On The Argument From Science

39 posts / 0 new

Thu, 09/07/2017 - 13:08

(Reply to #31) #32

xenoview

You are still using childish name calling. You never did prove a necessary being or that the universe had a cause/creator. Sadly you hide from real science because you can't proved testable evidence of your necessary being. All you have is metaphysics, and that's not even real science.

Thu, 09/07/2017 - 02:56

#33

chimp3

Philosophy is old and tired.

Philosophy is old and tired. We are still arguing about "contingent beings". What has been discovered by philosophy or religion that pertains to the physical universe? Not much except circular arguments. Peripatetic claims this is his last post. Why? He has shot his wad. The limits of philosophy. Meanwhile, scientists will keep making progress. I will stay tuned to the the science channels for amazing and meaningful news.

Thu, 09/07/2017 - 05:06

#34

LucyAustralopithecus

I would also contend that the

I would also contend that the only 'things' that have been argued to be proof of being 'necessary' are in fact conceptual 'things'
which are actually contingent upon a human mind interpreting them as of what they are.

- The three side triangle
- The number 2 (or any number)

These are all predicated upon a mind to conceive them and can therefore also be considered to be contingent.

There is no perfect triangle or number in nature, and nature in itself works in the real world and in three dimension as oppose
to shapes and numbers which are inventions of our imaginations.

Thu, 09/07/2017 - 14:30

(Reply to #34) #35

Randomhero1982

I can think of something else

I can think of something else that is a figment of the imagination haha!!!!

Thu, 09/07/2017 - 08:19

#36

LostLocke

If we think about something

If we think about something logically and come to a conclusion (which I believe is actually an opinion and not an actual conclusion, but that's a whole other argument), and then after advances in research and exploration discover that the universe does the opposite of that, who do you think is in the "wrong"?
As been said before, "The universe is under no obligation to make sense to us."
If our logic and the universe's reality butt heads, it is our obligation to change what we considered logical, NOT ever the other way around. Logic, as we think of it, is tentative never absolute.

The relativity of time is a good example. On a human scale from a human perspective time is consistent, absolute, and universal, but we know in reality it is none of those things. If someone who doesn't grasp relativity says, "That doesn't make sense, how does it work? It's not logical", the universe just shrugs its shoulders and responds, "Tough shit. That's your problem not mine."

Thu, 09/07/2017 - 08:34

#37

LucyAustralopithecus

Very well said, The universe

Very well said, The universe isn't interested in what we can perceive or understand.
And in physics/science we work with actual real things within reality, not constructs of the imagination.

Thu, 09/07/2017 - 22:35

#38

Randomhero1982

What is your field of study

What is your field of study Lucy?

Fri, 09/08/2017 - 00:07

#39

LucyAustralopithecus

atomic physics with emphasis

atomic physics with emphasis on the quantum mechanics of electrons

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.

You are here

Pages