There is no such thing as an Atheists.

#451

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

11.30.2018 08:18PM

3

4

9

11.30.2018 08:18PM

-->

@Mopac

The Ultimate Reality cannot change,

You have no way of knowing this.

because if it changed it wouldn't be The Ultimate Reality.

This bald assertion is simply an ontological argument.

If it changed, it wouldn't already be perfect.

Another ontological argument. You have no way of knowing this. What do you mean by "perfect" and how could you possibly verify that it applies?

As The Ultimate Reality does not change, time has no dominion over it.

How could you possibly know if the unknown/unknowable "changed" or not?

#452

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 08:20PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 08:20PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Important for what?

#453

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

11.30.2018 08:24PM

3

4

9

11.30.2018 08:24PM

-->

@Plisken

Important for what?

It is important to maintain a constant awareness of and vigilant respect of our epistemological limits.

So you don't get seduced and or brainwashed by con-artists and liars.

#454

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 09:14PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 09:14PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Well our epistomology needs work if it can't differentiate between a con man and common sense.

#455

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

11.30.2018 09:17PM

3

4

9

11.30.2018 09:17PM

-->

@Plisken

I've always found "common sense" to be such an amorphous concept that it is practically meaningless.

#456

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 09:31PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 09:31PM

-->

@3RU7AL

0.o That mental capacity which enables one to practically function under circumstance in which one may not pretend to comprehend.

#457

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

11.30.2018 09:36PM

3

4

9

11.30.2018 09:36PM

-->

@Plisken

In real, actual, practical terms it is nearly impossible to implement.

https://futurism.com/teaching-ai-common-sense/

#458

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 09:45PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 09:45PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Humans aren't computers that just take an input and spit out something that can be considered as information. They aren't approaching a problem as a person. There's no will from which to establish a goal, no practical consideration.

#459

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

11.30.2018 09:52PM

3

4

9

11.30.2018 09:52PM

-->

@Plisken

If you can't quantify it, it is qualia.

If it is qualia, then it is just a matter of opinion.

If it is just a matter of opinion, it is practically meaningless.

#460

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 09:58PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 09:58PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Really, you can't make 'meaningful' deductions without a measuring stick?

#461

Mharman

Debates: 23

Posts: 5,299

3

6

10

Mharman

11.30.2018 10:10PM

3

6

10

11.30.2018 10:10PM

-->

@keithprosser

Welcome to the Religion Forum. It's why I generally stay away from it. It's nothing more than a pissing competition between atheists and Christians (and third parties).

#462

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

11.30.2018 10:11PM

3

4

9

11.30.2018 10:11PM

-->

@Plisken

If you say something like, "the cable is about two meters long", then I know it is an approximation and we are able to communicate.

If you say, "use common sense" I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

It's exactly as useful as "figure it out yourself", or "use your brain".

#463

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 10:12PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 10:12PM

-->

@Mharman

He claims to have the will power to have read through this entire thread lol.

#464

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 10:21PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 10:21PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Cut the cable a little longer than you need so it doesn't weigh as much and we'll size it afterwords. That way, we don't even have to worry about measuring it wrong.

#465

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

11.30.2018 10:26PM

3

4

9

11.30.2018 10:26PM

-->

@Plisken

Good idea.

#466

Plisken

Debates: 0

Posts: 706

2

1

5

Plisken

11.30.2018 10:45PM

2

1

5

11.30.2018 10:45PM

But wait, there's more! For only four payments of $19.95 you can learn the ancient art of cable cutting. Cut not one but two cables, for free!!

#467

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

3

4

7

Mopac

11.30.2018 11:05PM

3

4

7

11.30.2018 11:05PM

-->

@3RU7AL

You say I can't know, but you don't really know that to be the case.

I know that The Ultimate Reality, by necessity, must be perfect and unchanging. What that means is, it transcends time. Time is contingent on it, not the other way around.

If The Ultimate Reality changes, it is no longer The Absolute, and what that ultimately means is that nothing is real.

You dismissing what I say as an ontological argument does not invalid what I am saying. What do you think we are discussing? The Supreme Being.

#468

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

12.03.2018 03:08PM

3

4

9

12.03.2018 03:08PM

-->

@Mopac

We agree on the logical necessity of "NTURTTGgTS" AND that it is unknown/unknowable.

Everything else you claim about it, that it is "unchanging" and or "perfect" and or "transcends time"?

All of those claims demand evidence.

All of those claims also demand strict definitions.

This is an ontological argument - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVbnciQYMiM

#469

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

3

4

7

Mopac

12.03.2018 06:15PM

3

4

7

12.03.2018 06:15PM

I do not watch videos. I post on my breaks at work.

We agree on the logical necessity of "NTURTTGgTS" AND that it is unknown/unknowable.

