Definition of God - one thread to rule them all

[Vociferous]

I was going to leave this post be, but someone had to go and say Betelgeuse three times.

No, it is demonstrably true!

The bare assertion of a true believer.

IOW, Vociferous' assertion of (motivated) Agency left you confused as to what he was defining? Does the assertion of a fundamental mathematical essence to physics leave you confused?
"Agency" does not define change, it defines "Will". Question do we know God's will? His Will be done?

If there was a creator, it's will is apparent in everything that exists. Asking about its will further than that would seem to presume it intervenes in some way, which would seem to indicate its act of creation was flawed and in need of ad hoc scaffolding. Christians definitely don't believe that, and neither do I.

That same assertion can be made about Vociferous. He has a penchant for jumping over all atheists as being ignorant, uninformed , mentally retarded, and unable to form cogent arguments by his superior estimation.

Aside from me never once implying anyone was "mentally retarded" (and maybe a Freudian slip to presume so), I've never jumped all over anyone for their beliefs. I've only corrected their willful misunderstanding and misuse of science. Unlike you, I don't go around demanding others "prove" what I know science cannot adjudicate either way. To the contrary, I've repeatedly said that you have every reason to be an atheist and no compelling reason to be a theist. I know, that kind of intellectual honesty baffles you.

OK, if definitions of God need not be scientifically correct, but rests on mythology, I agree with that definition. Just don't try to sell it to me as "Truth" which obtainable only through "belief". Agency?

The truth of any metaphysical proposition is subject to belief. That's what distinguishes them from science.

Well, that might satisfy the Principle of Sufficient Reason, but it does not satisfy the Principle of "Necessity and Sufficiency". There is no demonstrable volition necessary present other than Necessity itself.

The PSR is necessary, unless you're satisfied with a contingent, infinite regress, devoid of explanatory power. Claiming anything is true, without sufficient reason, is exactly what you rail against religion for doing. There is no such thing as a "Principle of Necessity and Sufficiency". Necessity and sufficiency are requirements of a logical IFF statement, which Yaz already explained to you.

I don't know if you noticed, I like David Bohm not only as a physicist but also as philosopher.

Even though he was an idealist and you claim to be a realist.

 

[Vociferous]

Calling a spade a spade, and calling out an obvious religiously fanatical gun toting racist redneck, is not acting like a 14 year old...still, would except that sort of reply of someone as vociferously embalmed as yourself.

Yes, 14 year olds regularly call others names.

 

[Vociferous]

https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/lawrence-hargraves-first-flight

Aw, an Aussie flew a kite. How cute.

 

[paddoboy]

Yes, 14 year olds regularly call others names.

Like I said, the type of reply one would expect from a fanaticaly religious, racist gun toting redneck.. Thanks for confirming once again...

 

[paddoboy]

If there was a creator, it's will is apparent in everything that exists. Asking about its will further than that would seem to presume it intervenes in some way, which would seem to indicate its act of creation was flawed and in need of ad hoc scaffolding. Christians definitely don't believe that, and neither do I.

Other then abiogenesis being the only evidenced based scientific answer available, [despite the refusal of radical religious redneck opposition and ignorance to recognise that fact] any belief or suggestion of any form of ID, is firstly unscientific, and secondly unevidenced, and simply a result of hand me down conventions, and to avoid facing the utter finality of death, which is upsetting to some.
Nice anyway seeing you avoid the sciences, and probably understandable also. Live your mythical dreams, if that's what makes you happy.

 

[Vociferous]

Calling a spade a spade, and calling out an obvious religiously fanatical gun toting racist redneck, is not acting like a 14 year old...still, would except that sort of reply of someone as vociferously embalmed as yourself.

Wait, I just read this again and was aghast at the misuse of simple English words as well as it literally sounding like a 14 year old who doesn't even know how to use a thesaurus to attempt to sound smart. "Accept" or "expect" would both be literate replacements for "except", and "embalmed" just sounds ridiculous.

You really shouldn't try so hard to match the vocabulary of others.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

But, that is all probably just made-up stories an unfounded Rumour, eh?

Unlike many here, and I am looking at you, I have no axe to grind nor am I out to troll people I don't like or start threads to target folk I don't like...I like everyone here even you and that is why I don't burr up when presented with unpleasant facts.... The cruelty and indeed genocide of some of the early settlers is well known by those who study the history. It was terrible..I pass from time to time a cliff where a whole family group of Aboriginal people were herded off it...not nice at all.

