Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Like you have various grasses, from which was bred crop, you can't find something similar to crop in this way. That's why indians call it a "gift from gods"  ;D

Posted

Well, Edric, if the IPU is irrelevant, why isn't god?

"Nema, I was talking about SPACE phenomena. We cannot detect any space phenomenon which does not emit EM radiation, because EM radiation itself is the only thing we can detect (at the moment, at least) from light-years away."

No and yes.

We can only use EM, but that doesn't mean we can't detect other effects. By light, we can detect the effects of gravity (We can see a star wobbling, and we can therefore detect the masses of its planets). Hence, we don't have to be able to see something to know it's there. As to some of the other effects, I'm not entirely sure if we can detect much of them, but I'm not an astrophysicist. (I've just noticed that dunenewt has already pointed this out. Ah, well)

"That doesn't mean we can detect it."

We have to have some way of detecting it, else it doesn't phaen.

"We have no data on gods. We have no data on alien species. Given this, how can you say that one has a higher probability than the other?"

We have data on intra-universal life (our own planet). We know that it is possible for it to form. We know the sorts of conditions which caused it to form. We can work out an estimate of the number of other places such conditions may at some point occur. We can therefore guess at the probability of alien life.

We have no data on extra-universal or meta-universal entities. We do not know of the conditions by which it may exist, and we have no evidence of its existence, let alone of its ability to interfere with or view us (the latter also requires interference, according to quantum mechanics).

Posted

I DO. When talking about metaphysical, theological or ontological things, Razor might lead to a blind point of agnosticism or some model of a self-propelled self-made material universe. Nature of universe seem to contain various metaphysical forces, like you can't start a computer without electricity, you can't start a vibrous big bang etc. To understand a link between abstract physic (as well as mathematic) and what we call "objective reality" (dh universe), we simply can't erase those accepting more variables and say "this is easiest to understand, so it's true". Puny alibism.

I disagree. It is only rational that when determining what is true, under the conditions of a posteriori and a priori, it's best to choose the more simple explanation when everything else has been exhausted. Do you want rationality or faith? I choose rationality.

Wolfwiz, I'm still looking at your post because I haven't had enough time today because I was celebrating my 18th birthday ;) Cheers.

Posted

Hey, happy birthday, Crix. Enjoy yourself, you've earned the right to vote, smoke, and die for your country.

No drinking, though. ;)

Posted

I disagree. It is only rational that when determining what is true, under the conditions of a posteriori and a priori, it's best to choose the more simple explanation when everything else has been exhausted. Do you want rationality or faith? I choose rationality.

Wolfwiz, I'm still looking at your post because I haven't had enough time today because I was celebrating my 18th birthday ;) Cheers.

Happy birthday! Enjoy your first elections - as well as other, much more interesting things ;D  But still I have no idea what makes you sure that "everything else has been exhausted".

  • 2 months later...
Posted

This might be a little off topic, but why do people think that if there is a God, there is a reason to life? Just because there may be a God does not mean that he gave us a meaning. As was said before (probably), we humans don't really know much, do we?

Posted

Because the word 'meaning' has a range of definitions, potentially including the proposition of a question. This would mean that "what is the meaning of life" can be interpreted as "why is there life", to which the answer could well be God; which in turn means that the there must be a 'meaning' of life if God exists.

Posted

This might be a little off topic, but why do people think that if there is a God, there is a reason to life? Just because there may be a God does not mean that he gave us a meaning. As was said before (probably), we humans don't really know much, do we?

Life itself is a meaning. You are the king here, so rule and don't run, to be blunt.

Posted

It's a selfdependant thing. You live because of higher will, which forces you to live. Call it God or shakti, it still seems only like a personification of life itself.

Posted

It's a selfdependant thing. You live because of higher will, which forces you to live. Call it God or shakti, it still seems only like a personification of life itself.

If you are forced to live, what happened to free-will? Is that really a life? And anyway, we can choose to end our lives at any time, can't we?

Posted

Surely there is no forcing you to live. One of the realities of our free will is its irrationality. When you have a meaning, rationally you would follow it; in this case, you would live and try to manifest your life as much as possible (form of this manifestation is very individual here). You can freely choose between rational life or irrational suicide. Life isn't some kind of "order" given by God to us, it's defining very foundation of our being.

Posted

I think that the meaning of life is a man-made concept. We are the result of a blind string of events, but our rationale wants us to make up some meaning to it all. It's natural to do so. I don't mind making up meanings to life: mine is to make this world better than it would be had I not have been born. Make some impact on people's lives, etc. No matter how small. That's how I live life actually.

Posted

I think that the meaning of life is a man-made concept. We are the result of a blind string of events, but our rationale wants us to make up some meaning to it all. It's natural to do so. I don't mind making up meanings to life: mine is to make this world better than it would be had I not have been born. Make some impact on people's lives, etc. No matter how small. That's how I live life actually.

I agree, because we are the only life-forms that we have found that think and rationalize, if you understand what i mean.

Posted

I'm not trying to say that your idea is wrong, because i do agree with you, Dragoon, but a thought occurs - if we do keep improving and making the world better, at what point do we stop, because there must be a limit to what we can do?

Posted

Just because we personally won't face it doesn't mean that we shouldn't care. Isn't that the whole issue with the environment?

Posted

We are facing it. But more than that, the enviroment keeps us alive. It is only fair that we should do the same for it. And in this instance I will be fair. Anyone wishing to draw a parallel between this and rich Western homeowners being kept alive with food grown by semi-slaves in third world countries can forget it; I've already thought about that and dismissed it. :P

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.