For most of human history, before and after Christianity, philosophy and theology were different areas of the same field. The greatest thinkers in all of human history (Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, the Stoics, etc...) were all theists. The scientific method was developed by the Catholic Church, but nowadays, redditors and trannies associate science with atheism, even if the data doesn't support this conclusion, as the majority of real scientists (not youtubers who make shallow science videos) still believe theism to be the correct position.Why did "philosophers" decide to troon out? Is it because of the institutionalization of philosophy and the attempt to remove the divine right and duty of men to think and make it only available as a degree for the pawns of the overlords that are a pushing a specific godless global agenda?
>Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, the Stoics, etcit's quite simple. Philosophers then:>bunch of ex-soldiers getting drunk down at the symposium with the boys and discussing their deep thoughtsPhilosophy now:>bunch of over-socialized, indoctrinated onions-boys who have never had a deep thought in their entire life
People say the university of constantinople was not a real institution cause it was administrated by the state, modern philosophers are churned out industrially by moneyed institutions and no one bats an eye
Modern day (((philosophers))) have no original thoughts and only want to tear down civilization so they can swoop in with>well ackshually
>>532728211"philosophers" now are fedora tipping pseudo intellectuals
>>532728211bro, what's a "philosopher"?scientist is a thing that you do.is every single theologian not also a "philosopher"?who are those 8 out of 10 "philosopher", and what do they do?sounds like the definitions of the terms are just skewed >biologists lower belief in godthis comes from an incorrect understanding of evolutionwhile there are christians who deny evolution (such as https://www.youtube.com/@YoungEarthCreation/videos )i see no reason why god cannot put that process into the laws of creation>"And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good."- genesis 1:12
While scientists have a greater understanding of the miracle of creation with every discovery, philosophers waste their time trying to prove that immoral behavior can be ethical.
>>532728810
>>532728211Bunch of retarded ahistorical nonsense to jack of how church and belief in dead jew savong you from himself is somehow scientific... Grab a book and read something true for once instead of chatholic lies.Science is purely areligious. Those who in science believe in higher power do not believe in your jewish nonsense. No mathematican nor physicist who believe in higher power will agree that some jew 2000 years ago broke the laws of physics.
The logical presuppositions of the scientific method necessitate the sort of thing that can justify it (i.e. the Christian God), but philosophy understood generally does not. Philosophy isn’t an exercise of having a certain worldview. Thus, philosophers can just get this question wrong or never engage with it at all. Meanwhile, science literally only makes sense at all in the context of a worldview that includes God. Naturally more of the latter would come around to that view. It has basically nothing to do with one or the other being more right but rather the simple presuppositions necessary for the field to be worth engaging with at all.
>>532728875It is a question that must be asked. All questions must be asked. That is the meaning of free inquiry.
>>532728211You have to actually be right about things to be a mathematician or an Engineer. Not so much with philosophy, you can just make up your own bullshit and if youre quick witted enough, no one will be able to "prove" you wrong. So you have people much more prone to narcissistism. I generally find that extreme narcissists have a hard time even understanding the concept of god. They cant come to terms with the idea that theres things beyond their imagination or understanding.
>>532728923I think it’s crazy that you pseuds exist. Any so-called scientist which doesn’t believe in the sort of God that can for example provide access to a universal divine mind or emanate transcendent principles (such as logic, mathematics, etc.) must necessarily accept this axiomatically anyway, completely without basis or justification. In other words, a scientist who is an atheist accepts their scientific worldview on the basis of blind faith MORE than a Christian who accepts the Christian God on the basis of revealed knowledge. They are by definition the most religious people who ever existed, just for something completely retarded and incoherent.
>>532729160Here, ill answer. "No"
>>532729160If you throw out metaphysical inquiry, as scientific atheists do, the question becomes nonsense. Consent implies a consciousness with free will, which a scientific atheist can never account for.
>>532728714In America, a “philosopher” is a woman with a humanities degree who works in a universities “critical theory of race and gender” department.
>>532729196I’m a physical scientist by training and I’m also an agnostic deist. Abrahamic religions are just silly social engineering platforms.
>>532728211Scientist here includes sociologists and biologists. Ie women. Select for hard science and watch how supernatural belief plummets
>>532728529Those moneyed institutions get almost all the money from the state btw
>>532728211Philosophers are the highest IQ members of society. With scientists and Christian’s near the lowest.
>>532729196Oh fuck off with your metaphysical sophistry. You're not an intellect, you're a copetard
>>532728211philosophers have a higher IQ than scientists. higher the IQ the less likely you are to believe in fairy tales
>>532728714To philosophize, in my opinion, is to try to figure out and wonder about the underlying realities of existence, as well as seeking wisdom to live a life aligned with the cosmic order of things.Obviously, this is all nonsensical yapping when you remove the trascendent foundation that gives the world an objective meaning, which effectively ends up with things like this: >>532728875I'd even take it a step further, why even discuss if animals or little kids can consent? None of this is real, we're the product of neurochemical fluctuations and we can't even prove if we are even real, and if there is no meaning to anything nor am I able to logically justify my presence in the world, the only coherent conclusion would be suicide.And yeah, arguing that evolution somehow contradicts Christianity is a very intellectually lazy critique. The Bible is not a scientific book, it's a book of philosophy, theology, poetry and history. The writing style of Genesis is a necessity to explain the nature of God to the people of the time, which is flawlessly laid out in the book.
>>532729366Agnostic deistic is an oxymoron. Either you are agnostic or you accept deism. You cannot do both. Besides, both of these categories say basically nothing more than “I haven’t really thought about this question enough to know whether this worldview actually makes sense and I don’t intend to.” If your deity is not the kind of deity that logically allows participation in universal knowledge claims via the divine mind, then you can’t logically justify any universal knowledge claims. Yet you do. Thus you’re not actually a deist. You’re just ignorant about the kind of deity you behave as if exists.
>>532729479> logical claims?> oh well you can just like fuck off!Pretty stereotypical idiot reply tbqh
>>532728923The porn addiction's got you very emotional, but you provided 0 counter-arguments.
>>532729366"Deism" is just a pompous word for:>"atheism is incoherent, but I don't want to be bound by anything due to emotional reasons and still hold something close to a consistent position"
>>532729524Positive agnosticism is a perfectly valid position. I choose to believe in a higher power but have no idea what that looks like or entails because I have a little monkey brain. Read a book.
>>532728211It's a low IQ and narcissism problem which is fostered by the leftist universities. There isn't a philosopher worth the title that does not believe in at least the possibility of there being a God or no God, because simply they themselves would have to be a God to know that to be true with any certainty which then becomes a paradox. Every single Atheist is low IQ and every single religious person has made a choice on faith. That is the essential difference. The desire to live in a world where behavior is not judged is the primary motive of all leftist university staff. No one wants to be judged less for their behavior than an atheist, for they can not do what they wish until they have convinced everyone else that there is no divine backed moral code to judge them by. Atheism is basically embarrassed beta Satanists.
