Christian 'Mythology'.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Hi Rosindubh, thanks for the above.  For the sake of succinctness, I'll just talk to the below extract which I think is at the nub of where we differ :

To be pedantic, I would have to restate this distinction - that the expression or description of such concepts in mathematical language is a product of human mind and culture; whereas the concepts being so described themselves are incontingent and dependent on nothing. They do not 'exist' in any normal sense of the word and because they have no dependencies to posit a law giver to so decide them would be irrational. If there are parallel universes for example we might find the speed of light varies and we might find the periodic table varies but the incontingent truths of logic and maths would be consistent across all possible universes because they are inevitabilities and not dependent on any context.  To imagine some law-giver in a higher realm deciding for 'some reason' that two plus two should equal four in our universe makes no sense - it implies that two plus two only equals four because of some contingent dependency and this is not the case.

If you insist that maths is not contingent then why do you insist that God has to be?

I think materialists would say that maths is contingent on matter

[torridon]

If you insist that maths is not contingent then why do you insist that God has to be?

I think materialists would say that maths is contingent on matter

I don't see why maths would be contingent on matter.  Maths is abstract.

As for God being contingent, well to start with God is largely undefined, so you have a problem of definition to start with.  But if we run with a popular view that god is some sort of being but then go on to observe that 'god could not lift a rock that was too heavy for him to lift' then with this observation we are demonstrating that god is in fact contingent upon logic; an origin of all things would be contingent upon nothing.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I don't see why maths would be contingent on matter.  Maths is abstract.

As for God being contingent, well to start with God is largely undefined, so you have a problem of definition to start with.  But if we run with a popular view that god is some sort of being but then go on to observe that 'god could not lift a rock that was too heavy for him to lift' then with this observation we are demonstrating that god is in fact contingent upon logic; an origin of all things would be contingent upon nothing.

So are you now saying God is not contingent?

[floo]

All gods are a human creation, imo.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

All gods are a human creation, imo.

A fine old traditional world view to be sure. However how does it bear up in a world of materialists dalliances with eternity and cosmologists toying with simulated universes? Not good since an eternal multiverse could throw up simulated universes and we would probably be one of them. As often happens when scientists near a conclusion on cosmology, theologians have got their before them and the author of our universe has been contemplated and worshipped for centuries.

[floo]

A fine old traditional world view to be sure. However how does it bear up in a world of materialists dalliances with eternity and cosmologists toying with simulated universes? Not good since an eternal multiverse could throw up simulated universes and we would probably be one of them. As often happens when scientists near a conclusion on cosmology, theologians have got their before them and the author of our universe has been contemplated and worshipped for centuries.

It is just possible some intelligent designer was responsible, but I am of the opinion it is not the god of the Bible, which appears to be a very human creation.

[torridon]

So are you now saying God is not contingent?

No, I am pointing out that god is contingent upon logic, according to popular conceptions at least.  God is bounded by and subject to logic.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It is just possible some intelligent designer was responsible, but I am of the opinion it is not the god of the Bible, which appears to be a very human creation.

I look forward to reading your thesis on this bearing in mind you strike me as one of the ''no person in command of their senses could possible see anything humane in the GOTB''. I think that reflects more on your own sense of moral superiority. I don't see it your way, obviously and think this type of book or collection thereof is definitely not of your standard stable of overhyped literature.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No, I am pointing out that god is contingent upon logic, according to popular conceptions at least.  God is bounded by and subject to logic.

Does logic therefore give rise to matter/energy......or is it contingent on it?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Does logic therefore give rise to matter/energy......or is it contingent on it?

Actually current thinking is that information is the foundational substrate or reality - and that matter and forces are manifestations of it.

Try Vlatko Vedral's "Decoding Reality - the Universe as Quantum Information".

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Actually current thinking is that information is the foundational substrate or reality - and that matter and forces are manifestations of it.

Try Vlatko Vedral's "Decoding Reality - the Universe as Quantum Information".

OK.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Actually current thinking is that information is the foundational substrate or reality - and that matter and forces are manifestations of it.

Try Vlatko Vedral's "Decoding Reality - the Universe as Quantum Information".

There's the magic word though............ quantum.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Actually current thinking is that information is the foundational substrate or reality - and that matter and forces are manifestations of it.

Manifestations of or contingent on?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Manifestations of or contingent on?

Both, and the quantum is no more "magic" than gravity is magic. Read the book.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Both,

ROFL.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

ROFL.

Dull incomprehension noted. Come back when you've read the book.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Dull incomprehension noted. Come back when you've read the book.

Dull incomprehension? Hillside.........., How can something be fundamental AND contingent?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Dull incomprehension? Hillside.........., How can something be fundamental AND contingent?

Now try reading what you actually asked.

Dull incomprehension is fine, unless you want to 'fess up to yet another falsehood instead?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Now try reading what you actually asked.

Dull incomprehension is fine, unless you want to 'fess up to yet another falsehood instead?

You cannot sensibly claim to be both fundamental and contingent Hillside.

[Stranger]

You cannot sensibly claim to be both fundamental and contingent Hillside.

 

You seem to have forgotten your own question...

Manifestations of or contingent on?

You're always good for a laugh, Vlad.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

You cannot sensibly claim to be both fundamental and contingent Hillside.

No-one has. Again, try reading what you actually asked.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You seem to have forgotten your own question...

You're always good for a laugh, Vlad.

If information is contingent on matter then it is not the foundation of reality is it? Matter is.
If matter is contingent on information then matter is not information...which is the foundation of reality.
If matter is a manifestation of information then it IS information and therefore fundamental but it cannot be fundamental and contingent.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

No-one has. Again, try reading what you actually asked.

A manifestation of something IS that thing Hillside. If you are the foundation of reality then you cannot be contingent on it since you are it....and you are fundamental.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

If information is contingent on matter then it is not the foundation of reality is it? Matter is.
If matter is contingent on information then matter is not be information...which is the foundation of reality.
If matter is a manifestation of information then it IS information and therefore fundamental but it cannot be fundamental and contingent.

None of which has anything whatever to do with the question you actually asked - which concerned whether matter and forces were manifestations of or contingent on information.

Stop digging.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

A manifestation of something IS that thing Hillside. If you are the foundation of reality then you cannot be contingent on it since you are it....and you are fundamental.

You'll reach Australia soon. A "thing" is a thing - a manifestation of it is something else that shows or demonstrates it. Octopi are "manifestations" of evolution for example. They are also contingent on it.

0/10 - See me