h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Seems that JtP posted something four days ago!

The bottom of his page says;
Justin the Preacher hasn't added any friends to their list.
Can't think why.

Restrain yourself from wading in and growling at him, everyone. I want to see if we can keep him this time.
Moth - of course he isn't an AI (no AI could be sophisticated enough to quote random chapters of the Bible over and again and then repeat a set amount of similar-looking fanatical rhetoric and add "You will all burn except me" on the end - could it?!) but sometimes it seems like Hoo or someone playing a joke. But I guess that's a bit unlikely. Anyhow, I welcomed him back. Hope he hangs around, poor fellow.

Not going anywhere near it.

After all, once you've hard one run in with JtP all that follows is just the same. I think it was Hoo but don't spread the rumour in case I'm wrong!

Ah, I think I capitalized Creation, referring to God creating the universe and everything in it et cetera.

Well, there's no reason why you shouldn't believe in an always-existing universe with no creation.
Moth - I actually feel sorry for him. I've always tried to mingle polite and forgiving comments with bitingly sarcastic overtones. Hasn't worked, of course, but he's still as entertaining as ever.
I tell ya, if people like Justin are in Heaven, I'm *glad* I'm going to toasty-warm Hell...

Steve the programmer was Hoo. He admitted it.

Noggin

I know, but it's like this argument:

"What caused the Big Bang?"
"What caused God?" (that's me, seeing where this is going)
"Oh nothing caused God, he's just always been there."
"Fine then, nothing caused the Universe, it's just allways been there."
"Oh but everything has a cause."
"Then what caused God?"
"Nothing, I already told you, he doesn't have a cause."

Et cetera.

I don't want to start down the route of the Universe being always existing, with no cause because you can exchange "Universe" with "god" and get exactly the opposite of what I believe. Using the same sort of logic. Do you see?

I know, Roadkill, it is TERRIBLY annoying. I made that point on te God? a few days ago, about the cause-and-effect argument. I think the theists responded with "He's God. I don't care what you say."
Noggin, do you have the number for Steve the Programmer's page?

Ah, I must have missed that.

Anyway in a few weeks I thould think my outlook on cause and effect will get a complete makeove - reading Hume, you see.

U197974

Ah, Hume. I'm reading Wittgenstein, and I've decided I don't like him. Denouncing philosophy using philosophy. Pah. But I do like his observations of language.
By the way, I reccomend that everyone here reads "Prometheus Rising" by Robert Anton Wilson. Guaranteed to change your mind.

I had a look, Mal, but I couldn't find it. There are so many "Steve"s I caouldn't be bothered to try them. Hoo may have deleted it in any case.

Hume pointed out that you can't observe cause and effect. Kant pointed out that cause and effect (connection according to a rule) is a principle of the understanding, and a feature of the phenomenal universe only. Noggin the Nog pointed out that if you reject solipsism what's out there must be connected to what we perceive by some rule. QM throws everything back in the mix.

Noggin

Don't like Wittgenstein?????

Which book are you reading?

Noggin

Ah, I love QM. No, I like Wittgenstein, I just don't like the basic idea of where he philosophises about the uselessness of philosophy. But I'm reading the Tractatus, currently, and am then going to move on to the one whos name escapes me, after I finish John Stuart Mill.
Didja ever see a more educated sixteen year old?
Don't worry about the link, Roadkill posted it just above.

His philosophy changed quite a bit after the Tractatus (which I've never actually read). The other one is "Philosophical Investigations", although I found "the Blue Book" more helpful. I want to read "On Certainty", too.

He *is* difficult to understand. Most of his stuff takes a few years to sink in.

Noggin

JtP is currently online. But since he's on premod there's nothing to see yet.

Noggin

Roadkill;
imagine;
There's this huge immaterial 'entity' (any offers on a better word?) who creates matter from itself (there is nothing else).
once matter is established we have time , space, and the causal effects. Because we 'exist' in the causal there has to be a first cause, a singularity (whatever you decide that is).

What we are 'searching for' is first cause. The way time and the universe runs; linear, chronological, subject to change, implies a 'begining'. We exist in the finite. We are finite creatures in a finite world in a finite universe. This discounts the 'always been' universe for me.
The creating entity exists outside and inside the world of matter.
it is not an entity that has an requirements or needs. Because we and the Universe are 'made' of the substance of this creator entity, we are also it. Our very atomic construction is made of it, in the same way we are physically made of star substance.
The creator entity is not subject to the laws of cause and effect,= time, change, space. We exist to experience life in all of its diversity. We exist in this apparent theatre of the absurd, so as to own the experience.

You know, the Gnostics and a few others had an interesting idea about this. The creator-entity is perfect and good and made it all and then retired to the higher dimensions (possibly from stress ), and the one who's running round here, the one the Christians worship, is Samael, a mad and blind and angry "god", who's barely a god at all, and insane.

I'm not so sure about the perfect and good entity, since both are perceptions we have.

Samael,must be the 'devil' figure which mankind always has to conjour up to excuse manmade errors and natural catastophe.
All religions seem to personify the singularity and that leads to attributes I don't believe it posess.
I think that may be the biggest lie of all

Ah well my general attitude is generally that it's all wishful thinking, philosophically developed.