>>532728211>professional philosophersWho the fuck is a professional philosopher nowadays?
>>532729272>Consent implies a consciousness with free willAre animals conscious and possessing free will?
Well you know how fields like Chemistry and Genetics typically have a higher percentage of people who have a belief in God or religion? It’s the inverse of that.
>>532729960…do you understand what I just claimed? As a scientific atheist, it is completely impossible for you answer that question correctly.
>>532729803It’s not because it’s at best incoherent. As a matter of fact, you accept a whole slew of truth claims including metaphysical ones. For example, you presumably accept that knowledge is possible. How do you know that? If you’re an epistemological agnostic, which you would be, you couldn’t know that. So you just accept it blindly without reason or justification. That’s a position, but it’s not exactly a valid one. If you don’t believe me, explain to me on what basis you accept logical principles are reliable.
>>532728211The scientific method was developed by people who actively rejected religion and God's... look into the history of alchemy and hermeticism. For most of history those who dabbled in alchemy had to brand themselves as wizards and magicians, or they would be ostracized or killed. Even Newton had to hide his alchemy shenanigans because even in his day when science was being widely accepted doing wacky experiments was still heavily criticized by the church.
>>532730321The scientific method was innovated almost exclusively by believing Christians. The first scientists were monks and priests. What are you on about?
>>532728211Scientists often engage in magical thinking.
>>532730296I don’t. Read Godel monkey brain. The only thing I “know” with any degree of certainty is that I don’t know much at all. More than you know evidently.
>>532729885It’s so true that atheism is just accepting this or that because you don’t want to be judged for the contrary lol
>>532728211Scientists are lauded as the most intelligent people alive but they're just good at maths and puzzle solving. Wisdom > Intellect.You can be a normie and still become a scientist. Not so with a philosopher.
>>532728211>THE UNIVERSE IS HUGE>EARTH ISN'T SPECIAL>THERE ARE BILLIONS OF PLANETS OUT THERE JUST LIKE IT>launch a telescope called Kepler >expect to find at least 50 Earth-like planets>that is an extremely low ball estimate >some thought they would find 1000s>find 0>also find out our solar system is a 1 of 1 literal statistical anomaly that should not happen>kikes get mad>launch JWST>still find nothing>it gets hit by a rock lol>also a statistical anomaly that should never happen>hire social media kikes to make fake Photoshop pictures of shit so people will stop asking where our money wentDon't even get me started on the cosmological constants. The only way they can explain why our universe is perfectly tuned to produce human life is with Marvel superhero multiverse bullshit, which they have zero evidence of. Kikes have wasted the last 50 years of our best and brightest physicists chasing strings that don't exist. If you take all the available information of what we know, the best logical conclusion is that we don't exist by random chance. We exist because we were created to exist. Our universe exists exactly how it is on purpose. People that say that the universe is random with 100% conviction are not scientists and are probably retarded.
>>532729418Philosophers are the highest narcissists in society and the types of people who pay a fee to get into Mensa. Keep coping redditor.
>>5327297861000% this.
>>532730450Gödel’s incompleteness theorem vindicates what I’m saying. It demonstrates knowledge claims must be justified by some outside source that is capable of doing so. An agnostic cannot do that. An agnostic deliberately accepts all that follows from such a thing but allows the possibility of all kinds of things which cannot even conceivably do that. It’s incoherent at best. You can’t accept the possibility of (not A) but then accept all other things that necessitate (only A). That’s a contradiction.
>>532730480Three words: strong anthropic principle. Why? Beats the fuck out of me.
>>532728211>another ai summary screencap threadI wish I could leave and forget about this fucking retarded waste of time
>>532730321Newton was an Arian. His higher intelligence led him to question everything and reach unorthodox conclusions for the time, but he could have embraced atheism and he didn't, in fact: he devoutly believed in God the Father as a creator of all things.Alchemy was simply what they considered chemistry to be. There's nothing contradictory between investigating the material realities about you and believing in a trascendent creator.
>>532728211>What explains this?Hubris, aka having your head up your ass and thinking it smells like a rose garden.
>>532730377The scientific method has its roots that go way before Christianity even existed. I'm not just pulling this stuff out of my ass. Hermes Trismegistus, a combination of Hermes and the Egyptian God Thoth, both of which were the figures during the bronze age to signify the documentation ot experiments and passing down knowledge through repeated knowledge. It is once again, Christians either stealing the ideas of older religions and cultures lr adopting them and simply passing down the torch.
>>532730472You understand that what we call “philosopher” today is just a black woman with a degree writing about decolonial studies, right?
>>532730598>an agnostic can’t do that Sure I can. I don’t know. See how easy that was? I’m also an empiricist fwiw.
>>532729960>Are animals conscious and possessing free willfrom an atheist point of view, no, they are notthe "thoughts" of animals are simply brain chemistry that responds to external stimuli (such as drugs) everyday interactions are also external stimuli. for example, depending on the rotation of the earth, it will be hotter or colder, this would make you more irritable or hungrier, etcif you're lacking a certain vitamin, you'll get cravings for that kind of food while ordering at a restaurant, etcthere is no "choice" taking place at any point, just the universe taking part in a cosmic theater play with itself theists don't have that problem, as we believe in a greater force than the physical world
>>532730712Arguably to Aristotle and Plato but no further. These occultic studies are just eastern religion that got smuggled into Western “spirituality”. They have nothing to do with science. We have no recorded record of anything that could be understood as science before Aristotle.
>>532730426> Scientists often engage in magical thinkingWhile Philosophers engage in hard science and observable truths about life?
>>532730480>stringsMore like the tendrils of God, but those idiot scientists know how to get funding and keep it coming.
>>532730823>he doesn’t know about Euclid Nobody tell him.
>>532728211belief in god is inversely correlated with how big your ego is.and directly correlated to how structured and objective your field of study is. Big EGO + Unstructured / unobjective life = No God.Small Ego + Highly structured / highly objective reality = God. Philosophers have the biggest ego and the smallest belief in God.Where as mathmiticians and physcistsare quickly humbled by very difficult problems have a smaller ego..
is the foundation of lies crumbling ?
>>532730768You don’t seem to understand that while you can make claims about what you do or don’t know, it doesn’t mean you have good reasons for making those claims. I can sit here all day and say “Well, I don’t know if air exists.”, but if I go through my life and make a series of other claims that would necessitate conviction in air existing, then I’m just contradicting myself. Your worldview in reality implies one thing while you say another. That’s all.
>>532730157>Consciousness can't exist unless a God is puppeting meChristcucks are mentally ill.
>>532729378i wouldn't exactly call it plummeting
>>532730892Mathematics, not science
>lol
>>532730946Give an account for your consciousness then. I’ll wait.
>>532730157I didn't say I was a scientific atheist.>>532730785So from a theist point of view, yes animals have consciousness and free will?
>>532730943It really doesn’t though. Once again, I’m an empiricist. The evidence of the existence of air exists and is easily demonstrable. God? I don’t know.
