Can my God beat your God?

[prana]

I think a hypothesis does not become a theory unless it is 'repeatable'.

ok, who's volunteering ?

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Serpent
Which I won't do.

That's fine. I've said all along it requires argument by foundation; not that it's required by anyone subscribing to logic of any sort.

How does that compare to particle wave. I may not be able to see the particles or waves of light, but I can see it's presence or it's absence quite clearly.

Both are argument by foundation. You seem to believe in particles, even though you can't detect their presence nor absence. How come? Could you convince me to believe int hem?

I can never experience the presence or absence of a god.

Go have your temporal lobe radiated with low frequency microwaves some day. Good times.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by prana
I think a hypothesis does not become a theory unless it is 'repeatable'.

No, they are entirely different things.

A theory is a model... you can pull one out of your ass if you like.

A hypothesis is something which a theory predicts.

You don't test theories, you test hypotheses. If a theory's hypotheses test positive, you tend to accept the theory.

It's the hypothesis testing which is repeatable or not. If it's not repeatable, you consider flaws in your testing methodology; and the previous results are typically rejected.

... a "law" is generally something which is assumed which underlies the rest of your reasoning (eg. laws of thermodynamics; see 'argument by foundation').

[prana]

doh ! I should just go back to school

Theory :
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena

Hypothesis :
A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.
Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption.

I suppose, the colloquial meaning of theory is different from a scientific theory, in the context you folks are speakin ? OK I give up, English truly is crapping me out !

[Christopher M]

We have to distinguish between colloquial definitions and the terms as used by philosophy. I assumed we meant the latter.

Haha, english isn't your first language? Oh man... don't bother with it then!

[Serpent]

Originally posted by Christopher M
Both are argument by foundation. You seem to believe in particles, even though you can't detect their presence nor absence. How come? Could you convince me to believe int hem?

I believe in the currently espoused particle theory to a degree but my personal beliefs don't quite match up with science. However, it's apersonal theory with no factual backing so I won't try to impose it on you.

Go have your temporal lobe radiated with low frequency microwaves some day. Good times.

Maybe. But how is that experiencing god?

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Serpent
I believe in the currently espoused particle theory to a degree but my personal beliefs don't quite match up with science.

I don't. And I've yet to hear any model of atomism which isn't inherently flawed (aside from a priori of atomism, which is what currently espoused particle theory does; just like a priori assumption of God). The laws of thermodynamics fare no better, nor does Hubbell's [not] Constant. That's alot of science down the drain once you toss those puppies out.

Frankly, I find atomism to be demonstratably a more silly belief than the existance of God.

However, it's apersonal theory with no factual backing so I won't try to impose it on you.

Sounds like you did your best trying to figure something out, and you're not quite sure, and can't prove it, but it seems right to you. Sounds like how alot of religious people feel about their religious beliefs.

Maybe. But how is that experiencing god?

In the same way that stimulation of one region of your brain gives you "light" qualia, another will give you "mystical" qualia. This is the mechanism for symptoms of disorders like temporal lobe epilepsy.

[ZIM]

In reference to the question concerning Zoroasterianism: I just got through reading IN SEARCH OF ZARATHUSTRA , so that's why I'm kinda hyped up on it. Good book, if you want background...

[ZIM]

You're commiting the well known heresies of Arianism and polytheism.

You make it sound like Heterodoxy is a bad thing. We've got religious freedom, you know.

Anyway, as for monotheism:

Consider the impasse of a One God Universe. He is all-powerful and all-knowing, but because He can do everything, He can do nothing, since the act of doing demands opposition. He knows everything so there is nothing for him to learn. He can't go anywhere since He is already everywhere, like cow**** in Calcutta. The OGU is a pre-recorded universe of which He is the recorder. It's a flat, thermodynamic universe, since it has no friction by definition. So He invents friction and conflict, pain, fear, sickness, famine, war, old age, Death.

Do you think it's a coincidence that the Archangel Gabriel went to Mary and more or less founded Christianity, THEN went to Mohammed and more or less founded Islam? Conflict is what is required! Why do you think that the Godhead is listed as a Trinity? Friction, man, just friction...

And why is that? Because the beings we are pleased to call 'Gods' are really alien entities that thrive off our individual spiritual essences... they need belief and OBEDIENCE, blind faith, etc. IF you DO believe in Them, your best choice to serve Them is to choose to believe in several COMPETING religious beliefs ALL AT ONCE [I personally use a two-week schedule]. This way, I can generate all the energy all the time, all through myself alone...

Right about now, someone is laughing, saying 'oh nice troll'... well, go ahead and LAUGH pink boy! Oh, you'll be laughing when your nostril hairs are burning in the Hereafter.... but I digress...

...anyway, HERESY is COOL.

[@PLUGO]

I still think Kali would chop the Monkey King into tastey bits...

[MasterKiller]

I think ZIM is actually Jenna Elfman here to convert people to Scientology.

You passing out free copies of Dianetics, per chance?

[ZIM]

I think ZIM is actually Jenna Elfman here to convert people to Scientology. You passing out free copies of Dianetics, per chance?

No, but I am a Rocket Scientologist. Diuretics is my book of choice.

[Christopher M]

ZIM - ultimately there is one thing that exists. What other option is there? Dualism is a non-starter.

You've got it all wrong though... all the strife is caused by the Demiurge. Angels? Bah. Archons.

[@PLUGO]

Archons!?!?!?

sounds absolutely Gnostic

[Christopher M]

Nah, I meant that greatest of classic arcade games, Archon.