|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Was John Calvin a Calvinist?
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What ?
Go back to your studies until you understand.
Or better yet, submit. Understanding will follow.
Are are you trapped like Einstein ?
Your theology, as is all Augustinean theology predicated on a wooden interpretation of predestination, is compounded by that error.
You are denying reality. I.e. the indeterminate.
Even IngoB, who DOES know better, DOES acknowledge his imparsimony. He chooses imparsimony over the FACT of indeterminate reality (which is redundant phraseology which reduces to the FACT of indeterinacy: reality). Not for reasons of faith or intellect, but disposition.
We ALL do.
This battle is a battle of will, of ego all the way down to the depraved id, of vanity.
I'm parsimoniously right. But have I charity ? That's my battle. In opposing damnationism (mandatory arbitrary determinism: God the Bender), do I damn and am therefore damned ?
And Johnny, who has God helplessly HAD to save from eternity and who has He HAD to damn ?
Why ?
How ?
Did He play dice ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
I take it you failed then.
(Simply repeating assertions and repeating questions doesn't exactly encourage more discussion Martin.)
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
How?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
PS I knew in advance that you would use the word 'imparsimony' in your previous post.
[ETA - damn, indeterminism creeped in with your cross-post.]
[ 06. November 2010, 11:24: Message edited by: Johnny S ]
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
:0) yeah, God's that smart too. He can work stuff out. And will it to be otherwise.
So what course material, what academic reference can you cite to overturn the immutable, quantifiable, scientific fact of uncertainty as NOT a lack of occult information ?
Where are the better, Platonic electrons that God projects our shadow ones through ?
I suspect that you are struggling to be the nicest possible Augustinean-Calminian it is possible to be Johnny.
And you're doing better than I EVER will, as I ain't nice.
But I'm right.
And God is.
As I wish your day to be, mine will be. Cheers for now.
[ 06. November 2010, 11:35: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So what course material, what academic reference can you cite to overturn the immutable, quantifiable, scientific fact of uncertainty as NOT a lack of occult information ?
As it happens I've just finished reading The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking.
In the chapter where he discusses the Uncertainty Principle he makes this statement - quote:
"Quantum physics might seem to undermine the idea that nature is governed by laws, but that is not the case. Instead it leads us to accept a new form of determinism: given the state of the system at some time, the laws of nature determine the probabilities of various futures and pasts rather than determining the future and past with certainty."
What fascinates me about that statement is that he still insists on using the word determinism. Of course he has to. His quest for the unifying principle is grounded in his attempt to reconcile Newtonian and Einsteinian physics.
The thing about science is that it has to be (at least to some degree) deterministic for it to work.
When was the last time you saw a brickie down tools to calculate the probability of the location of all the electrons in his bricks?
To my mind the quest for the unifying principle is what philosophers would call compatibilism - the attempt to reconcile (however imparsimoniously) determinism with indeterminism.
[ 06. November 2010, 12:32: Message edited by: Johnny S ]
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Indeterminism is determined. Uncertainty is certain. These, THIS is not commutative. Hawking is yesterday's man, spent and has NO chance any more than Einstein did. Less.
As I do not understand free will - it's not an attribute of God in any way and explains nothing of any significance and is not accepted, needed in science - in the slightest, I find it meaningless, just as I do predestination (determinism), then I have no need for compatibilism to reconcile two meaningless concepts.
But there again I'm a VERY simple minded man.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jahlove
Tied to the mast
# 10290
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
But there again I'm a VERY simple minded man.
good for you, mate - perhaps you could post in terms that the even simpler-minded amongst us could comprehend?
--------------------
“Sing like no one's listening, love like you've never been hurt, dance like nobody's watching, and live like its heaven on earth.” - Mark Twain
Posts: 6477 | From: Alice's Restaurant (UK Franchise) | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Even IngoB, who DOES know better, DOES acknowledge his imparsimony. He chooses imparsimony over the FACT of indeterminate reality (which is redundant phraseology which reduces to the FACT of indeterminacy: reality). Not for reasons of faith or intellect, but disposition.
The problem is that you lecture passionately about things you have not understood much. Parsimony is not a part of nature. Nature is so fundamentally imparsimonious that it requires modern science, the best human minds of a huge population chained together in a Babelian effort spanning centuries, to impose it on nature. Somewhat. But never ever is nature without another trick up her sleeve. I've been an elementary particle physicist. It's a zoo of particles, Lagrangians and Lie groups. Our attempts to unify, simplify, breed ever more complexity. Every time we crank up the energy and look deeper, there is more. It's like a fat fractal of observables. And compared to the neuroscience I do now that was almost ridiculously straightforward. Parsimony is our last lease on sanity. It's what keeps us afloat on the dark sea of science. Yet not so because that's what nature is like, and by extrapolation what God is like, but because of what we are like. Nature is deep, we are shallow.
Furthermore, you have not understood indeterminacy much, and hence also not how it relates to God. Indeterminacy is a specific statement about the world. B does not follow from A. But B is and A is and therefore God necessarily creates B and A in indeterminate relationship to each other. Now, this is impossible precisely as long as one has a false, demiurge, conception of God. An agent cannot arrange matter to be non-arranged. However, it is dead simple - parsimonious even - once one understands God a bit more correctly. You will note that both you and I did create B and A in indeterminate relationship to each other, in our imagination, without the slightest problem. God's imagination is reality. The indeterminacy of the world in fact proves the existence of God, and I will spell that out in another thread. Yet what is important to realize now is that it simply does not follow from indeterminacy in the world that God doesn't know what is going to be the case. That's just a category error, and it turns God into a demiurge, into a part of the world. Einstein indeed saw deeply, much deeper than the young quantum mechanics he was critiquing. His only problem was that he tried to stick to physics when God was staring him into the face...
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
All clear now Jahlove?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
IngoB:
quote:
Now, this is impossible precisely as long as one has a false, demiurge, conception of God. An agent cannot arrange matter to be non-arranged. However, it is dead simple - parsimonious even - once one understands God a bit more correctly.
Well I can see the direction of travel here and will read the pre-plugged thread with interest, but aren't you close to saying "Now that we understand the incomprehensability of God, we can . . ."
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I'm bloody impressed anteater if you can see the direction of this: 'An agent cannot arrange matter to be non-arranged.', let alone what it means. Makes me look positively cogent.
IngoB baby, come down, stoop to conquer. I ask AGAIN. Your rhetoric and claims of superior understanding of anything just don't reach me, especially when accompanied with straw men, category errors, irrelevancies. Projection.
The bewildering proliferation of entities at higher energies comes under the heading of indeterminacy, not imparsimony.
What's the problem ? Why bluster ?
You CANNOT blind me with science - particularly as you're not actually using it, with pseudo-intellectualism. Or even the real thing, which you're not actually using correctly even if you have it. You need to beat me up, club me to the ground with A is for Apple. Patronize me please, but do not use second rate rhetoric and think that I'm intimidated by it. I'm offended, certainly, by your claims to intellectual superiority and understanding and wisdom over my third rate versions not because you make the claims which are all true I'm sure, brain as big as two planets as you have, but because you don't and therefore CAN NOT actually do it.
If you could, you would.
DO IT. Don't just claim to be able to. I'm third rate mate, on a good day.
My understanding of fundamental, hypostatic, essential indeterminacy is fine, thank you, you haven't TOUCHED it.
There is NOTHING demiurgical about God being constrained by it. Any more than He's constrained to be good.
You'll claim you don't have the time. What, to even START ? I'll wait forever mate, I'll treasure the start of the catechism, when it happens and wait longingly for as long as it takes once you've given me the first bead for the next.
Please START.
If you can. If you can spare the time.
Otherwise, mate, the floor, the gutter is unassailably mine.
God is not a clock wound up forever forever ago. God is not infinite Bender with all of eternal Futurama spooled inside Him. He does not HAVE to be known gnostically thus. He didn't know you from Adam eternity ago. Not that there's much to know.
PLEASE give me the first bead of your truly superior understanding that I HAVE to accept?
Or am I just tooooooo stupid? It can't be done? I have to be left in my savage's ignorance? A wolf-child too old to learn to speak? I cannot become as a little child, rabbi?
In that case mate, I will come back at every predestinarian, every Ptolemaic-Augustinean here every time, whether damnationists like yourself or universalists like Mousethief.
At least you have the courage to damn despite Jesus' promise of salvation.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
As I do not understand free will - it's not an attribute of God in any way and explains nothing of any significance and is not accepted, needed in science - in the slightest, I find it meaningless, just as I do predestination (determinism), then I have no need for compatibilism to reconcile two meaningless concepts.
I don't get this Martin.
You seem to be saying that you cannot believe in black and white because all you can see is grey?
[ 08. November 2010, 03:10: Message edited by: Johnny S ]
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I never beat my wife Johnny.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
Martin, I have seen little evidence that you deserve any particular effort of mine - at least as far as the topic of predestination is concerned. There was plenty of meat in what I wrote above, and indeed elsewhere on the Ship, but your only response is a lengthy list of "ad hominem"s and the insistence that you, only you, will be the judge of which of my arguments makes sense. There's no point - and no joy - in arguing with someone being that destructive.
As it happens, I've thought about randomness quite independently of your latest attempt to shout down dissenting voices with that weirdly transparent combination of intellectual arrogance and self-deprecation. So I have posted on that now elsewhere. FWIW.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
You've got NOTHING mate.
I'd get off the pot if I were you before you burst a haemorrhoid.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
I never beat my wife Johnny.
What phony dog poo?
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Tuesday.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