>>532730823I just gave you two examples, Hermes and Thoth, both were concepts that humans thought up of before Aristotle even existed...
>>532731059Then what are you? I’ll explain why it still applies. >>532731108Not science. We don’t even know dating of those to before Aristotle is accurate and they both deal with strictly metaphysical claims not nature.
>>532728211religion is the opiate of the low iq masses created by the elite to keep you in line.
>>532731104How do you know “evidence” is reliable?
>>532730984All part of a continuous chain of reasoning underlying the scientific method as we understand it, likely extending well back into the pre-Socratics.
>>532731220What I am is irrelevant to the question I asked. This isn't about me.
>>532728211>just run analysis on Petri dishes for 40 years.>literally a data entry job>know nothing about history, physics, philosophy, religion, geology, anthropology, cosmology, anything.>call yourself a scientist and say God is real and dunk on atheist non-scientistsFeels good!
>>532731029Given an account for why disruptions to your physical brain cause significant changes in your "conciousness" and personality?
>>532731291I’m not following why you’re asking me. I made a point about how secularists can’t justify belief in consciousness and thus can’t answer questions about it. I’m obviously not a secularist so are are you arguing with me or you just want to know my position?
>>532730712larphere's the official father of the scientific method- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Bacon#Religious_beliefs
>>532730934Great insight.So what happens when you have a big ego, but also a structured and objective conception of reality? I think I'm wrestling with that, because I acknowledge that God must exist, but I have trouble submitting to institutional religion, even if I can accept the intellectual premises for Christianity.
>>532731260Through the vehicle of my senses, that’s essentially what empiricism means. Am I just a brain in a jar? Maybe. I don’t know. Doesn’t seem like it so I have to use what senses I have.
>>532731287You’re just blurring terms. I can reason about logic or I can reason about physics, but logic =/= physics.
>>532728850you have more niggers for sure. I bet you see one daily, I go months and months without seeing any.
>>532730717I'm not talking about college degrees. But you could say the same cynical thing about university taught scientists given the progress in modern physics and forfeiture of empirical truth to big data server farm induction and consensus by committee. But the problem with science goes back further to reductionism and the separation of measurement and experiment from occulted ideas about metaphysics and ontology that drove famous historical characters like Newton and Tesla. Separation from the total context is the issue.
>>532731363Define consciousness.
>>532728211I have a PhD in physics and I just cannot phantom how can something exist, I just dont imagine why anything at all exists. If someone made it (time, space and matter) then who made the maker.
>>532731390Okay so in this example evidence is the data you gather through sense data. And when I asked you how you know that sense data is reliable you said through more sense data. So the way you know sense data is reliable at all is through more sense data…ya know, the thing that’s precisely in question…and you don’t think this is a contradiction…?
>>532731409Perhaps, but I’m not doing it just to be contrary. You can’t have math or science without logical reasoning is all I’m saying. You also can’t really have science without math. It’s a rich tapestry.
>>532731220How is it "not science"? Do you even know what the scientific method even is? Toth was a representation of experiments and recording knowledge, that sounds pretty similar to our understanding of the scientific method...
>>532731302ok pseud
>>532731546It doesn’t matter why you’re doing it. It’s a classic category error and it defies basic logic. If you run with it, everything that proceeds from it is by definition illogical. We can agree there is a relationship but not the association you’re implying.
>>532731363What is consciousness?No, not the default mode network. These are simply neural pathways through whoch neurochemical fluctuarions occur.What makes you conscious in the real world? How do these chemical interactions translate into the senses you perceive?
>>532731539Philosophically perhaps, empirically not at all. Science is based on observed phenomena using human sense perception. This is not complicated.
>>532728211if you don't threaten them with violence, philosophers and scientists will try just about any old nonsense.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MPHyR92MQic&ra=m
>>532731565They’re not empirical experiments though. They circumlocate around strictly metaphysical claims. If in “experiment” with my intuition, well that’s a kind of experiment but not empirical one and so it’s not properly science.
>>532728211Feelings vs empirical data.Athiests and the religious are equal absolutist idiotic cultists. The only honest people are those that admit they don't know how it works exactly but it had to come from somewhere and describing that as god seems fair if beyond the grasp of our understanding.
>>532728211https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yi3BQLdndIScience is our method for figuring out how God has ordered the Universe.Philosophers that hate God are simply what we call redditors.
>>532728211We're freemasons. Always have been. From the pyramids to the cathedrals. We built everything that matters. And passed on the knowledge from generation to generation.We don't believe, that's for cattle. We know.
>>532731693So to be clear, you think validating the reliability of sense data with sense data itself is not empirically…what?
>>532731693It went beyond human senses a long time ago. With CERN its going into quantum felds teritory but its still doesnt explain shit why the quatum fields exists.
>>532731674Which*Fluctuations*Typing on phone.
>"professional philosophers"Philosopher is not and will never be a profession.They're likely talking about people with a philosophy degree that had their heads filled with marxist nonsense in university.
>>532731674If these are just physical pathways and connections, you would need consciousness a priori to know that and the consciousness you would have in your case in one of merely physical pathways and connections. Ergo, it’s a nonsense claim. You couldn’t possibly know it to be true.
>>532728211philosophers don't exist anymore. it's a buzzword for leftist activists.
>>532731743A life not lived seeking out the underlying truths of the Universe is a wasted life."We don't know" is intellectual laziness.
>>532731888Technically all university researchers who the PhDs are professional philosophers in the same way all people with MDs are professional physicians.
>>532731388Lol you dont need that, especially right now with all the grifting rascals abound. The body is your temple, use it for prayer and to do good works in our father's name, simple as. Then use those good works as a proselytization unto others to do and believe the same.
>>532728211Philosophy isn't a real science. People who understand logic, understand God.
>>532731970Its like asking an ant to comprehend the cosmos. Humans are just fundamentally too grounded in this reality to even imagine time dilation.
>>532731970Honesty isn't intellectual laziness. Perhaps one day an absolute answer will be found lets keep looking for it. No, your flawed illogical religion isn't it btw.
>>532728211The biblical God is contradictory and false but there is a real force in the universe and within every human being that many people refer to as “God” or “intuition” or “a gut feeling.” You can strengthen this force within you by interacting with it, which many people call “prayer.” There are millions of neurons in your head and gut and no scientist or philosopher can explain how they produce human consciousness. But they do. A very curious situation.
>>532731771There’s a reason all of their critiques of belief in God boil down to ethical squabbles. They simply hate the idea that they are being judged for their conduct.
>>532731693Science speculates about entities and mechanisms that it cannot confirm the physical presence of either with the naked eye or available perception- extending (and altering) equipment like microscopes and telescopes. These it models with maths in order to temporarily describe hypotheses. It's called the practice of instrumentalism and it is exemplified by jewish mathematical physics. Basically, you can stop lying and/or being retarded now.
