Does antitheism exist?

[Outrider]

If that extra-universal is as you have said underived there is nothing external to it to be blind to.

Again, there is the universe, which is all the observable aftermath of the Big Bang that we reside within.  Then, as a possible explanation for that universe, we are considering an infinite broader mechanistic reality which, as it's infinite, is not derived.

You can be blind in the world but not blind if you are all the world is.

Why not?  Why does there need to be a vision?

In other words what is it you can be blind to and blunder through?

Everything.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Again with the 'direction' and the 'self' and the 'determining'... it's not aimed, there is nothing in the background targetting a particular point. There is matter, there are natural laws, and there is an ongoing process - unguided, undirected, unconscious, simply being.

O.

The direction of the universe is dependent on the nature of our proposed ultimate extra universal reality. Everything we know as unguided is undetermined or determined by a range of determiners. We have but one determiner here, our ultimate extra universal reality. we cannot say then that it is unguided or undirected.
There are unconscious processes in the universe but there are also conscious processes also in the universe and by mere dint of that we cannot plead unconsciousness. Also we cannot logically discount consciousness , being a mechanistic process, being a characteristic of an infinite mechanistic process.     

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Again, there is the universe, which is all the observable aftermath of the Big Bang that we reside within.  Then, as a possible explanation for that universe, we are considering an infinite broader mechanistic reality which, as it's infinite, is not derived.

Well actually we've ceased to consider the latter since you keep bottling it back into the former.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Although to give you some due, you seem to be speculating an underived from which everything is derived.

[Outrider]

Well actually we've ceased to consider the latter since you keep bottling it back into the former.

I don't, but if I'm failing to communicate it to you adequately let me know where you think it's breaking down and I'll be happy to try to clarify.

O.

[Outrider]

Although to give you some due, you seem to be speculating an underived from which everything is derived.

An infinite, eternal reality which, as it has no initiation, is not 'derived' from anything, is not dependent upon anything, merely is.  Within that, at least one universe manifests as a natural occurence following undirected natural laws; within that universe, we emerge, and try to determine the nature of that broader reality in the absence of any hard and fast information regarding it.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

An infinite, eternal reality which, as it has no initiation, is not 'derived' from anything, is not dependent upon anything, merely is..

Since I agree with this, have argued this and been shouted down by others about it and you don't seem to have picked up on it our discussions are somewhat handicapped I feel.

[Outrider]

Since I agree with this, have argued this and been shouted down by others about it and you don't seem to have picked up on it our discussions are somewhat handicapped I feel.

This has been my position from the start.

Hence we can both agree that an entirely natural, undirected, unguided reality in which our universe manifests without any deliberate intent is entirely plausible?

O

[Roses]

Since I agree with this, have argued this and been shouted down by others about it and you don't seem to have picked up on it our discussions are somewhat handicapped I feel.

Your new name speaks volumes, you have stuck your wisdom where the sun don't shine.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

This has been my position from the start.

Hence we can both agree that an entirely natural, undirected, unguided reality in which our universe manifests without any deliberate intent is entirely plausible?

First of all it questionable that something that is extra universal can be said to be  ''natural''.....are you confusing ''natural'' with ''conscious'' here?
But yes, this something extra to our universe is not directed or guided, for what else is there to guide it or direct it? That our universe manifests because of it and it alone...I think we can agree on.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Your new name speaks volumes, you have stuck your wisdom where the sun don't shine.

You mean well and truly up my ''Littlerose''?

[Outrider]

First of all it questionable that something that is extra universal can be said to be  ''natural''.....are you confusing ''natural'' with ''conscious'' here?

As opposed to 'manufactured' or 'built'.

But yes, this something extra to our universe is not directed or guided, for what else is there to guide it or direct it? That our universe manifests because of it and it alone...I think we can agree on.

That was all I was trying to show, that there is a viable model that doesn't require a consciousness directing something.

O.

[Roses]

You mean well and truly up my ''Littlerose''?

Your rose bushes wouldn't appreciate suppositories pushing up their roots.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That was all I was trying to show, that there is a viable model that doesn't require a consciousness directing something.

You've shown it? Where?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Your rose bushes wouldn't appreciate suppositories pushing up their roots.

What about me antirynhums....ooh err Missus.

[Roses]

What about me antirynhums....ooh err Missus.

The antirrhinums would probably snap your fingers off with their dragon teeth.

[Outrider]

You've shown it? Where?

Scroll back a bit... just there, between when the thread started and here.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Scroll back a bit... just there, between when the thread started and here.

O.

We don't know what level of sophistication of process is needed to effectively turn a computation into a physical reality nor how many steps are needed.

My insistence on talking about consciousness rather than sovereignty was to underline to you that having suggested an intricate mechanism as starting point logically there was no warrant to call suggesting a mechanistic consciousness unreasonable whereas arbitrarily limiting it's sophistication to the level of a bicycle was probably unreasonable.

I'm glad we agree on the sovereignty of the extra universal reality though.

PS I noticed you appealed to the multiverse on occasion.   

[Outrider]

We don't know what level of sophistication of process is needed to effectively turn a computation into a physical reality nor how many steps are needed.

We don't have any reason to presume anything was conducting any computation.

My insistence on talking about consciousness rather than sovereignty was to underline to you that having suggested an intricate mechanism as starting point logically there was no warrant to call suggesting a mechanistic consciousness unreasonable whereas arbitrarily limiting it's sophistication to the level of a bicycle was probably unreasonable.

If you're going to accept that it's there, in the absence of any information you're going to have to accept that it's potential capacity is unknowable; at the same time, though, there's no reason to presume that a consciousness is there at all.

I'm glad we agree on the sovereignty of the extra universal reality though.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'sovereignty'; presumably the physical laws that hold sway within the universe are a specific implementation or subset of broader natural laws, if that's what you're aiming at.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

We don't have any reason to presume anything was conducting any computation.

If you're going to accept that it's there, in the absence of any information you're going to have to accept that it's potential capacity is unknowable; at the same time, though, there's no reason to presume that a consciousness is there at all.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'sovereignty'; presumably the physical laws that hold sway within the universe are a specific implementation or subset of broader natural laws, if that's what you're aiming at.

O.

Not really since an underived wouldn't be subject to law or laws. It would be the law.

[Outrider]

Not really since an underived wouldn't be subject to law or laws. It would be the law.

Right...?

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Right...?

O.

Right...?

O.

Yep. Are you suggesting the ultimate underived reality is subject to something else?

[Outrider]

Yep. Are you suggesting the ultimate underived reality is subject to something else?

No, I just wondered if you were going somewhere with that, was all.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If you're going to accept that it's there, in the absence of any information you're going to have to accept that it's potential capacity is unknowable; at the same time, though, there's no reason to presume that a consciousness is there at all.

Translated: I can't know that a consciousness is not necessary, I cannot deny having suggested the extra universal reality as an intricate and infinite machine means I have no logical warrant to say....''this sophisticated and no more''. I cannot deny the probability of an infinite machine being infinitely intricate. I cannot deny consciousness in the universe.

Therefore I have no reason to think the extra universal reality is conscious.

[Outrider]

Translated: I can't know that a consciousness is not necessary,

Or, conversely, that it is.

I cannot deny having suggested the extra universal reality as an intricate and infinite machine means I have no logical warrant to say....''this sophisticated and no more''.

On the contrary, I showed why Ockham's Razor justifies warrants that.

I cannot deny the probability of an infinite machine being infinitely intricate.

I don't need to.

I cannot deny consciousness in the universe.

Why would I want to?

Therefore I have no reason to think the extra universal reality is conscious.

You arrived at an appropriate conclusion, but you've made a right balls-up of the route.

O.