Time doesn't exist

[Chupperson Weird]

Re:PL's post, yeah except Christian doctrine also states that God knows everything that's going to happen.

Re: LD's post though, what about quantum mechanics/parallel universes/timelines and stuff? I guess there can never be any evidence but it always seemed plausible to me that each thing that happens or doesn't happen spawns another parallel universe/timeline depending on the outcome.

[Lizard Dude]

LD, you have any books to suggest to catch me up?

I haven't read any astronomy in a few years. All I was trying to point out to PaperLuigi is that it's pretty clear there was a Big Bang. But there's still massive mystery out there! Why is the expansion still accelerating? What's all this dark matter? Why don't relativity and quantum mechanics agree in some cases?

"****ing magnets, how do they work?"
~Shaggy 2 Dope

[Weegee]

LD, your argument makes sense under the premise that humans are soulless, instinctively-driven gutbags. How would you account for decisions which seemingly contradict suvival instinct, though?

[Lizard Dude]

You're using the word "soulless" in a pejorative sense, where I'm not. Just because you're a machine doesn't automatically make you evil, or careless of other life, or perfect. It doesn't make you worthless either. Life is precious and should be respected.

I'm just saying humans aren't magic and don't transcend the laws of physics to "make choices". But our programming does make choices, in a sense. You just don't actually control it. But you think you do. So it doesn't matter, except for discussions like this. It feels the same whether you think you're a robot or magic.

[Turtlekid1]

While I agree that humans will follow their programming, I question whether you really think programming can exist without a programmer.

This is getting into NatDT territory...

[Weegee]

Actually, I meant "soulless" in the technical sense, but I couldn't produce any synonyms which conveyed my point equally accurately. I'll admit that "gutbags" was uncalled-for, though.

Bottom line: We either have actual free will or de facto "free will". What a difference.

This is getting into NatDT territory...

Shouldn't this topic have gone there in the first place?

[Lizard Dude]

Bottom line: We either have actual free will or de facto "free will". What a difference.

The only difference is whether you believe you're magic or not.

[Weegee]

I would object to your use of "magic" as a blanket term for religion and spiritual concepts in general, but I won't for now.

[PaperLuigi]

While I agree that humans will follow their programming, I question whether you really think programming can exist without a programmer.

Well, does a supernatural being lift the sun up every morning?

Also, who or what made the programmer?

[Luigison]

How would you account for decisions which seemingly contradict suvival instinct, though?

You left an "r" out of survival and I think you're using instinct in the wrong way here, but I know what you're asking.  (I make lots of similar mistakes so please don't take this criticism the wrong way.) 

There are lots of natural decisions that seem counterintuitive, but evolution isn't a program with a set outcome.   Rather, mutations happen that may helpful or not depending on other factors.  It may seem counterintuitive and even evil for an animal to kill its offspring, but if resources are scarce it may actually be beneficial in the long run if the animal survives and is later able to reproduce when more resources are available. 

[Weegee]

Once again, that works, but only under the assumption that humans are just sophisticated, highly-developed animals.

Well, does a supernatural being lift the sun up every morning?

Oh come on; you know better than that. You're like a kid who ran away from home and pretends not to know his address.

[Lizard Dude]

Once again, that works, but only under the assumption that humans are just sophisticated, highly-developed animals.

Uhhhhhhhh, as opposed to what?

[Turtlekid1]

Okay, I'll bite.

As opposed to beings created specially in the image of their Creator to rule over and care for their home and its inhabitants.

[PaperLuigi]

Oh come on; you know better than that. You're like a kid who ran away from home and pretends not to know his address.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. My argument is a valid argument. I'm taking a purely naturalistic stance, as the existence of a god who lifts the sun cannot be proven scientifically. Just like we can't prove the existence of a so-called universal programmer. We can, however, verify the rising of the sun via the scientific method. Philosophically, we'll eventually reach a point where we can't explain something, although I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know something without proof.

Also, is anyone going to address my second question?

[Chupperson Weird]

@Turtlekid
Man, too bad we're totally not doing any of that because that actually wouldn't be too bad.