>>532728211Are different kinds of theology professors and ministers counted inside the "professional philosophers" group? The catholic church alone will have more theologians than "professional philosophers" exist in the world.
>>532732144Did you intuition tell you all that? Lmao
>>532732144Nobody cares about humans or their concience, humans are not special and dont matter. The universe itself is special.
>>532732173Obviously not. These are almost certainly academic “philosophers” working in university “philosophy” (critical theory of race and gender) departments. They’re literally professional sophists.
>>532732236If that’s true you wouldn’t have any way to know that any more than the other not special animas like bugs or worms. It’s pseud shit.
>>532731739It doesn't matter. Empirical evidence just means it's the accepted scientific fact, back in like 600bc ancient Egypt the "scientific" fact of the day was that if you burned wood it would turn to ash. The point I'm driving here is that the scientific method was invented by Christian scientists or Greek philosophers, it goes much deeper than that.
>>532732171Science speculates and then demonstrates through empirical hypothesis testing. The fancy tools we build to test those hypotheses are physically constructed and interpreted via human sense data. Y’know, empirically.
>>532732198The story of Jesus told you, but you thought it was only a story about him.
>>532732341And you dont. Humans dont know anything, theyre just animals who can use some fancy tools. Shame youre too stupid to realize that, it proves my point.
>>532728211Do you believe in God?>What exactly do you mean by God?You know, like God.>Are you asking about the Christian version of God as expressed in the bible?Its a simple question, yes or no, God. Do you believe it?>No, its not a simple question. People have quite different ideas about what God is, its nature, its purpose, its relationship to Humanity. Do you believe it can intercede in Human affairs? Can it create physical manifestations on Earth? Does it speak to you inside your head in your own language? Is it the same God as what the Jews and Muslims believe in? Is it the same God that Catholics and Protestants believe in? Do the Mormons believe in the same God? And that's without even considering the associated concepts surrounding some people's beliefs in God. Such as Heaven and Hell. You see? Its more than just simply thinking God is the same for everyone. I believe in God, but following any discussion I am sure many others who also profess a belief in God would say my idea of God is false or something totally else.Why the fuck do you have to be so fucking difficult? Everyone knows what God is. Its just a matter of answering the question.>Ah, so you are asking me if I believe in whatever concept of God exists inside your own head. You cant acknowledge that other people may have a completely different concept of God to you. Well I can't do that if you dont explain what this God of yours actually is.Fuck this guy, put him down as a "no", fucking moron. This is your "survey".
>>532731373You're the one who replied to me first.
>>532732354First of all, that’s objectively not what empirical evidence means. Empirical evidence refers to data gathered by empirical means. To accept them as brute fact is another matter entirely. But that wasn’t my question. You said you accept the reliability of sense data on the basis of sense data (the very thing which is question). How do you possibly justify this? It is blatantly circular reasoning and defies simple logic. Whether you believe it is “empirical” is totally irrelevant.
>>532732461Clearly you don’t understand that your claims are nonsense. You wouldn’t know any of these claims about you or the cosmos any more than a fly if what you say is true. It’s self refuting.
>>532732510Yeah to point out that secularists can’t answer the question. I’m having trouble understanding what your reply to that statement is.
>>532732388Wrong.
>>532731534Nothing made the maker. The maker is first in the order of creation, meaning the maker came before time. Something that's outside of time and responsible for creating time obviously is not subject to time, meaning there's no question of "when". This really isn't a difficult concept to grasp. The eternal is outside of time, and thus it's something that exists everpresently.
>>532731943Precisely.>>532732077>>532732118The reality is as follows: life is brief, in a few decades you and your loved ones will all be buried or burned.You can use your life to complain about what X politician is doing and how the world is so bad, which is out of your control, as well as indulge in vain, meaningless pleasures that will ruin your intelligence and leave you with nothing lasting in return.Or, you can use your life to deal with the immaterial realities of the Universe and figure out by yourself what the answers to the big questions could logically beWaiting for the "big answer" is a futile misuse of time, as nothing within the bounds of matter can evet account for what is outside of it. What exists in the Universe must logically come from a realm we can't *physically* access because it is subordinate to imposed limits.Therefore, the answers can only be found within the stream of your own consciousness.
>>532732600So explain to us how science works anon. I’m listening.
>>532731373>secularists can’t justify belief in consciousnessYou don't need to justify something you have direct experience of???????
>>532732388They’re interpreted through logical reasoning that precedes the understanding of the reliability of data, actually. If you cannot prove with reasoning independent of empirical evidence that empirical evidence is reliable, then all you have is meaningless data from which you can infer nothing in particular.
>>532732556we dont know anything about the cosmos you retard. Because we know 0.00000000000001% of the secrets about the universe more than a bug it barely matters you stupid inbecile :) And we will never find out the rest because its beyond our comprehension forever YOU RETARD.
>>532732667That’s called circular reasoning my man. It refutes the claim by default. It means you can say it but you can’t actually claim it’s true.
>>532728211>professional philosophersLolololololModern academics are fucking P A T H E T I C
>>532732717Of course you do. How would you even know you really are experiencing? Schizophrenics experience voices in their head all the time. Are there really voices in their head just because they experience it?
>>532728211Reminder the words of the Bible have traveled further into the reaches of our universe than those of Greek paedophiles
>>532732667Who said anything about waiting? Why do you keep calling people "intellectually lazy" while at the same time being actually intellectually lazy assuming people having considered what you're saying?
>>532732667you dont matter retard, your stupid brain is irelavent, you will never understand the universe not the human race. Its beyond even human imagination, your ego is still too braindead to even undersrand that.
>>532728211Because the deep consideration of the need for divine intervention is incongruent with the concept of faith, which is, by design, hostile to questioning.It's like asking why fewer adults believe in Santa claus
>>532732740You’re still not getting it…You keep making claims about what is the case, but if what you claim is the case is true it would render the ability for you to know what is the case strictly impossible. Therefore, your claims about what is the case are just ad-hoc. You’re just saying shit without knowing whether it’s true or false.
>>532732725>If you touch a stove and burn your hand you can not be in pain until you logically justify your belief that there should be painHoly fucking shit dude ivory tower fart huffing retard.
>>532728211/pol/ made me less religious. The amount of stupid faggots on this board who can’t even do basic things like talk to girls or hold a job is proof God either doesn’t exist or truly hates his creations because nobody would create such defective losers if he weren’t incompetent or evil.
>>532732827>Are there really voices in their head just because they experience it?Yes
>>532732827>How would you even know you really are experiencing?I experience it retard
>>532732502Your greentext reads as utter sophistic faggotry. You can squirm out of any question that way.>You ask me if I'm a vegetarian? Well, I cannot answer to you until you precisely define vegetarianism, because there are like so many opinions dude like is fish meat?? haha I be smarter than you
>>532732925I know its sad to hear it, BUT YOURE TO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND THE UNIVERSE, RETARD.