What this demonstrates to me is that you are making a mockery of this discussion, because what we are talking about is intrinsically tied to "The Ultimate Reality" and what it means to fulfill that definition.

You are using it as a "fill in the blank" type of assertion, which is certainly fallacious.

What does "The Ultimate Reality" mean?

All these claims about it being unchanging and perfect are implied by accepting it as being what it is. The Ultimate Reality. This is a definition.

If the reality isn't perfect, how can you call it The Ultimate Reality? The perfect Reality would be The Supreme Being. If reality changes with time, how is it a greater reality than time? The Ultimate Reality must be perfect and unchanging, these two qualities are one and the same. The Ultimate Reality is perfection, and that never changes. It can't.

Ontology is the study of being. We are literally discussing The Supreme Being. The Ultimate Reality. This is an ontological subject, so you pointing out that this is an ontological argument is about as meaningful as saying, "We are having a discussion".

#470

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

12.03.2018 08:16PM

3

4

9

12.03.2018 08:16PM

-->

@Mopac

All these claims about it being unchanging

How do you know if it is "unchanging"?

and perfect

How do you know if it is "perfect"?

are implied by accepting it as being what it is.

We already agreed that it is unknown/unknowable.

The Ultimate Reality. This is a definition.

Your insistence on "definition" is merely axiomatic.

You can't randomly assign characteristics to something that is unknown/unknowable without some sort of justification.

#471

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

3

4

7

Mopac

12.03.2018 10:16PM

3

4

7

12.03.2018 10:16PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Now you are being ridiculous.

You are substituting "The Ultimate Reality" for any unknown. That is why you keep calling it noumenon. You are talking about noumenon.

Well, I am not talking about noumenon, I am talking about The Ultimate Reality.

Your god is as big as your intellect.

#472

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3

4

9

3RU7AL

12.03.2018 10:20PM

3

4

9

12.03.2018 10:20PM

-->

@Mopac

How do you know if it is "unchanging"?

How do you know if it is "perfect"?

#473

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

3

4

7

Mopac

12.04.2018 12:29AM

3

4

7

12.04.2018 12:29AM

-->

@3RU7AL

It has everything to do with what "The Ultimate Reality" means. This is not aimply an arbitrary string of words, it an identifier!

How do you identify The Ultimate Reality?

Well, for it to be what it is, it must be ONE. The Ultimate Reality, by definition must be 1. Both the word "The" and the word "Ultimate" solidify this.

The Ultimate Reality must be perfect and complete. It must account for all other realities. If this wasn't the case, then a reality could exist independent of it, and if a reality existed independent of it, how could The Ultimate Reality be all encompasing? It must always be real, ultimately real. For that reason, there can be no reality apart from it. Reality apart from The Ultimate Reality is nonexistence. That iis not reality, it is the absence of reality.

Time as a reality can only exist by The Ultimate Reality. As this is the case, time can have no dominion over The Ultimate Reality. The Ultimate Reality cannot change, because if it changed, that would mean that it is subject to causal forces. If this was the case, causality and time would be greater realities. The Ultimate Reality can not be subject to another reality. If the entire universe acted in unison, it could not effect The Ultimate Reality. The universe is constantly changing, time has dominion in the universe. God is not effected by these things ,but God holds all of it in eternity, a timeless eternity. A perfection of that which is.

So if The Ultimate Reality could be replaced, changed, effected, it wouldn't truly be The Ultimate Reality. It has to be perfect. Complete. All encompassing. Unique. Singular.

How do I know? It has been revealed to me, and it can be revealed to you too if you ponder on that name.

The Ultimate Reality.

What does that mean? Meditate on it. You'll see I am not simply making this up. It's innate to what it is.

#474

Deb-8-a-bull

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,205

3

2

3

Deb-8-a-bull

12.04.2018 12:45AM

3

2

3

12.04.2018 12:45AM

-->

@Mopac

The Ultimate reality hypothesis?

Orrrrrrrrr

The theroy of Ultimate reality?

I say none.

Thus raising questions.

Thus not ultimate.

Hey did i ever mention that i once beat a cat with a stick?

Good day Pac mo.

#475

EtrnlVw

Debates: 0

Posts: 2,869

3

5

EtrnlVw

12.04.2018 01:08AM

3

5

12.04.2018 01:08AM

-->

@Deb-8-a-bull

Hey did i ever mention that i once beat a cat with a stick?

Yes actually, about 5 to 6 times if I had to take a guess over the years between DDO and here, is there anything you would like to expand on about that incident? I mean you always bring it up how about we talk about it....what is it you wish to get out of bringing it up? most likely there are some repressed feelings you have. Wana play DR Phil?

#476

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

3

4

7

Mopac

12.04.2018 05:27AM

3

4

7