her book but it sounds like you have - Is that the sort of book you read?

Phil
Now, No.
I used to be into new age spirituality after I left organized religion. The new age movement does try and use physics language out of context to justify all sorts of incoherent ideas otherwise known as "deepity" (from deepak Chopra's new age writings) or "woo". Not sure who coined woo.
The particular author (Lynne McTaggart) in question has a book about spirituality & physics which is basically empty of substance however my concern was her new agey medicine book which I find utterly dangerous & shocking. Fortunately in engineering you dont get this - you dont allow new age folk lore to build airplanes or sewage systems. In medicine the situation is more dangerous.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Baruch's post
24-08-2014, 11:34 AM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 05:50 AM)phil.a Wrote:  Baruch:

Reading your comments, it looks like you had a similar experience to Chas when you attempted to parse my post and make meaning out of it.

Did you get my point, about there being a difference between qualities and quantities, my argument being about the former and your response being about the latter?

Also - you were kind enough to expose your position on beauty/goodness/truth, what did you make of my comments to that post?

In my opinion, the reason you conflated quality with quantity in your response to my ideas is related to the fact that in your reality perceptions, you confer primacy on Truth but depreciate Beauty and Goodness

Phil

What do you mean by qualities - I asked you before but didn't respond.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Baruch's post
24-08-2014, 11:37 AM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 06:04 AM)phil.a Wrote:  
(23-08-2014 08:54 AM)Baruch Wrote:  My point is actually quite trivial - that there is nothing created ex-nihilo, paradoxical or from any singularity but that the emergence process fits in perfectly within our understanding of thermodynamics & conservation of energy. I.e emergence of water from H & O requires energy transfer in this case as a exothermic reaction - not just H & O popping magically into H20
2H2 + O2 = 2H2O + ENERGY.(with some energy to trigger the reaction under room temperature such as from a spark) The "emergence" occurs once the covalent bonds and new molecule is produced.

And remember that you are making this point to someone who a bit earlier on stated that all matter and energy in the universe sum to zero (e.g. you are preaching about conservation of energy to someone who has already shown awareness of conservation of energy).

So if your refutation of my post was based on the premise I don't understand something that in fact I do understand, what might that say about the nature of your refutation?

Did I not mention that my degree is in engineering? I am a design engineer. Essentially, engineering is the subject of applied physics, if i did not understand rudimentary physics I would not be able to do my job (and I am quite successful at doing my job).

Phil

Again, nothing you stated here justifies what you said about zero space between atoms etc, the paradox & singularities when making water. Basically your sentences I criticized still make no sense or nonsense.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Baruch's post
24-08-2014, 11:59 AM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 07:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  They have different roots and different origins.

The definitions quoted are descriptive, not prescriptive, they reflect the current misuse of the words by the ignorant.
What sort of nonsense is this? The meaning of words is determined by their usage, not by their etymological origins. That's how language works.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
24-08-2014, 12:09 PM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 11:33 AM)Baruch Wrote:  
(24-08-2014 06:09 AM)phil.a Wrote:  No I have not read her book but it sounds like you have - Is that the sort of book you read?

Phil
Now, No.
I used to be into new age spirituality after I left organized religion. The new age movement does try and use physics language out of context to justify all sorts of incoherent ideas otherwise known as "deepity" (from deepak Chopra's new age writings) or "woo". Not sure who coined woo.
The particular author (Lynne McTaggart) in question has a book about spirituality & physics which is basically empty of substance however my concern was her new agey medicine book which I find utterly dangerous & shocking. Fortunately in engineering you dont get this - you dont allow new age folk lore to build airplanes or sewage systems. In medicine the situation is more dangerous.


Ah ok, you are an ex-religionist! Yes I have noticed that about new age, quite often it's recently ex-religious people who find it meaningful. It's almost like the removal of the religious corset causes a temporary regression back to a pre-religious, "magic and spirits everywhere" sort of worldview. I liken it to how a women might look, if she is reliant on a corset for her figure (e.g. has traditional beliefs) and then discards the corset, things are going to look pretty messy for a while, until she's got her real body back in shape.

I was lucky enough to have a secular upbringing in which I was not told what to believe or what not to believe. My parents just lead by example, by living an honest and ethical life.

It's probably because of my background that I thankfully never had to go through a new age phase.

I agree with you r.e. medicine, new age stuff may be harmless in some areas but in medicine it is anything but. Although I guess if people die because they are treating cancer with snake oil, one could take the view it's just natural selection in action....

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2014, 12:33 PM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
(24-08-2014 11:34 AM)Baruch Wrote:  What do you mean by qualities - I asked you before but didn't respond.

I think I'd define qualities as "perceptual differentiations of reality" that are known of relative to each other, e.g. qualities are known through the knowing of other qualities. I know of "hot" through the fact I know of "cold", and vice versa.

In terms of the perceptions, if I look at the facts of my actual awareness I notice I can discern and perceive in 3 primary (but somewhat separate) dimensions or domains of awareness: Beauty, Goodness and Truth. So for a given perception of a "quality", the perception may be formed by any single one one of these domains or a mixture of all of them.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-08-2014, 12:38 PM
RE: Refuting "the problem of evil"
"I don't believe in new age woo... Hydrogen and oxygen have water properties."

Consider


Nope.. Certainly not interested in reading this thread...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WeAreTheCosmos's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: