But technically I wouldn't exist. It would only be the case that someone like me would exist. It's like saying that in some universe green is orange. In that universe there would be no green if it were orange. There would just be be orange. So if i didn't exist here I wouldn't exist in another universe. it would just be the case that someone similar to me would exist If the possibilities are infinite then there's nothing unreasonable about each and every single universe not having someone like me in it. It's 50/50 either something akin to me is there or not. That being said it's not unreasonable to conceive of an entity that does not exist in every possible universe. And it's perfectly reasonable that any and all contingent entities could fit that description. Sure the odds of something akin to me existing with subtle tweaks here and there certainly outweigh the possibility of non-existence, but it doesn't entirely rule it out. Because I'm contingent it is certainly possible that I could have never existed in any universe. Again, the odds are small but not impossible.
Alright to get back on track. All bible banter aside it is not entirely unreasonable to conceive of something much larger than ourselves--a higher power, if you will-- that had a hand in setting the universe into motion. I'll leave the people who know the story to fill in the gap, but if we take it word for word we're cruising for another shite storm. That being said we can assume that this being was able to set things in motion because it resides outside of time and space, a la Guardian's proposition. That being said, there's still the paradoxical issue of explaining something interacting with space and time when it doesn't interact with it to begin with (i.e. it's outside of it). Moreover, discussing Creationism implies intelligent design. And there is a substantial evolutionary evidence in the physiology of many animals that does not suggest intelligent or purposeful work. The giraffe for example has it's laryngeal nerve run all the way from it's brain down it's neck, loop around the heart and back up to the larynx. For lack of a better word it would've been smarter for the nerve to run from the brain straight to the voice box (we're talking about a few inches) instead of traveling several feet down and back up again to the voice box. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cH2bkZfHw4
It's certainly possible that I could not have existed in any universe at all. That is, everything about me in this universe is contingent. Moreover the assumption is that my counter-parts or versions of me in other universes are me. But they can't be me or else I would be spatially and temporally located in more than one place, and that is physically impossible. So I can't be any of those other "White_Rooks" in those other universes because I'm the White_Rook of THIS universe. That being said, all my counter-parts/other versions of me can only ever be entities that are similar to me because I only exist in the space and time of this universe. Someone that's only similar to be does nothing to define MY existence You're confusing the significance of the whole with the significance of each of its parts. Any one of those alternate universes derives it's meaning from the sum of all of it's parts, not individual parts. There's still meaning in a universe in which I do not exist. Thus to say that I provide the meaning to this universe doesn't provide any motivation to think so.
The assumption here is that given the infinitely possible worlds/universes that exist, there can be can a single, seemingly insignificant difference--such as my having green hair instead of brown hair-- that makes it completely different from this and any other possible universe/world. That is certainly acceptable. Different and absolutely essential are two very different things. You're claim is that contingent things such as my possible hair colour are a necessary component in differentiating that universe from another. This is incorrect. My hair colour is a contingent thing-- that is, it could have been any colour. And while there might be as many different universes in which my hair is coloured differently, it is not necessary for universe 135 to have a version of me with green hair. Our infinite differences across all possible universes distinguish each one within the multi-verse they do not define it. The problem here is the assumption that counter-parts are actually ourselves. While my counter-part in universe 135 with green is certainly similar to me, the fact that he made the decision to colour his hair green and I decided to keep mine my natural colour means that he is nothing like me. He is only an entity that is similar. He is not me. More over, to assume that counter-parts of an individual refer to that individual is to claim that, assuming that the multi-verse is a physcially existing entity, each of us is located in more than one point of space and time. And this is a physical impossibility. This part is a little weird. But given that the "you" you're referring to is a contingent entity, any meaning to it is empty. If we're to consider your multi-verse approach it's certainly possible for a universe to exist where none of us were born. how would there be any meaning in that?
This is all too ad hominem to the point of trolling.
Oh it is. Uganda plans to put forth an anti-homosexuality bill outlawing it and making homosexual behaviour illegal and possibly punishable by death.
That's what i was getting at. With science I'm guaranteed a 95-99 percent success rate. With prayer I'm not better off than the flip a coin. As for calling it meaningless, that would imply that there's nothing to be had in. As different and chance-ridden as it is, people do manage to find meaning in it. I like to think of it as more of a superstitious probability.
See the problem with prayer and any effects it might have is that nothing else other than prayer is being looked at as a variable. If A sick person is given antibiotics for a serious illness and his/her family is sitting around their bedside praying, and he makes a recovery the next day. What was responsible for his recovery? I fail to see how it's done just as much as human effort and ingenuity. Moreover, what happens when prayer doesn't work? In the case of the antibiotic, the doctor will admit that he/she did all they could and that maybe they might try to improve or change the administered dosage. As for prayer all I've ever heard was "It wasn't meant to be". And I fail to see how that's acceptable.