And the fact is there are many racist Australians but they don't dare run around with a flag telling the world ..they are generally secretive because they know no one likes them.

And if you care to look into the history it is really terrible there is no question about that...The difference that seems to have escaped you is that, as far as I know, we did not, generations on, make movies glorifying killing our first people's which your mob did over and over and over...


And we white folk should give those, who's ancestors we killed a better deal, over here we do, yet folk like V offer no compassion or understanding such that to ban a flag that represents racism to many gets the old "live with it your feeling and opinion counts zip" ...

That is just so very wrong..more so because he an intelligent man can not for one moment see any reason to be compassionate.

And..just because I am mates with paddoboy don't make the mistake of trolling me as I have no problem with you unless you make it your business to make it that way.

Also our treatment of Chinese is also something we can be ashamed of...and when I was a kid migrants were given a hard time...I would makes friends with those new kids so if someone wanted to pick on them they had to come thru me...
Anyways I agree with the general drift of your post.
Alex

 

[paddoboy]

Wait, I just read this again and was aghast at the misuse of simple English words as well as it literally sounding like a 14 year old who doesn't even know how to use a thesaurus to attempt to sound smart. "Accept" or "expect" would both be literate replacements for "except", and "embalmed" just sounds ridiculous.

You really shouldn't try so hard to match the vocabulary of others.

I don't need to match the vocabulary of some religious fanatical redneck, and embalmed actually fits to a "T"
embalmed:
https://www.google.com/search?q=emb...0.69i59j0l7.2943j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
preserve (a corpse) from decay, originally with spices and now usually by arterial injection of a preservative.:: hence, my use of it in "still, would except that sort of reply of someone as vociferously embalmed as yourself."

 

[Vociferous]

And we white folk should give those, who's ancestors we killed a better deal, over here we do, yet folk like V offer no compassion or understanding such that to ban a flag that represents racism to many gets the old "live with it your feeling and opinion counts zip" ...

I get that a former penal colony, still beholden to the Crown, doesn't comprehend true freedom.

 

[paddoboy]

I wonder if the first powered flight would have been even thought of if not for the pioneers of flight in Australia.

https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/lawrence-hargraves-first-flight
Alex

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Hargrave
Among many, three of Hargrave's inventions were particularly significant:

• study of curved aerofoils, particularly designs with a thicker leading edge;
• the box kite (1893), which greatly improved the lift to drag ratio of early gliders;
• work on the rotary engine, which powered many early flying machines up until about 1920.

He made endless experiments and numerous models, and communicated his conclusions in a series of papers to the Royal Society of New South Wales. Two papers which will be found in the 1885 volume of its Journal and Proceedings show that he was early on the road to success. Other important papers will be found in the 1893 and 1895 volumes which reported on his experiments with flying-machine motors and cellular kites.

significance to those pioneers working toward powered flight, Hargrave successfully lifted himself off the ground under a train of four of his box kites at Stanwell Park Beach on 12 November 1894. Aided by James Swain, the caretaker at his property, the kite line was moored via a spring balance to two sandbags (see image). Hargrave carried an anemometer and clinometer aloft to measure windspeed and the angle of the kite line. He rose 16 feet in a wind speed of 21 mph. This experiment was widely reported and established the box kite as a stable aerial platform.[8] Hargrave claimed that "The particular steps gained are the demonstration that an extremely simple apparatus can be made, carried about, and flown by one man; and that a safe means of making an ascent with a flying machine, of trying the same without any risk of accident, and descending, is now at the service of any experimenter who wishes to use it."[9] This was seen by Abbott Lawrence Rotch of the meteorological observatory at Harvard University who constructed a kite from the particulars in Engineering. A modification was adopted by the weather bureau of the United States and the use of box-kites for meteorological observations became widespread. The principle was applied to gliders, and in October 1906 Alberto Santos-Dumont used the box-kite principle in his aeroplane to make his first flight. Until 1909 the box-kite aeroplane was the usual type in Europe.

Hargrave had not confined himself to the problem of constructing a heavier-than-air machine that would fly, for he had given much time to the means of propulsion. In 1889 he invented a rotary engine which appears to have attracted so little notice that its principle had to be discovered over again by the Seguin brothers in 1908. This form of engine was much used in early aviation until it was superseded by later inventions. His development of the rotary engine was frustrated by the weight of materials and quality of machining available at the time, and he was unable to get sufficient power from his engines to build an independent flying machine.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Aw, an Aussie flew a kite. How cute.

Now that's what I like about you... You keep it fun.

Do you have lawns?

I think we invented the powered lawnmower...there is so much stuff that is why we are seen as innovators ...I think we have more inventors per capital than any where else in the world.

However if you wish to see us in a bad light to make you feel better about yourself I for one am big enough to let you do what you need to do to manage your inferiority complex.

Just keep learning how to have fun and maybe nurture compassion when you are less fearful of the world.
Alex

 

[Write4U]

Even though he was an idealist and you claim to be a realist.

Yes, but I have a great capacity for empathy, an ability which you obviously lack.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I get that a former penal colony, still beholden to the Crown, doesn't comprehend true freedom.

Yes it is crazy, and a lot of Aussies don't like it at all...once I did not like it but the reality really is if we got rid of the Queen as a figure head we would need to make one..and when you think it through it makes sense to contract out the roll of such a figure head..can you imagine the political nonsense trying to create a non political figure head... I am pragmatic ..it works ok and another country pays for all of it...pretty clever I recon.
Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I have a great capacity for empathy,

I see that as your greatest quality and when you get on top of your shyness and have no more need of a pretend arrogance I can see you doing volunteer charitable work.

Alex

 

[Vociferous]

Even though he was an idealist and you claim to be a realist.

Yes, but I have a great capacity for empathy, an ability which you obviously lack.

Empathy does not excuse a blatant contradiction in your purportedly cogent arguments. But then, maybe you don't know what "contradiction" or "cogent" mean either. That would seem to fit with your track record.

 

[billvon]

And they drink inordinate amounts of beer.

I can vouch for that. Although most of it is not very _good_ beer.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I see that as your greatest quality and when you get on top of your shyness and have no more need of a pretend arrogance I can see you doing volunteer charitable work.

Alex

Sorry write 4u I got it all wrong..I thought V said that and I thought he was being funny as he is prone to do.
Alex

 

[paddoboy]

I can vouch for that. Although most of it is not very _good_ beer.

That_is_joke_right?
I'll put my can of VB or Carlton, or Fosters up against the stuff that Yanks call beer, like Budweisser or Schiltz or any other stuff you stick in a can and call beer.

But then, maybe you don't know what "contradiction" or "cogent" mean either. That would seem to fit with your track record.

Yet your own 1400 odd posts mostly are exactly the opposite. Please, I'm getting rather tired of pulling up a Pot/Kettle/Black imagery to illustrate your own ignorant contradictions and muddled arguments.

I get that a former penal colony, still beholden to the Crown, doesn't comprehend true freedom.

You forget young fella, that Aussies are renowned for taking the piss out of each other and others as well. We don't mind having a laugh at ourselves, particularly at what is meant to be a childish jibe by yourself and your philosophical protector and his equally childish jibes. So you see, you have much to learn, particularly with regards to how the ID baggage you carry, is blinkering you to the reality of the real world and the sciences.
Let me give you an example of the irreverence that most Aussies have.......

Former Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke tells a joke at a lunch to commemorate the 30th anniversary of Australia II's America's Cup victory.

 

[Write4U]

I see that as your greatest quality and when you get on top of your shyness and have no more need of a pretend arrogance I can see you doing volunteer charitable work.

Alex

You sensed that part of my reality..... that's empathy.......!

 

[Write4U]

Empathy does not excuse a blatant contradiction in your purportedly cogent arguments. But then, maybe you don't know what "contradiction" or "cogent" mean either. That would seem to fit with your track record.

You're a master at "projecting" your foibles onto others. It's a signature egocentric behavior.

My arguments are based on cogent knowledge of the universe. Your arguments are based on a host of contradictions in regard to the existence of this universe .
What I see is a mathematical universe is demonstrably a mathematical universe. An entire scientific area of inquiry is contained in Mathematical Theory.
Mathematical theory
A mathematical theory is a mathematical model that is based on axioms. A theory can simultaneously be a body of knowledge (e.g., known axioms and definitions), so in this sense a "mathematical theory" is used to refer to an area of mathematical research within the established theory. [/quote] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_theory

IOW, the Universe.

OTOH, I am not aware of scripture that can match the body of knowledge and mathematical models of how things work . I submit, that merely citing the mundane definition of "Agency" is not a very cogent model for a definition of god., IMHO......