>>532732513Sense data? How is recording your experiments sense data? I never said anything like that, I said that Thoth was a representation of what actual humans were carrying out, experimenting and recoding their findings and passing down the knowledge. That's literally what the beginning stages of empirical evidence is. So I don't know what you're arguing about here.
>>532732926Did you just admit everying you believe is just your emotional response to the universe?Rough.
>>532732930Why are you blaming God when the autism rise is linked to aging atheists focused on winning the rat race who then have children 15 years past their window?
>>532732926Claims about what seems to be case strictly in regard to exclusively natural phenomena and universal knowledge claims demand completely different models of support. To say that you touch a stove and it feels hot isn’t a knowledge claim. You’re just stating an experience of phenomena without knowing anything more about it. It doesn’t demand the kind of support. But claims about knowledge, truthfulness, nature, goodness, all of these are not merely natural phenomena. It’s insufficient to depend on experience because they’re not claims about merely experiencing. I can say “I experience life as if I really exist” and that’s a factual statement, but if I say “I really do exist” that’s an entirely different sort of claim.
>>532732725And this logical reasoning exists and, more germane to the discussion, can be interpreted without a conscious reasoner? Like a guy with eyes and ears and a monkey brain? Epistemology doesn’t build space ships or electron microscopes. Sense perception is all we have to go by as discrete physical entities. Is it fallible? Sure, that’s why science requires reproducibility of empirical observations by independent parties, who are themselves constrained by their sense perceptions. You’re arguing in circles and I need to poop, or so my senses tell me. Toodles.
>>532732963How do you know that? >>532733001How do you know that? You’re just restating what you think you know without giving an account for how you know.
Kekk Christ is the greatest and oldest psychopath; imagine believing in a Jew who performed miracles.
>>532733050Jfc dude read Aristotle
>>532733161It can’t be reasoned with eyes and ears alone, no. You understand some kind of epistemological position is absolutely necessary to build a microscope and for it to be useful right? If you don’t have epistemological uncertainty then that microscope provides you nothing reliable.
>>532733029You seem to be under the impression I will engage in a pointless discussion with a subhuman devoid of cognitive ability such as yourself.lol no.
>>532728211Scientists are more willing to gloss over axioms and take them on faith than philosophers.After Hume, what room is there for religion in philosophy? None except embracing complete irrationality, for that you need no philosophy.
>>532732769Yes, dude, I'm agreeing with you. The point I made before was that consciousness can't be explained from a materialist worldview. I was putting it into perspective against the other guy.>>532732878You're a nihilist, so we can't reconcile pur positions. However, your worldview leads to depression, suicide and existential misery and that's a de facto reality. Mine leads to a relentless exploration of human potential and flourishing. But you can't even define what those words mean because, in your worldview, nothing matters and nothing can be defined. So now, why haven't you killed yourself? And if it is because of some subjective, arbitrary purpose you have for your own life, what makes it grounded in reality or justifiable?
>>532733137Experience is sufficient to justify beliefs. If I touch a stove and it feels hot that is sufficient to make the claim "stoves are hot">>532733188>How do you know that?Because I experience it.
>>532733366Leave and don't come back until you are 18 AND renounced your sodomy.
>>532733243I have. What does he have to do with what I'm talking about?
>>532733431>Say a bunch of meaningless words to make a point>Press postHow about you provide what you consider to be Hume's best counter-arguments against theism?
>>532733460No, it’s not. It’s only sufficient to justify certain types of beliefs. Your experience is sufficient to make a claim about what you experienced, but not how you know you are really experiencing. If you try say “I know I experienced it because I experienced it” that’s just restating the claim. What’s in question is precisely the claim. You’ve completely failed to give an account for the possibility of knowing. “Hot” describes experience. So it’s sufficient to merely state “the stove felt hot”. But if you started to ask questions about why stoves get hot and how you know it, mere experience completely falls short. You’ve exited the realm of claims about strictly natural phenomena and now included seemingly supernatural phenomena for which the experience of natural phenomena is insufficient to account for. Even think about the statement “I know it’s hot because it felt hot.” Who is I? What is an I? Can your sense data tell you that? It cannot.
>>532733646Clearly you haven’t because he delineates claims about metaphysical concepts and physical concepts, the latter of which is understood through empirical methods and the sense data they provide.
>>532733432>Yes, dude, I'm agreeing with you. The point I made before was that consciousness can't be explained from a materialist worldview. I was putting it into perspective against the other guy.This is a nonsensical thing to argue. It sounds solid to the uninformed but I can tell you're just repeating what you've heard religious debaters say on YouTube. You can't actually explain your position. You can't actually explain why consciousness can't be explained with a materialist worldview. Here we are, in a material world, and we are conscious. Explain why something needs to be happening "behind the scenes" for it to exist. Explain why it can't possibly arise naturally as an emergent property of matter being arranged in a special way.
> I know experience is reliable because I experienced /pol/ 70 IQ confirmed I guess
>>532733814Because understanding of material concepts would necessitate certainty in strictly immaterial notions you buffoon. This is fucking obvious and he is 100% correct. Is there material evidence for the existence and understanding of consciousness? No, there is not. It is a strictly immaterial notion that your material world totally fails to account for at all.
>>532733335Absolute nonsense. You don’t need an epistemological position to grind and place some glass lenses, simply the empirical observation that it magnifies things. My poop was smarter than you, and I just flushed it like I’m doing with this thread.
>>532733743Are you a presupper? Because you realize can't ever know if your ground level axioms are true. So if you make any claims about divine revelation you can't actually know if you really have divine revelation you are just assuming you do.
>>532728211The word God with a capital G carries a lot of cultural baggage, implying that is can be known for a fact that the prime mover has something like a personality or ego that a human can understand or relate to. This is simply not knowable. I agree that there must be some kind of prime mover, some kind of creator, some kind of ultimate source, etc. I concede that it would be fair to call this God and to reject anything less than this being called God. So I believe in God in that sense. I also admit it's possible it could have some sort of personality or ego, but one we could understand? How could anyone even know? I think most God figures of most religions are inspired by higher powers, breif contact with entities beyond human understanding that are like gods to us. The abrahamic God for instance could very well be inspired by some realization, discovery, or contact with the entity that created earth, humans, or maybe even physical reality at large. There's no way to know or prove that said hypothetical entity wasn't also created by something greater though. I doubt THE God with a capital G, THE prime mover is something to small and petty as to have human emotions, a human like ego, a human like personality, human flaws, etc.Most people never give it this much though. It's crushing how fucking lonely it is actually wanting to understand and know God rather than wanting to reason backwards from a desired conclusion. I've only ever encountered a few in passing on image boards in my entire life. Everyone else just wants to pick an answer they like then argue that it's true because they want it to be true.
>>532733991We’re not talking about mere action without understanding dummy. We’re talking about action and thinking that involve understanding and claims about understanding. In theory, you could build a microscope without having any understanding at all what a microscope is, how it should work, what it’s for, what it can do, etc. but the moment you bring in understanding, such as how, why, for what, you’ve accepted an epistemological position. If I am epistemologically uncertain about the very existence of nature, then a microscope shows me nothing other than some thing I’m not even certain exists. It’s meaningless data.
