Two Epistemologies
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-02-2015, 10:25 AM
RE: Two Epistemologies
(19-02-2015 02:35 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I must misunderstand your last post, and I'm not the best communicator when it comes to forums online, but it sure looks like you are claiming that it's a non-falsifiable fact that there was no time before the universe existed. This is not right on its face--we both know that neither of us have time machines (pun not intended) to see the Big Bang--but to say there was time in this universe before there was light...? I call baloney.

I think we're talking about different things here.

When I was talking to True Scotsman about "super special existence", that's the part I'm talking about being nonfalsifiable. I wasn't addressing the start of time in "this" universe. What I'm saying is that anything people posit about existence outside of this universe is pure speculation and is not falsifiable. So, when they say that something had to cause this universe, and that the cause itself needs to be without cause, they will claim it to be "outside of time". That's where everything goes out the window in terms of falsifiability.


(19-02-2015 02:35 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I think you have the confirmation bias when you say it's non-falsifiable to not have linear time before a universe, because that is saying there is something or someone moving through time before the universe existed, which demands you renounce atheism. ...That's what.

I think you're overstating your god claim, here. Renouncing atheism would by very definition entail accepting the existence of one or more gods. What in any of what you just said proves the existence of any gods?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
23-02-2015, 01:41 PM
RE: Two Epistemologies
(23-02-2015 10:25 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(19-02-2015 02:35 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I must misunderstand your last post, and I'm not the best communicator when it comes to forums online, but it sure looks like you are claiming that it's a non-falsifiable fact that there was no time before the universe existed. This is not right on its face--we both know that neither of us have time machines (pun not intended) to see the Big Bang--but to say there was time in this universe before there was light...? I call baloney.

I think we're talking about different things here.

When I was talking to True Scotsman about "super special existence", that's the part I'm talking about being nonfalsifiable. I wasn't addressing the start of time in "this" universe. What I'm saying is that anything people posit about existence outside of this universe is pure speculation and is not falsifiable. So, when they say that something had to cause this universe, and that the cause itself needs to be without cause, they will claim it to be "outside of time". That's where everything goes out the window in terms of falsifiability.


(19-02-2015 02:35 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I think you have the confirmation bias when you say it's non-falsifiable to not have linear time before a universe, because that is saying there is something or someone moving through time before the universe existed, which demands you renounce atheism. ...That's what.

I think you're overstating your god claim, here. Renouncing atheism would by very definition entail accepting the existence of one or more gods. What in any of what you just said proves the existence of any gods?

Which is it, Robby, are you going with part 1 or part 2?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: