From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Fri Jan 25 2002 - 17:48:12 MST
On 25 Jan 2002 at 18:30, Walter Watts wrote:
> Just wanted Joe Dees to know;
>
> I have kept this wonderful summation in my billfold for some time now for easy
> reference.
>
> Thanks, Joe.
>
> Walter
>
If you'll check, you'll find that it isn't exactly the same one; I did it from
memory.
>
> joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
>
> > On 25 Jan 2002 at 8:16, David Hill wrote:
> >
> > I will do this one more time:
> > The classical attributes of a deity are singularity ("there can only be
> > one") omnicience (all-knowing), omnipotence (all-powerful),
> > omnipresence ('(S)He's everywhere!"), omnibeneficence (all-good), and
> > omnisoothience (all-true). One can immediately see that the attributes
> > of omniscience and omnipotence cannot simultaneously inhere in a
> > single universe. If a deity were omniscient (knew everything), then it
> > would know the future and thus be powerless to change it, but if it were
> > omnipotent (all-powerful), then it could change the future, and therefore
> > could not know it for certain. It's like the simultaneous impossibility of
> > an irresistable force and an immoveable object; if one of these two
> > deific properties exists (and they are considered to be the most
> > important two), then the other logically cannot.
> > Furthermore, If deity were everywhere, it could perceive nothing, for
> > perception requires a point of view, that is, a spatiotemporal
> > perspective other than that of the perceived object from which to
> > perceive that object. Deity being omnipresent (everywhere), there is
> > nowhere that deity would not be, thus nothing it could perceive.
> > It gets even worse. Deity must be perfect; in fact, perfection is what is
> > broken down into all those 'omni' subcategories. thus, a perfect deity
> > could not even think. Thought is dynamic, that is, to think, one's
> > thought must move between conceptions. Now, thought could
> > conceiveably move in three directions; from perfect to imperfect, from
> > imperfect to perfect, and from imperfect to imperfect (from perfect to
> > perfect is not an alternative, perfection being singular and movement
> > requiring distinguishable prior and posterior). But all of the three
> > possible alternatives contain either prior or posterior imperfection or
> > both, which are not allowably entertained in the mind of a perfect deity.
> >
> > There's much, much more that I could add, but this should more than
> > suffice to demonstrate that asserting the existence of a deity
> > possessing the attributes that most consider essential to it deserving
> > the deific appelation mires one in a miasmic quagmire of irretrieveable
> > contradiction, once one journeys beyond emotion-driven faith and uses
> > one's noggin to divine (Luvzda pun!) the nonsensical and absurd
> > consequences necessarily entailed.
> > >
> > > Show the proposition to be false or accept its possibility.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf
> > > Of Nicholas Johns
> > > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 7:32 AM
> > > To: virus@lucifer.com
> > > Subject: RE: virus: Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 22:02:51 -0700
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > With the advancement of computing power comes the revival of the solipsist.
> > >
> > > I know nothing, yet I believe I know everything.
> > >
> > > >From: "David Hill" <dhill@spee-dee.com>
> > > >Reply-To: virus@lucifer.com
> > > >To: <virus@lucifer.com>
> > > >Subject: RE: virus: Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 22:02:51 -0700
> > > >Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 07:17:57 -0600
> > > >
> > > >Y'all still seem disinterested in the proposition that all the carefully
> > > >crafted arguments on Truth, beauty and God are moot simply if they are
> > > >wrong. And we can't tell whether they are or not because we can only trust
> > > >in experience or faith (Faith: the inability to consider the proposition
> > > >that you may be wrong) and we can't trust in those either.
> > > >
> > > >I personally cannot discount the possibility that one morning I will wake
> > > >up
> > > >and find writ large over the morning sky:
> > > >
> > > >"GAME OVER PLEASE INSERT ANOTHER KRASNIKL"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >"Any sufficiently elaborate simulation is indistinguishable from reality"
> > > ><ME>
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf
> > > >Of
> > > >David McFadzean
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:07 PM
> > > > To: virus@lucifer.com
> > > > Subject: virus: Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 22:02:51 -0700
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Approved: intermix
> > > > Message-ID: <009f01c1a546$725d5ea0$6d8414d8@therion>
> > > > From: "Sehkenenra" <Sehkenenra@netzero.net>
> > > > To: <virus@lucifer.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: virus: Kirk: Standing my ground
> > > > Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:17:30 -0800
> > > > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > > > Content-Type: text/plain;
> > > > charset="iso-8859-1"
> > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > > X-Priority: 3
> > > > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> > > > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
> > > > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
> > > > [David Hill]
> > > >
> > > > David Hill] <SNIP>
> > > > Again, the problem is all in the semantics.
> > > >
> > > > -Nicq MacDonald
> > > >
> > > > "For centuries our race has built on false assumptions. If you build a
> > > > fantasy based on a false assumption and continue to build on such a
> > > >fantasy,
> > > > your whole existence becomes a lie which you implant in others who are
> > > >too
> > > > lazy or too busy to question it's truth." - Renark von Bek, The Sundered
> > > > Worlds (Michael Moorcock)
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> > > http://www.hotmail.com
> > >
> > >
>
> --
>
> Walter Watts
> Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
>
> "To err is human. To really screw things up requires a bare-naked command line and
> a wildcard operator."
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:41 MDT