Theism and new atheism are on the same continuum. Both are realist (Buddhist definiti
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-12-2012, 11:35 PM
RE: Theism bla bla bla
(08-12-2012 11:34 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The OP is also refuted by the fact that matter arises from energy, and energy from matter all the time.
Yup. That is another great point Bucky.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2012, 12:22 AM
RE: Theism bla bla bla
(08-12-2012 11:35 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(08-12-2012 11:34 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The OP is also refuted by the fact that matter arises from energy, and energy from matter all the time.
Yup. That is another great point Bucky.
Madhyamaka is not addressing this type of thing at all. Oh forget it. Weeping
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2012, 12:27 AM
RE: Theism bla bla bla
(09-12-2012 12:22 AM)enochian Wrote:  
(08-12-2012 11:35 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  Yup. That is another great point Bucky.
Madhyamaka is not addressing this type of thing at all. Oh forget it. Weeping
Than please explain what it IS addressing.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2012, 12:32 AM
RE: Title was too long.
(08-12-2012 11:27 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(08-12-2012 02:49 PM)enochian Wrote:  There is nothing in Madhyamaka that would attack science of any kind.
I was rebuttaling your OP. it said clearly that something can not arise from an other. Which is clearly NOT THE CASE. Molecules can form OTHER MOLECULES.
Madhyamaka is not addressing this type of thing. Madhyamaka uses abstract arguments, where "other" is a hypothetical something which has no relationship whatsoever to the first object.

You gotta think more philosophically.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2012, 12:34 AM
RE: Title was too long.
(09-12-2012 12:32 AM)enochian Wrote:  
(08-12-2012 11:27 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  I was rebuttaling your OP. it said clearly that something can not arise from an other. Which is clearly NOT THE CASE. Molecules can form OTHER MOLECULES.
Madhyamaka is not addressing this type of thing. Madhyamaka uses abstract arguments, where "other" is a hypothetical something which has no relationship whatsoever to the first object. You gotta think more philosophical.
Shoulda clarified then. Still, we are all made up of atoms. The rock and the giraffe are all made from atoms. While atoms in themselves do not change to make either item, they are present in both objects.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2012, 12:39 PM
RE: Theism and new atheism are on the same continuum. Both are realist (Buddhniti
Lots of assertions made. Lots of generalizations. "If something is old it can't be new. If it's new it must have been freshly created. All created items come from the ether. And from all of this we can assume it was pulled directly from your ass"

All I see woo speak and not much else.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2012, 10:02 PM
RE: Theism and new atheism are
Quote:All philosophical and religious positions revolve around only 2 views:

Existence and Nonexistence.



One cannot claim that anything exists, since for something to exist it would

logically have to arise from a) itself b) other or c) both these possibilities

together

Physics would disagree with you. And this
is where your argument falls apart. Philosophical nonsense going head
to head with the cold hard reality of physics. Your philosophical position
argues from the ignorant position of making basic and incorrect assumptions about
how the universe functions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2012, 09:56 AM
RE: Theism and new atheism are on the same continuum. Both are realist
Quantum mechanics reveal how logical thinking and common expectations quickly fall apart, which is exactly what Madhyamaka indicates.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2012, 09:59 AM
RE: Theism and new atheism are on the same continuum. Both are realist (Buddhniti
(09-12-2012 12:39 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Lots of assertions made. Lots of generalizations. "If something is old it can't be new. If it's new it must have been freshly created. All created items come from the ether. And from all of this we can assume it was pulled directly from your ass"

All I see woo speak and not much else.
I don't even know what you are saying.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2012, 10:01 AM (This post was last modified: 10-12-2012 10:09 AM by enochian.)
RE: Title was too long.
(09-12-2012 12:34 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(09-12-2012 12:32 AM)enochian Wrote:  Madhyamaka is not addressing this type of thing. Madhyamaka uses abstract arguments, where "other" is a hypothetical something which has no relationship whatsoever to the first object. You gotta think more philosophical.
Shoulda clarified then. Still, we are all made up of atoms. The rock and the giraffe are all made from atoms. While atoms in themselves do not change to make either item, they are present in both objects.

Giraffe and the rock is just a metaphor. I guess I should have stuck to the original metaphor of flames and darkness.

The point is "other" is a hypothetical something which has no relationship whatsoever to the first object.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: