Runboard.com
Слава Україні!

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6 

 
Courtney Dickson Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


12/11/2018, 4:22 pm Link to this post PM Courtney Dickson Blog
 
spud100 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


@Ex
"Probably terrifying. You would be confronting God and would therefore have to confront the truth of how utterly puny and insignificant you are."

You don't feel we know this already?

@Spike,
I'm not surprised at your success, but your method has been known before. Look!

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/do-our-questions-create-the-world/


Image

Basically, Wheeler (a Nobelist) said that the universe is like the game 21 questions. If you go through a yes/no response to each question, you wind up with a specific result. Had you asked a different set of question, you'd wind up with another result.
12/12/2018, 9:56 am Link to this post PM spud100 Blog
 
Courtney Dickson Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


The good news is we are going to get some help and answers soon with agi and sai with in ten years. God is here with us now but is letting things unfold. I recommend that you ask God to enter your life and be with you so you can enter the singularity with a sound mind and a good friend. God wants us to love each other and his creations.
12/12/2018, 10:34 pm Link to this post PM Courtney Dickson Blog
 
Extropia DaSilva Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


>Eventually, we will develop a mathematical proof that God exists.<

What use would that be? You already believe that there is a God so a theorem that also says there is a god does nothing to change your mind.

As for people like myself, who think there probably is no God, a new mathematical proof saying we are wrong to question the existence of God would have the same issue as the last mathematical proof claiming to demonstrate God’s existence.

I am talking about the theological debate held at the court of Catherine the Great. There, the French philosopher and atheist Denis Diderot encountered one of the greatest mathematicians ever to have lived- Leonard Euler. Euler was there on bequest of Catherine to defend her belief in the existence of God against Diderot’s atheism. Euler stood before the audience and said:

“A plus Bn divided by N equals X, hence God exists, reply!”.

Diderot had no answer to that, and neither do I. I suspect it is just gibberish algebra but I cannot prove this to be the case because my mathematical abilities are just not up to it. Any mathematical ‘proof’ would have the same problem. To me it it would just be a load of impenetrable technical jargon I don’t understand. There is no way you could quote a bunch of Greek symbols mathematical operations and at the end of what is (to me) utter gibberish I ‘see the light’ and exclaim ‘ah yes, when you carried the two my doubt was removed and I could see there is a God!’.

Equations describing the material world are different, because these can lead to technological capabilities that make a measurable difference to human ability. I may not be smart enough to be able to read and understand Newton’s laws of motion but since people who do understand it can use it to successfully put probes in orbit and land robots on alien worlds I take it from these feats that such equations are useful. Maxwell’s equations for electromagnetism are, to me, as gibberish as Euler’s proof of God but since working with such equations has enabled engineers to build countless useful products I can accept the validity of those equations.

If mathematical proof of God can result in us acquiring new abilities and making things we could not make before, then it could well persuade me. But if all it does is enable Spiko to say spout gibberish and then claim it is my own ignorant fault if I cannot grasp how this nonsense proves God exists, it would just leave me with the same suspicion that Euler’s equation left me with: that it IS nonsense only I cannot prove so.
12/13/2018, 2:15 am Link to this post PM Extropia DaSilva Blog
 
Spikosauropod Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Parliamentarian

Registered: 06-2007
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


quote:

What use would that be? You already believe that there is a God so a theorem that also says there is a god does nothing to change your mind.


But if such a proof existed and no reputable mathematician disputed it, I could hold it over your head thus: “A plus Bn divided by N equals X, hence God exists, reply!”. That would give me tremendous satisfaction and embolden me to propose the following:

Spike's New Moral Society SNMS-32

SNMS-1: God exists.
SNMS-2: God is both Truth and a necessary consequence of Truth.
SNMS-3: God is omniscient.
SNMS-4: God is omnipotent.
SNMS-5: God is the creator of all that exists (the Universe).
SNMS-6: God is patient, tolerant, and forgiving.
SNMS-7: God created us with immortal souls and free will.
SNMS-8: Love is the perception of another soul as a part of oneself.
SNMS-9: God loves all souls with perfect, infinite love.
SNMS-10: God is omnibeneficient.
SNMS-11: God cannot communicate with us in any way that is statistically verifiable. God can only communicate with us through what appears to be coincidence.
SNMS-12: God guides us and protects us.
SNMS-13: The nature of God is the definition of Good.
SNMS-14: Faith is the belief that God exists as previously described. Faith is not about kowtowing to God or being rewarded for our good works; it is about believing in more than the material universe. Faith is not about believing that we will get what we want or think we need in this lifetime; it is about believing that we will ultimately get what we actually need.
SNMS-15: We may speak to God whenever we like and talk of whatever we please. This speech is often called “prayer”. God requires no such speech, but he welcomes it. Prayer should be commenced by addressing, “God.” Prayer should be concluded by saying, “Amen.”
SNMS-16: We should depend on God but not live as though we are dependent on God. To practice dependence on God is to repudiate free will.
SNMS-17: Belief in God should be implicit rather than explicit in our actions. Our faith should be practiced rather than professed.
SNMS-18: The behavior we exhibit toward others and the behavior we hope to experience from others should be consistent.
SNMS-19: We should strive to live and prosper and to help others live and prosper.
SNMS-20: We should strive to be like God. In this manner we effect Good.
SNMS-21: God’s methods and purposes are difficult for us to comprehend, but we are to assume that our choices and actions have meaning and value.
SNMS-22: The hardships persons experience are part of God’s plan for our completion. We should assume they are essential, even when they do not seem to make sense.
SNMS-23: God cares for us in this life and God will care for us in the time after this life. We should not neglect this life, or ignore the time after this life, but live in harmony with both.
SNMS-24: Humans will not be generated from modified or artificially constructed genetic material. They will always be the product of the joining of a natural male sperm with a natural female egg.
SNMS-25: During a person’s early morphology, their growth will be carefully monitored and controlled to ensure that they are delivered as a well-defined physical male or a well-defined physical female with an erotic compass oriented to their well-defined physical gender.
SNMS-26: Humans will remain human. They will not undergo extreme modifications of their minds or bodies. They will not migrate away from their natural biological basis.
SNMS-27: No brain altering protocol will be developed or disseminated that induces a modification of human will.
SNMS-28: Reality will be kept dignified and austere. Erotic impulses may be indulged only in virtual reality.
SNMS-29: Erotic impulses may be indulged in their most extravagant and lascivious forms in virtual environments where no others need be affected.
SNMS-30: In public, citizens will wear unprovocative clothing that does not emphasize their natural form and that covers their shoulders and the rest of their body from the bottom of their manubrium to the top of their ankles.
SNMS-31: The appearance and behavior of complex creatures may be simulated in virtual environments, but not the creatures themselves.
SNMS-32: Synthetic intelligence will neither be recognized as sentient nor afforded associated rights.

I take it you do not dispute the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. Do you understand the proof or do you know what value there is in knowing it has been proven?
12/13/2018, 1:56 pm Link to this post PM Spikosauropod
 
Extropia DaSilva Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


Ok fair enough, if there is general consensus among reputable mathematicians I could not argue against that.

But establishing logical proof of the existence of God does not tell us much about what that God is like. It would not prove that the root of all creation in any way confirms to your long list of ‘attributes I would like god to have’.

If there is a god it can only be one so indifferent to suffering that praying to it is a waste of time. The evidence rules out a benevolent, interventionist God. On this point my mind is completely made up and so much of your list is nonsense to me.
12/14/2018, 1:33 am Link to this post PM Extropia DaSilva Blog
 
Spikosauropod Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Parliamentarian

Registered: 06-2007
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


SNMS-22: The hardships persons experience are part of God’s plan for our completion. We should assume they are essential, even when they do not seem to make sense.

There is an indisputable wisdom to my "attributes I would like God to have".

Like I have explained elsewhere, I assume that God is rational. If God is rational, it would make sense for him to create "parts" for his machine that work together. This would seem to include creatures with an affinity for the truth.

However, there is another way to look at the problem. God made us to be rational compassionate agents. It would be difficult to create something like that without having an appreciation for it. It is difficult to believe that God would make creatures that, from our perspective, are superior to himself. Do you disagree that being rational and compassionate is superior to the apparent alternative? Would you make creatures that were designed to suffer for no reason whatsoever?

I realize that my argument is not airtight, but it is "reasonable".
12/14/2018, 1:50 am Link to this post PM Spikosauropod
 
Extropia DaSilva Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


Suffering can be justified and there is no need to invoke something as improbable as God. Evolution will do just fine.

Why must we feel pain? Well, if you look at the damage people who cannot feel pain unknowingly inflict upon themselves you can appreciate what selective advantage there is in having evolved the ability to sense injury. This does unforunately mean that sometimes animals suffer. Being eaten alive by predators is undoubtedly a horrific experience and such victims are suffering.

Now in evolution !@#$ happens. There are all kinds of game strategies in play in the natural world and some have very brutish outcomes. When wolves disembowell their prey while the poor suffering animal is alive they are not being sadists they are just being wolves, doing what works for them in their environmental niche.

However, a God that designed wolves to torture their prey to death rather than ending their life with a swift coup de gras to the neck once caught (got you, bite! Dead) would be a sadistic God. Since wolves are like that and there are countless other examples of horrific suffering that would not exist were the world designed by a kind and rational being, we must conclude creation was driven by something other than your god.

Something like evolution by natural selection would certainly be compatible with the world we have. Which is not surprising given it is fact.
12/14/2018, 5:13 am Link to this post PM Extropia DaSilva Blog
 
Spikosauropod Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Parliamentarian

Registered: 06-2007
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?


quote:

Being eaten alive by predators is undoubtedly a horrific experience and such victims are suffering


OK, so let's start there. How do you know it is a horrific experience? Have you been predated by wolves recently?
12/14/2018, 10:31 am Link to this post PM Spikosauropod
 
Courtney Dickson Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2017
Reply | Quote
Re: What are the rules of Heaven and Hell?




Maybe we are the enablers of sufferings end. We all know by now that SAI is coming and scientifically achievable. What would SAI do about all the animal suffering once it saves us? Would it find nature beautiful as it is like most people see it or would it make and raise all creatures to new and different ways to live?
12/14/2018, 10:51 pm Link to this post PM Courtney Dickson Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6 





You are not logged in (login)
Back To Top