>>532734095No, I’m philosophically Christian. That includes certain presuppositions but all views do.
>>532728211>Why did "philosophers" decide to troon out? Is it because of the institutionalization of philosophy and the attempt to remove the divine right and duty of men to think and make it only available as a degree for the pawns of the overlords that are a pushing a specific godless global agenda?Pretty much this, yeah. There are no competent non-academic philosophers these days and that's how academia likes it.Also, philosophers see themselves as the most rational of all people, and associate belief in God with primitivism, so they hate belief in God.The standard view of reality since the 20th century is it's all particles banging around. Atomism is overwhelmingly dominant in academic philosophy, especially Anglophone philosophy.But continental philosophy is full of irrationalism and word salad, so it's no viable alternative.Philosophy today is in a decrepit state.
>>532734095Not true btw, Christian understanding is mediated by revealed knowledge but justified in participation of the divine mind. Absolute certainty is 100% possible in this view. You on the other hand accept axioms not just baseless but in a way that defies simple logic.
>>532733814>I exist therefore that means that I can accurately account for all the activities my body as a system carries outAre you stupid?Why don't you tell me how the neurochemical fluctuations that occur in our brain translate into the real-time perception of the senses? Adhering only ti a neurobiological framework.
>>532728529>People say the university of constantinople was not a real institution cause it was administrated by the state, modern philosophers are churned out industrially by moneyed institutions and no one bats an eyeSchopenhauer said that Kant was the first and the last great philosophy the academy ever produced. He was right.Obtaining one's livelihood from an institution is incompatible with independent thought, which is what all real philosophy requires.
>>532732683>us
they were always more skeptical and/or with a more nuanced understanding of it compared to the masses: when the average "religious person" today is a brown monkey screeching slogans like the kind you find on /pol/ it's hardly surprising they declare themselves either atheist or some kind of non confessional deist/theist, especially since there's currently no pushback against apostasy
>>532734306>Not true btw, Christian understanding is mediated by revealed knowledge but justified in participation of the divine mind. Absolute certainty is 100% possible in this view.How do you know that though? How can you know you are participating woth a divine mind?
>>532734367*the first and the last great philosopher the academy ever producedAnd the reason Kant could be this is he got in just at the right time, when academia provided a living for an academic but before academic philosophy went off the rails with Fichte and Hegel
>>532734250Stefan Molyneux has solved a lot of major philosophical problems including secular ethics but ever since he got originally deplatformed and smeared on wikipedia he can barely pull 20 live viewers on youtube. No academic philosophers are allowed to question the state power that provides the funding for their institution.
>>532734635The average "religious person" of any race is just either superstitious or politically motivated. Very few people are actively seeking out immaterial, universal truths, and modern "philosophers" are not among them mostly, they're just institutional pawns.
>>532734652It should go without saying that a DIVINE mind justifies all knowledge. It’s divine.
>>532733743You've deconstructed this more than a reddit philosophy graduate can deal with. This is the rift between materialists and meta-existentialists. The former will never enter into a thought that does not include knowledge of something they cannot interact with. To them, experience MUST extrapolate, because the material reality MUST be deterministic. This is why the OP image says philosophers aren't very faithful these days. Materialism favors those reliant on certainty and the majority of philosophy these days is just comfortable regurgitate -- sophism generally.
>philosophers>make up a bunch of shit about what they think the world is like and what it should be like>theologians>make up a bunch of shit about what they think the world is like and what it should be like>oh, that's what God said btw :o)truly a mystery why they were so similar...
>>532729191>They cant come to terms with the idea that theres things beyond their imagination or understanding.That's more a Meyer Briggs N vs S thing. Sensor types literally cannot comprehend the existence of anything they cannot directly sense. If it is beyond their 5 senses, if it does not have some immediately obvious physical purpose that can be perceived by the 5 senses then it does not and can not exist.There are dozens of examples of people coming to the same conclusion over and over regarding how about 75-80% of people are pure NPCs, "hylics", etc. Turns out this aligns perfectly with intuitives vs sensors. In other words, only intuitives even have the potential to not be NPCS. People who are pure sensors quite literally cannot comprehend or even imagine the existence anything that can not be experienced or verified with the 5 senses. Further, they aren't even interested if there is no immediate practical application. This last detail is key to why most religious practitioners are purely performative and play along for social benefits. They do not believe in or care about anything spiritual or metaphysical in nature, they just memorize certain opinions, catch phrases, talking points, etc that get them social benefits they want. That's it. At minimum, 3/4 of people will reject what I'm saying because they are not even capable of understanding what I'm talking about in the first place. Only the intuitive types are even capable of having a genuine opinion on the subject or anything spirtual or metaphysical to begin with. "NPCs" or "hylics" are just like animals in human form. They react to the 5 senses and that's it. They literally do not have souls.
>>532734893>AssertionOkay even if I grant that how do you know you are participating with a divine mind?
>>532734839But most people don't even come close to adhering to their faith at all. The vast majority of people pay lip service to a belief they don't even espouse, purely because of environmental factors.
Y'all should read Carl Sagan or watch the movie Contact (1997)
>>532735001Based and true.Introverted intuition is magic.
>>532728211Because >muh desert godIs a 2000+ year fiction that has cult worship
>>532730668Arianism still holds that the Father created all things through the Word / Son / Jesus.They were remarkably orthodox, they just couldn't see how the Son being begotten of the Father according to the Scriptures could simultaneously be co-eternal.Papists and Slavodox do what they always do and omitted key information, lied about history and then created a strawman. No Arian ever denied the Divinity of Jesus. This was a deceitful accusation based on Latin and Greek Christians assuming that something which is not eternal cannot be Divine.They then burned almost all of Arius' writings to try to hide what he really believed. Thankfully they failed and we have a letter from Arius articulating his beliefs when they were under attack.Personally I do think Christ is co-eternal, but the mysteries of the Divine and the Holy Trinity are not a simple thing to understand. If Christ was begotten of the Father, and all things were made through Him, and by His offering my sins are paid for; then as far as I'm concerned He is God as He claimed to be.Arianism is not incompatible with the Gospel (that by Christ's offering on the cross the sinner can find salvation, which is received through faith, and given by grace so that none may boast). As such I cannot consider Arianism a heresy. It may be wrong, but its not heretical.As an aside RCs and EOs also try to hide the fact that Emperor Constantine was baptised on his death bed by an Arian priest, as technically that should mean he is damned, and both have it as tradition that he is a Saint.
>>532735001This is generally true, but the reality is more along the spectrum of IQ than a distinct two types of people. It's a gradation of consciousness and free-will as IQ increases. But once IQ gets too high (160+) there is a limiting factor of neuroticism that actually decreases free-will.
>>532735034Think about what you just said dude. You grant that participation in a divine mind justifies all knowledge. But you’re not sure how knowledge of participation is justified? Think about that. You already know that a divine mind evades the epistemological roadblocks that a merely human mind evades but you’re either just not realizing that in the moment or you don’t want to admit? In regard to participation in the divine mind, the source of all knowledge is ultimately the divine mind that knows everything. And this isn’t even like “oh well you just asset it as true but I don’t know it to be true so therefore you’re wrong” kind of thing. You do the same exact thing. You just do it with a human mind where that sort of thing is supposed to be impossible. So if I’m wrong, you’re even more wrong. If I’m right, you’re still wrong.
>>532735098Yes. Although I would say that all trascendent frameworks of belief are more aspirational than anything, most religious people are not truth-seekers, and the same can be said about atheists. Human nature is inherently inclined towards evil and conformity, not good or exploration. This is why global trends of religious adherence or apostasy don't matter at all. The average African Christian is not Saint Augustine, but simply a person getting by in a harsh environment and using superstition to ease off the pain. The average atheist in Czech Republic isn't Nietszche, but just a guy who was indoctrinated into non-belief, has never questioned reality and just wants to have sex and smoke weed without being bothered.
>>532728211>Before Christianity Christ is Creator of EarthBC only means before the Resurrection
>>532735502I can't agree with that, unless I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say. IQ is a totally separate thing. Intuition is effectively like a 6th sense that can pick up on metaphysical phenomena. Just as a smart person be born blind and a dumb person can have perfect vision, intuition works the same way. People who are lacking intuition simply cannot perceive spiritual concepts, just as people born blind can't perceive color, let alone the emotional and symbolic associations certain colors can evoke in different contexts.
>>532735502The terrible truth about IQ is that in regard to ideology it mostly results in nothing more than the ability to perceive and adhere to institutionally approved dogmas. Leftism corresponds to higher IQ and education precisely because more intelligent people can intuit the professional and social rewards that will be conferred to them by institutions if they affirm and advance leftism.
>>532735692My granting was that a divine mind could justify all knowledge not that one exists. How would you know you are participating in one?>You do the same exact thingI do make assumptions but I readily discard and adopt new ones based on predictive and explanatory power. If I have a suspicion that my assumption isn't valid I can get rid of it. If making a certain assumption allows me to presict the future then I'll adopt it because it's useful.>I’m wrong, you’re even more wrongNo if you are wrong I still have a useful model of reality. If you are right I still have a useful model of reality. You can't make any predictions or do anything that I can't also do.
>>532736019I think Christ literally being the Sun and plasma bodies being intelligent entities which give birth to matter from pure energy really explains the origin of life in the physical/material density. We've proven in lab settings that plasma bodies demonstrate intelligent behavior and create dust seemingly from nothing, likely by slowing or condensing energy until it becomes solid. In this lense, every metaphor about God creating and selflessly sustaining earth and all life on it makes a whole lot more sense. Every ancient tradition that viewed stars as sentient gods suddenly makes sense. Astrology suddenly becomes plausible. Maybe Christ was also a real physical person that served as avatar of the Sun's personality. Who knows. It all lines up a little too well for me to completely dismiss.At the end of the day though all that really matters is cultivating a strong enough awareness to maintain awareness in all states of consciousness as to not be deceived into consenting to reincarnation. Everything else is a distraction. Not many are ready for that though.
>>532735849>indoctrinated into non-beliefNon-belief is the default
>>532736425You’re misunderstanding dude. If you don’t grant that one exists, your epistemology is refuted completely. You can no longer account for universal knowledge claims at all. So for you to even ask the question how I know is pointless. You’ve entered abject skepticism and debate is no longer possible. All that stuff about explanatory power and assumptions and utility is meaningless. At bottom, they’re justified by a limited strictly personal subjective mind that can’t actually justify them. Ergo, my view has become a logical necessity for you.
>>532736425>>532736717And if you think I’m wrong, explain to me how you could possibly access the knowledge to make universal truth claims with a strictly limited subjective personal mind? It can’t be done…
>>532736717>You can no longer account for universal knowledge claims at all.But neither can you. You have the same problem. You can't even tell me how you onow you are participating in a divine mind.
>>532736850Why can’t I? I did tell you. Where exactly is the contradiction in justifying knowledge with participation in a divine mind? Be specific.
Even if religions of the world are wrong or make belief, the existence of a higher order or force that brought everything into being is hinted at among scientists and mathematicians because of their study of the world around them.
>>532736534>Muh avatarsPajeet detected.Christ has His own physical body and soul He's the Son of God
>>532736630Belief is a product of reasoning and applied critical thinking, the moment biology allows it.This is a stupid argument. Not being able to walk or talk is the default as well, but everyone would agree that a human must learn these things.
>>532736917Let's say a divine mind can infact justify all knowledge. How do you know that it exists and you are participating in that divine mind. That's what I meant. The only thing I granted was that a divine mind could justify all knowledge.
>>532737041Not being a meth addict is also the default.
>>532737024But why pretend that has anything to do with a story about a Jewish volcano demon who promised a specific rock in the Levant to Jews 3000 years ago?
>>532737024An interesting thing is that the majority of world religions and philosophical schools of thought based on trascendence (like stoicism) converge on much of their moral teachings. Some people would say that different religions are simply different human expressions of the internal truths that are accessible to all humans.Of course, I do think that there is a hierarchy of religions and systems, and that some have a much higher probability of being true than others.
>>532728211I wonder how they are measuring this and who they polled. My main field is philosophy, I'm a panentheist, I don't believe in a persona god but an impersonal cosmic consciousness. Do they count me as a god believer or not?
>>532737296Thanks for confirming that the "we're all born atheists" argument is low IQ.
>>532728714If you need an example of a philosopher alive today check out Bernardo Kastrup and his theories on Analytical Idealism.I would like to know how though they separate science and math and physics from philosophy. Everyone working on a theory of everything at the perimeter institute is both a physicist and a philosopher by necessity.
>>532735849>Human nature is inherently inclined towards evil and conformityNPC nature, the nature of the 75-80%, yes. The 20-25% of potentially real people are more split. At least, I think, or that seems to be the case from my experience. There's always been a correlation. Only the intuitive types seem to even have the capacity for genuine, non-performative moral good. Whether or not they choose to pursue it is another matter. The rest literally only exist to maintain the stability of this aggregate, concensus reality, this shared dream we perceive as "objective" or phsycial reality. This works becuase they're fully programmable. They have some limited free will, but no agency, as they're driven entirely by their perception of the external world.
>>532728211DO ANY OF THESE “SCIENTIST” SUPPORT LAWS IF THEY DO THEN THEY ARE ALL JEWISH LAWS CAME FROM JEWS READ THE TORAH AND I MEAN EVERY SINGLE LAST LAW IN EVERY SINGLE LAST COUNTRY JAIL IS A JEWISH THING MY DUDESATHENA
>>532737344>internal truths that are accessible to all humanEvolved moral intuitions because we a social animals.
