Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Considering The Existence of Gawd ( Tangentally )

On The Analysis of ‘Arguments for The Existence of Gawd’
Or The Lesser Position :
An Irrefutable Proof for A Transcendental Reality.

My own position is that The Lesser Argument is Trivially Proven by Consciousness alone.

If you’d like to add Heretical Questions like;
‘What is Gravity & ElectroMagnetism’
May be thrown in for good measure.

i think it is very curious that many physicists & certainly most pedestrians believe that gravity & electromagnetism -have- been thoroughly explained,
But actually; They’ve only been labeled & described.
That is hardly The same as understanding their underlying principles.
You can label your household pet as a dog, & keep voluminous diaries of it’s behaviour, but this doesn’t begin to scratch The surface of why it works.
i find it deeply laughable when physicists explain away gravity as The Bending of Space-Time. ( What Gibberish! )

And why would simply bending something cause a planet or pebble to flow in a preferred direction. The ‘Definitive’ Demonstrative Model for gravity is A Funnel with which balls roll along parabolic arc to a hole in The Bottom, But this ‘Explanation’ of Gravity, Requires Gravity to make it functional!
Without Gravity to Pull The Balls downward, they would just sit placidly on The Surface of The Funnel.
Also : Such a ‘Field’ Explanation has to then explain why Magnets both push & pull themselves. How or Why would ‘Exchanging Particles’ possibly account for this?
i fully expect a devastating Revolution in Physics to occur in The Next 2
0 years, in which Absolutely Everything that Physicists & Chemists thought that they Knew, will be thrown out & replaced with Entirely New, Equally Dysfunctional Theories.
Thereafter; The Arguments for this Lesser Position,
Of a Transcendental Reality become philosophically Subtle.
Is Reality Impossible?
It’s not enough that Reality doesn’t make a lick of Sense;
This Direction of Reasoning is required to show that for our perception of reality to exist, Impossible things would be required.
How can Light Work? How many Photons are required to form a given image?
Why don’t all these light ‘waves’ interfere with one another?
But they do, The Physicist Say! But No
i mean; A Room in filled with photons as light waves fill a room, how is it that we can see things so clearly?
And how does a Mirror Work?
Do The Photons Bounce off Atoms?

No. The Theory is ( ? ) :
The Photons enter The Mirror, Are ‘Absorbed’ by The Electrons in The Glass’s Atoms ( Various Silicates ) And are then Thrown off in A Completely Random Direction ( ! ) And somehow ( ? ) The Intermixing ‘Waveforms’ Recreate The ‘Correct’ Reflective Image ( ? ) !

Are we living in A Universe that is So Cruel;
It allows us to be Aware that we Are Robots?

Given that this ‘Consciousness’ problem is so very intractable, isn’t it more reasonable to believe that there are very few examples of it, perhaps only one genuinely conscious entity in The Universe?
Is there A Universal Goodness?
Something Good for Everyone, & Everything?
Is Evil merely whatever contradicts my Agenda?
How much Strangeness constitutes A Normal Amount of Strangeness?
Strangeness here means: Statistically Improbable Events.
When Strangeness Exceeds this amount; Is that also Expected?
How Much Strangeness is Required to Constitute; Inexplicable Strangeness?

Logically; No amount of Strangeness is Really Strange. Given that Strangeness is Expected in Ordinary Affairs, It might reasonably be seen as a Bell Curve, In which at Either End of This Curve, There is No Strangeness & Horrific Oceans of Strangeness; These Extremiums are in Fact; Expected.
The Only True Test of Strangeness is Demonstrating that A Single Well Defined Event was Completely Impossible. Such as The Apollo Program of The
1960s, or The Events Surrounding 911 in 2001.
When Impossible Things happen, they’re not really strange at all;
Rather; They’re merely Annoying.
When Analyzing or finding criticism with Common &/or Popular Arguments for Gawd; One will usually find that they are Trite in their misuse of common sense, simple syllogisms or accepted factoids of reality.

So there’s The Challenge.
Take each of These flawed Arguments & ‘Tighten Them Up’ to Make them Functionally Irrefutable.
The Real Challenge is to Take The ‘Lost Cause’ Arguments & Work them up into something Respectable.

Granted; Many of these ‘Worst’ ‘Arguments’ are so awful that there’s nothing there to spread on a dry slice of toast; But persist in their popular appeal for this or that reason(s. Young Fundamentalist Christians Particularly love ‘Catchy’ arguments that they believe are Logically Sound, but are paltry in their Essential Principles.
Can Gawd Create a Stone so Big that he can’t Move it?

This obviously assumes that Gawd has attributes which would, or should, enable s’he/it to make anything they’d like to, merely by speaking; Such as ‘Let there be Light’ or Bringing forth Life by blowing on it

Along The Ability to Do Anything Imaginable or UnImaginable.
This Argument seems to ‘Prove’ that Gawd must Exit; As s’he/it would be able to do both; Violating The Underlying Principle of Exclusive Properties.
The Logician will insist that you can have Either an Immovable Object Or An Irresistible Force, but Not Both. Either One Excludes The Existence of The Other.
But The Teenage Christians Reply; Exactly! And that is Why Gawd Must Exits!
No Ordinary Man or Featherless Parakeet would be able to do Both.

So how can A Reasonable Traffic Cone bend this Argument to convince a Larger Audience?

No comments: