What's Up With The Trinity

[Bowtiemenace]

 

 

A distinction with out a difference.  Semantics meant to obfuscate.

It does have a difference. Nothing has no laws, no matter, no energy. We just don't know what nothingness is. That's hugely different. Nothingness may be nothing, but nothingness is not necessarily nothing.

[ERayR]

It does have a difference. Nothing has no laws, no matter, no energy. We just don't know what nothingness is. That's hugely different. Nothingness may be nothing, but nothingness is not necessarily nothing.

 

   

[Bowtiemenace]

Another thing, science is useful, because truth is useful. Religion can be useful, even without it being true. Religion is most useful when its true, however, so you should try to find a true religion. 

 

If a religion is promising salvation for certain acts, then you should find those acts and perform them. You can only know if those acts are useful, however, if that religion is true.

[Bowtiemenace]

So would not the most useful religion, be true religion, one that not just appeals to present, emotional utility. So if a religion was supported by scientific and logical inquiry, then it would be more useful. Since science and logic discovers truth, then shouldn't we find that religion that is true, if there is such a religion, with science? Yes, we should.

[Calm]

It does have a difference. Nothing has no laws, no matter, no energy. We just don't know what nothingness is. That's hugely different. Nothingness may be nothing, but nothingness is not necessarily nothing.

Then it is not "nothingness", it is something unknown.

[Bowtiemenace]

Yes, I'm using Graham Priests term for the unknown in this specific case. You could also refer to nothingness as the quantum vacuum, which quarks pop in and out of existence in. Is it nothing? It has laws, that is, quantum mechanical laws. Is it physical though? No. Can we see those laws? No. So its nothingness. This is what most think the nothingness outside the Universe is. At least as far as I know. I'm no cosmologist, although I'm reading a lot about it right now. 

[3DOP]

I just want to be on record...before bowtie reveals what he thinks is right....that I gave him some ups for the way he tries to find out.

[mfbukowski]

I'm done.

 

It's not worth the effort.

Edited July 18, 2014 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

Take a breatht till he's 25 and has a fully grown brain.

Edited July 18, 2014 by calmoriah

[MiserereNobis]

It's so much fun to run into someone even more arrogant than me!

 

I laughed inside when I saw the Rorty video again, and then I laughed out loud when I read this.

 

I can certainly imagine you brandishing a poker, like Wittgenstein to Popper

[mfbukowski]

I laughed inside when I saw the Rorty video again, and then I laughed out loud when I read this.

 

I can certainly imagine you brandishing a poker, like Wittgenstein to Popper

It's funny you bring that up because I was just about to bring up the truth of moral propositions. That is where it all goes for theists eventually. "Logic" is irrelevant in morals and everything important in life unless we decide that morality is what everyone else believes and can be solved by a poll.

Anyway, this is an interesting post/thread on another board where folks actually mostly know what they are talking about.

http://forums.philosophyforums.com/threads/popper-feyerabend-and-faith-how-i-went-from-atheist-to-theist-41458.html

[mfbukowski]

I laughed inside when I saw the Rorty video again, and then I laughed out loud when I read this.

 

I can certainly imagine you brandishing a poker, like Wittgenstein to Popper

I love it how you go to the root and see it right away.

 

I watched a video of a lecture given by Graham Priest- and it was interesting, but of course he says his way of looking at things will not be persuasive to relativists. 

 

He got that one right.  He even asks if there are any postmodernists in the room- laughlingly- no takers of course.

 

His whole enterprise appears to be about revising logic, but then saying that certain portions of logic cannot be revised because they are based on assuming the existence of "abstract objects" which don't change.

 

Oh my! 

 

He's obviously brilliant, but, relative to me, (pun, as always, intended- I live for ambiguity) lives in a galaxy far from mine.  Another video!  YAY!

 

[mfbukowski]

If logic can be revised according to its method of use, it sounds to me like Pragmatism, but I don't think he sees that.  He mentions Kuhn, but his attitude is that those Kuhnian views have nothing to do with his. 

 

I think he is right.  Oh well.  Life goes on.

[mfbukowski]

And for those interested in quantum physics and ultimate reality there is this:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00EKN786W/ref=pe_610000_121327420_em_ti

 

THREE bucks and a free download of a kindle reader for your pc and you can be reading it in five minutes.

Edited July 19, 2014 by mfbukowski

[Bowtiemenace]

Wow... I thought you were giving up. Its really starting to annoy me, saying one thing and doing another. :| You do realize you're book link is Quantum woo, not quantum mechanics right? (At least the title seems to suggest it.) Rational wiki has some great pages on that silly new age fluff... And what's you're problem with Graham Priest? I don't even know most of his philosophical stances. I've just read some of his stuff on logic, its interesting, but definitely not standard. Anyways, if you want to stop, just stop posting. I'm in no mood for a debate either. My tendinitis is acting up again; in fact, I promise not to post on this thread again if your so determined to leave my logic alone. Just keep up with the appeal to ridicule, its sooo persuasive.

Edited July 21, 2014 by Bowtiemenace

[Bowtiemenace]

You guys are no fun. I'm going to move over to the ex-Mormon forums. They have some nice debates over there. Farewell all!

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You guys are no fun. I'm going to move over to the ex-Mormon forums. They have some nice debates over there. Farewell all!

??? I am quite fun and I am offended that you think "you guys are no fun".

[ERayR]

You guys are no fun. I'm going to move over to the ex-Mormon forums. They have some nice debates over there. Farewell all!

 

 

Insert something about doors here.

[mfbukowski]

Wow... I thought you were giving up. Its really starting to annoy me, saying one thing and doing another. :| You do realize you're book link is Quantum woo, not quantum mechanics right? (At least the title seems to suggest it.) Rational wiki has some great pages on that silly new age fluff... And what's you're problem with Graham Priest? I don't even know most of his philosophical stances. I've just read some of his stuff on logic, its interesting, but definitely not standard. Anyways, if you want to stop, just stop posting. I'm in no mood for a debate either. My tendinitis is acting up again; in fact, I promise not to post on this thread again if your so determined to leave my logic alone. Just keep up with the appeal to ridicule, its sooo persuasive.

Another brilliant bullseye.

 

New age quantum woo?

 

This book is a collection of the finest mystical writings of the great physicists of the 20th Century. They are Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Wolfgang Pauli, James Jeans, Arthur Eddington, Eugene Wigner, David Bohm, and Freeman Dyson. The essays are written in nontechnical language and will be of interest to a wide range of readers. 

Science enhances the moral values of life because it furthers a love of truth and reverence—love of truth displaying itself in the constant endeavor to arrive at a more exact knowledge of the world of mind and matter around us, and reverence, because every advance in knowledge brings us face to face with the mystery of our own being. --- Max Planck 

 

Again Mr. Bows shows his unbelievable hubris, in condemning the title and not even reading the book description.

 

See post 289 for link.

Edited July 22, 2014 by mfbukowski

[MiserereNobis]

Here's another book that is a collection of mystical writings from the founders of quantum physics.

 

Quantum Questions

 

I can't believe he called them woo.  These guys are the most brilliant minds of modern physics.

[mfbukowski]

Here's another book that is a collection of mystical writings from the founders of quantum physics.

 

Quantum Questions

 

I can't believe he called them woo.  These guys are the most brilliant minds of modern physics.

I know.

 

I have to quote the full description, which he didn't even bother to read

 

This book is a collection of the finest mystical writings of the great physicists of the 20th Century. They are Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Wolfgang Pauli, James Jeans, Arthur Eddington, Eugene Wigner, David Bohm, and Freeman Dyson. The essays are written in nontechnical language and will be of interest to a wide range of readers. 

Science enhances the moral values of life because it furthers a love of truth and reverence—love of truth displaying itself in the constant endeavor to arrive at a more exact knowledge of the world of mind and matter around us, and reverence, because every advance in knowledge brings us face to face with the mystery of our own being. --- Max Planck 

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science... It was the experience of mystery--even if mixed with fear--that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms--it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man. --- Albert Einstein 

At one extreme is the idea of an objective world, pursuing its regular course in space and time, independently of any kind of observing subject; this has been the guiding image of modern science. At the other extreme is the idea of a subject, mystically experiencing the unity of the world and no longer confronted by an object or by any objective world; this has been the guiding image of Asian mysticism. Our thinking moves somewhere in the middle, between these two limiting conceptions; we should maintain the tension resulting from these two opposites. --- Werner Heisenberg 

The scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives a lot of factual information, puts all our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart and that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. --- Erwin Schrödinger 

The essential fact is simply that all the pictures which science now draws of nature, and which alone seem capable of according with observational fact, are mathematical pictures. Most scientists would agree that they are nothing more than pictures—fictions, if you like, if by fiction you mean that science is not yet in contact with ultimate reality... To speak in terms of Plato's well-known simile, we are still imprisoned in our cave, with our backs to the light, and can only watch the shadows on the wall. --- James Jeans 

Scientific instincts warn me that any attempt to answer the question "What is real?" in a broader sense than that adopted for domestic purposes in science, is likely to lead to a floundering among vain words and high-sounding epithets. We all know that there are regions of the human spirit untrammelled by the world of physics. In the mystic sense of the creation around us, in the expression of art, in a yearning towards God, the soul grows upward and finds the fulfillment of something implanted in its nature… Whether in the intellectual pursuits of science or in the mystical pursuits of the spirit, the light beckons ahead and the purpose surging in our nature responds. --- Arthur Eddington 

It appears that mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent inherent in every atom... God may be either a world-soul or a collection of world-souls. So I am thinking that atoms and humans and God may have minds that differ in degree but not in kind. --- Freeman Dyson

 

No, these words were not written by Mormons.

 

Not until their work is done anyway.

[Spammer]

mfb, thanks for the book link.  This is a great resource.  

[wenglund]

Another thing, science is useful, because truth is useful. Religion can be useful, even without it being true. Religion is most useful when its true, however, so you should try to find a true religion. 

 

If a religion is promising salvation for certain acts, then you should find those acts and perform them. You can only know if those acts are useful, however, if that religion is true.

 

If a religion is useful, then it is true--in the sense that it is useful. It is a truly useful religion.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

And for those interested in quantum physics and ultimate reality there is this:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00EKN786W/ref=pe_610000_121327420_em_ti

 

THREE bucks and a free download of a kindle reader for your pc and you can be reading it in five minutes.

 

The section on Plank (which I read by simply clicking on "Look Inside") ought to be required reading for LDS who are in the process of or have lost faith in God only to be replaced by dogmatic faith in Scientism.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited July 22, 2014 by wenglund

[mfbukowski]

The section on Plank (which I read by simply clicking on "Look Inside") ought to be required reading for LDS who are in the process of or have lost faith in God only to be replaced by dogmatic faith in Scientism.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I agree completely.  I just wish we could make the world see the strength of our position, or more importantly, see it ourselves!  I saw it 35 years ago after studying these ideas for 10 or so years, and was just stunned at how Joseph could have understood all this in his way, so long ago, with virtually no education.   It has to be of God.  Here you have Max Plank echoing Alma 32.

 

Absolutely astounding.

Edited July 23, 2014 by mfbukowski