Quote from: dahangAs i proposed, doesn't human free will cover enough ground for potential suffering?if crops grew perfect, and there were no floods, wouldn't that change how much suffering humans imposed on themselves?
As i proposed, doesn't human free will cover enough ground for potential suffering?
looks like god wants us to create good things ourselves
Quote from: QuakeDuke on January 27, 2007, 10:38:19 PMIt has been fun, but I no longer have any reason to continue with this thread, or any other thread.Since personal experiences prove nothing, any and all things we might discuss fall into the category of nothing. Why? Everything we discuss is based on our personal experience, what we've read, heard, learned in some form or fashion.This also means all the science in the world means nothing. Why? Because every experiment, every theorem, every idea is embedded with the personal experience of scientists who then pass that on to us - however, since personal experiences prove nothing, all the stuff science has so called proven is invalid because it is based on the personal experience of the scientist who has communicated their personal experiences (learning, etc) with us.Hi QD,I must say, I don't follow your reasoning with regard to science. Because the key with science is it's not founded on the personal experience of the initial person who first proposed a new hypothesis to explain some natural phenomenon. Rather, science requires that the initial discoverer's "experience" be able to be verified and reproduced by other scientists.In this context, the scientific method itself is a repudiation of the notion that mere personal experience proves anything. (Remember cold fusion?) Indeed, it's not science until it's a shared, objectively verifiable experience.Lemme know if I somehow missed your point... Regards,quadz
It has been fun, but I no longer have any reason to continue with this thread, or any other thread.Since personal experiences prove nothing, any and all things we might discuss fall into the category of nothing. Why? Everything we discuss is based on our personal experience, what we've read, heard, learned in some form or fashion.This also means all the science in the world means nothing. Why? Because every experiment, every theorem, every idea is embedded with the personal experience of scientists who then pass that on to us - however, since personal experiences prove nothing, all the stuff science has so called proven is invalid because it is based on the personal experience of the scientist who has communicated their personal experiences (learning, etc) with us.
Everything is all inextricably bound with personal experience. I believe this, uh, theorem will prove true regardless of subject matter and and understanding (or lack of) of this can have a great influence in how we choose to believe personal experiences communicated to us by others.1st, in the beginning (no, not baseball or a religious reference but as a starting place ) there is the personal experience of a person who has the "initial" experience of "discovering" (understanding, receiving revelation, whatever) of a particular phenomenon - this personal experience is handed off to others, but is still wholly based in the personal experience of the initial "discoverer", and can never be separated from that initial personal experience. 2nd, there now comes into the equation the personal experiences of those who "work" on the hypothesis, each adding to the work their personal experiences concerning what they have learned (thus it is their personal experience) of the personal experiences communicated to them by the initial discoverer.
So this god you've described has set things up so that millions of humans have suffered horribly for millenia, in order that we may someday discover enough science and technology to hopefully someday put an end to disease and hunger ourselves?
Quote from: reaperif crops grew perfect, and there were no floods, wouldn't that change how much suffering humans imposed on themselves?Quote from: dahangPerhaps, but is that going to stop a Hitler from having significant impact on humankind? I doubt it.Quote from: reaper on February 07, 2007, 06:13:31 AMi don't like how people can look at science and form such complete explanations, i think if we learned anything from science, it's that science only showed use how much we don't know. i'd also like to point out another time stephen hawking was wrong, he spoke about global warming as fact, yet we should believe everything he says?
if crops grew perfect, and there were no floods, wouldn't that change how much suffering humans imposed on themselves?
Perhaps, but is that going to stop a Hitler from having significant impact on humankind? I doubt it.
i don't like how people can look at science and form such complete explanations, i think if we learned anything from science, it's that science only showed use how much we don't know. i'd also like to point out another time stephen hawking was wrong, he spoke about global warming as fact, yet we should believe everything he says?
i'd also like to point out another time stephen hawking was wrong, he spoke about global warming as fact, yet we should believe everything he says?
Well, shucks...I thought I'd drop by and see if anything has changed ..... it hasn't. Lots and lots of talk based on personal experiences & NO tangible evidence NOT tied to someone's personal experience....Too bad personal experiences don't prove anything.....
He was wrong about this? You know global warming doesn't exist?
Quote from: dahangHe was wrong about this? You know global warming doesn't exist?stephen hawking is wrong about global warming, he speaks about global warming like it's a fact.
it's about as far from fact as someone knowing religious experiences are pointless, and are just a byproduct of evolution.
http://geology.com/news/images/global-warming-graph.jpg