While you're correct from a physical standpoint, metaphysically we might conceive of of something outside of what we consider conventional space and time. While that solves the infinite regression of a god being created by something, and that something coming from something etc. it does create a major problem: namely, how something outside of time and space--that is, not interacting with it-- can interact and have a direct effect on it.
Y'all might want to wait a bit. They're apparently troublesome like the 1st generation of their predecessor.
Because they eat the poo poo. That's what Pastor Martin Ssempa says: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euXQbZDwV0w
I'm going to have to call you out on this one. From a conceptual philosophical viewpoint time does not necessarily have meaning. We could have just as easily constructed a clock and day that goes for a countless number of hours. But even if we did that the actual "metronome" of the universe would maintain a consistent "tick". The planets would revolve around their respective stars in some conceivable and logical pattern. Our perception of time certainly is independent and unique, but that's why it is OUR perception. I'd also like to add that science has posited an acceptable and reasonable concept of time. Whether or not they're actually right is certainly up for debate, but given how our solar system exhibits a specific pattern it's the best possible explanation of time. If it turns out that it's wrong then the concept will be revised. And the Matrix was simply an adaptation of the Cave Allegory. While it certainly does promote skepticism of how we sense and perceive things, it has no place in discussions where our perceptions and senses are assumed to be correct. So while you do put forth a interesting idea about our perception and concept of time, it's something that is currently working and accepted to be true. To go any further you're going to have to argue that it is entirely false, completely flawed, or something along those lines. But seeing as there seems to be a logical entailment between out concept of time and, say, our orbit around the Sun. the odds are a little against you to say the least. We're simply using the best possible tools and current understanding we have of existence to motivate a discussion. It would be sheer ignorance to not attend to the already existing scientific patterns in our universe that we have come to identify. More over, given how small and insignificant we are it would be similarly ignorant to doubt the existence of something much bigger than ourselves out there. We may all end up being completely wrong, but that doesn't mean we can't eventually learn something here. Or hell, maybe somehow someone here has it spot on.
I say fight 'em when he's alone. Then take polaroids of the aftermath and toss them at him when he cracks wise with his group. No but seriously, if you can try to be an adult about it just walk away.
In an ideal and egalitarian world hitting a woman would be just as legitimate as hitting a man. But it's not. if every sport was Co-ed I wouldn't see a problem, as long as everything else about it was egalitarian. But that's a perfect world. For now just be happy you have legs to play soccer.
But to deny the present is to deny what you just typed. You were presently experiencing it while you were typing it. All you have now is a memory and the post. But what if your memory of the post was fake. if this was the case you could never be sure of any of your actions other than the ones you would be doing at the present. You would say to yourself: "Hey I'm currently sitting at a computer" or something along those lines.
Whether a higher power might fulfill those roles may not necessarily be the case. Given the vastness of the universe it would be sheer ignorance to admit that something, possibly akin to a higher power, much larger than ourselves does not exist. Whether or not it's God is another story. It's like the belief in a flawlessly cut diamond. if we go by most carving standards it might seem like what we're dealing with is something that is essentially perfect. But if used something like a super powerful microscope to scan the diamond's surface we may just as well find flaws we thought never existed. So to say that omniscience and omnipotence are roles necessarily adopted by this higher power is difficult to put forth. We could spend a millennium examining something we think to be God without being aware of its real and existing flaws. Well put, but there's still the problem of whether its intentions were willful/intelligent.
It's one of those funny and ironic tragedies. It sucks, sure. But the effort to clean it up is costing more than what's invested into researcher cleaner/renewable energy sources. Given our dependence on oil this kind of thing is a given.
That may well be the case, but in terms of fair and equal play it was the right thing to do. What if the Nazi's had discovered and made first contact with the alien species and they sent a Nazi to communicate "humanity" to the aliens? It wouldn't be an accurate representation of humanity. It may not have been as harsh a case with Ellie but it was along the same lines.
It's an opinion. We're all entitled to them. Any real construal of it as a threat is just being over reactive. That being said opinions are little like *******s; **** 'em. More specifically, while we're all entitled to our own opinions it doesn't mean we all agree. Given how ignorant some people can be about what they believe Patsy has some sense. But it's a generalized sense, and that doesn't make it right.
None of this early motion stuff seems worth it now. Sony and Microsoft botched the games to be released for the respective systems. Wait a few years though and this all might be something to gawk at.