>>532728923As far as I'm concerned the laws of physics allow for all manner of phenomena that has been exhibited by saints and historical and mythical figures. My main objection is the notion that a man can be a god, no personal being can be the all.
>>532734835He never solved the is-ought problem. nor the other major onesThe guy is more a rhetorician than a real thinker and his followers get tricked by his rhetorical skills into thinking that actual answers are underneath the talk.
>>532731534If something is eternal and self-existent then it doesn't have to be made. Asking who made the eternal and self-existent is a completely retarded question. Have you not heard of the whole concept of "I am"? It just is. No cause, always, forever.
>>532737033Nah. Typical D&C kike behavior. Your tired old kike tricks only work on hylics. Zoom in on a single word, disregard the entire message, and reply with race baiting D&C. I see the scared, pathetic, parasite that you are. I can practically smell your fear from here.
get a job you fucking "metaphysical" losers a made up word for made up bullshit
>>532737143Dude think about what you’re asking: > divine mind justifies ALL knowledge > given this, how is the knowledge of participation known?The answer is via participation in the divine mind. What are you not understanding about this? As Christians we accept that there are different types of knowledge. There is human knowledge, intuitive knowledge, intellectual knowledge, revealed knowledge, and mediated divine knowledge. Human knowledge is limited but divine knowledge is by definition unlimited. Ultimately, all for Christians all knowledge is at bottom justified by divine knowledge. God’s omniscient wisdom is the ultimate source of all certainty, including knowledge of his uncreated energies such as logical principles or mathematics. We can say for example, I know facts about the attributes of God via revealed knowledge in scripture, but knowledge itself, including knowledge about the revealed scripture, is justified through participation in the thing that’s being revealed. It comes through a real living relationship with the Godhead, namely, the triune God, the omniscient Father, the Son who bridges personhood and divinity, and the holy spirit that facilitates the aforementioned relationship. It’s like your mom. How do you know your mother loves you? You participate in the relationship right? It’s the same with God, but unlike a mothers love which can be known through participation but can’t provide knowledge of cosmological things due the limited nature, I can say participation justifies knowledge of itself precisely because what is being participated in is the one and only kind of thing that’s unlimited. So again, if you think the question has been answered. It’s specifically participation in the kind of thing that can know itself. This sort of thing is not possible for secularists because the thing they would be participating in is not the kind of thing that can do that. If you think this contains a contradiction then point it out.
>>532733737The guy probably hasn't even read Hume's primary works, probably only heard of him second-hand.
>>532737584Biologically and evolutionarily speaking, atheism has failed, obstreperously so. The biological purpose of the species is reproduction, nothing else and nothing more, and atheism has caused the opposite -> an ideological or material opposition to the reproduction of the species based on comfort and hedonism.Also, if we base our moral laws on evolution only (an impossible thing to logically do, but let's entertain the possibility for the sake of argument), then why shouldn't I rape your girlfriend, steal your property and kill you? That secures the continuity of my biological wellbeing and the reproduction of my DNA.
>>532728211The answer to this one is actually fairly simple:Scientists consider logic to be a means towards an answer.Philosophers consider logic itself to be the answer.Where logic fails, scientists keep an open mind - because they do not know or understand how something works, thus cannot conclude anything.Where logic fails, philosophers go mental - because it cannot fail. It must be absolute.
>>532737896I hole-hardedly agree, but allow me to play doubles advocate here for a moment. For all intensive purposes I think you are wrong. In an age where false morals are a diamond dozen, true virtues are a blessing in the skies. We often put our false morality on a petal stool like a bunch of pre-Madonnas, but you all seem to be taking something very valuable for granite. So I ask of you to mustard up all the strength you can because it is a doggy dog world out there. Although there is some merit to what you are saying it seems like you have a huge ship on your shoulder. In your argument you seem to throw everything in but the kids Nsync, and even though you are having a feel day with this I am here to bring you back into reality. I have a sick sense when it comes to these types of things. It is almost spooky, because I cannot turn a blonde eye to these glaring flaws in your rhetoric. I have zero taller ants when it comes to people spouting out hate in the name of moral righteousness. You just need to remember what comes around is all around, and when supply and command fails you will be the first to go. Make my words, when you get down to brass stacks it doesn't take rocket appliances to get two birds stoned at once. It's clear who makes the pants in this relationship, and sometimes you just have to swallow your prize and accept the facts. You might have to come to this conclusion through denial and error but I swear on my mother's mating name that when you put the petal to the medal you will pass with Flying Carpets like it’s a peach of cake.
>>532738104> hole-hardedly
>>532738024>The answer is via participation in the divine mindSo you know you are participating in a divine mind via the divine mind?
>>532738156>> hole-hardedly
>>532737526NPCs like: >>532738023And yes. What you are saying is why I deeply believe that true freedom is found within your consciousness, when you stop depending on all external systems for your peace and satisfaction. The average NPC will never be free, quite the opposite, they'll be a slave to whatever external, "practical and tangible" metrics they value, which funnily enough will never fully depend on them.
>>532738171Yes. Unlike participation in something limited, participation in the divine allows the possibility of verification of itself. Does it not?
>>532737415Yes, because you believe in a higher entity (or entities) that rule over the Universe.In fact, what you are describing is not that different from the gods of Seneca, Epictetus or Marcus Aurelius, who were all theists.
>>532738327It's circular reasoning your justification for it being a divine mind is that it tells you it is a divine mind but it could be tricking you and you can't verify that.
>>532738320kys
>>532737415If it’s impersonal, how do you access universal knowledge?
>>532738599Verify your own existence to me.
>>532738023>get a job you fucking "metaphysical" losers >>a made up word for made up bullshit
>>532738599How can a mind that is unlimited by nature be limited by the reason it created?
>>532738840>>get a job you fucking "metaphysical" losers >>>>a made up word for made up bullshit
>>532738794I can't why are you talking to someone who doesn't exist?
>>532738863>How can a mind that is unlimited by nature be limited by the reason it created?The inter dimensional demon calling itself a divine mind that you are communicating with can just make you believe so.
>>532728714This is a tranny
>>532739015Then you haven’t granted shit. You just granted that a divine mind would be able to justify knowledge of itself and then insisted, in contradiction with what would be known by a divine mind, that actually it’s not a divine mind at all. So you’ve also strawmanned my position, which is participation in the divine mind and not some demonic mind.
>>532739015A divine mind, if participated in, would necessarily allow you to know it’s indeed a divine mind and not a demon mind. Do you at least understand this?
>>532739953I granted what I said I granted.>So you’ve also strawmanned my positionNo I didn't. A divine mind could tell you it is a divine mind.>>532740016But so could a demon mind and you can't tell the difference.
>>532729027>Meanwhile, science literally only makes sense at all in the context of a worldview that includes God.To you
>>532728477This kek.
>>532730296>It’s not because it’s at best incoherentTo you. I perfectly understand what that anon said. t.Agnostic atheist
