At this point god existing is a 50/50 change.

[reptiles]

The cosmological argument mainly say's that which acts has potent ency until it is actualized by another entity mainly a good example a cup of coffee has potential to go from potentially hot to actually hot it in itself was not always hot without first being in some potency.

We can use this for everything that exists not just back into the infinite past or infinite potent future but here and know and we have everything going from potency to actuality till we start going down in a vertical chain till we get logically to a first point or else you are getting infinite amounts of causes from something inside potent-ency and actuality until eventually you get infinite regress know while mathematical infinities are possible actual infinities are impossible in thought infinity as a concept means it's so big it has no identity so infinite regress is out.

To stop this vicious cycle we must have a being a unmoved actualizer who is not contingent within the set of potency and actuality who is already actualized by nothing he just is a monad that which exists but it not contained or made by anything.

The main issue here this argument is assuming we live in a linear eternal universe or finite universe doesn't really matter it is under the assumption the past no longer exists it has been it is passed the future is mere potential rather than actual even if it is determined it is still in a state of potentiality. This is the block a model of time for reference.

The problem arises here if block b model of time is true this would mean the past present and even the future already exist and that the illusion of know is no longer true and time is simultaneous it is happening know back into the infinite past and into the infinite comptaibalist future the future then is no longer potent-ency and potentiality but rather the future is moving onto the present the present is moving onto the past and the past is moving onto the future.

At this stage their would be no potency or actuality as again the future exists simultaneously with the present so all potent-ency goes out the window everything is know an actual the reason we have potentency is cause of the conception of the future being purely potential rather than purely existing know.

So if this theory exists it's a death blow to any religion so it's really a coin toss weather god exists or not really depends on weather or not reality makes sense if we can truly trust reality or if it is a unintelligible mess again only time and evidence will tell.

 

[GenericChad1444]

not a single fucking word

 

[Jack Black]

 

[Petsmart]

 

[Deleted member 206]

i tried ngl but too low iq

 

[reptiles]

i tried ngl but too low iq

I even tried to simplify the language tbh

 

[BrettyBoy]

not a single fucking word

XD

 

[Antinous]

reality varies from one to another; everything is perspective whose driving force is the will to power; Infinity is incomprehensible to many, this is common; on related theories, not merely in a metaphorical and poetic sense but also ontological, the Eternal Return is the most intriguing and appreciable; furthermore, Nietzsche's own perspectivism "kills" any form of classical metaphysics such as Platonic, which some critical philosophers regard as "dogmatic"; But to this topic Nietzsche prefers to criticize Plato not for the sake of true or false, for they are submerged and not given at all, but for valuation issues, such as ethics and the ways of apprehending life.

 

[reptiles]

reality varies from one to another; everything is perspective whose driving force is the will to power; Infinity is incomprehensible to many, this is common; on related theories, not merely in a metaphorical and poetic sense but also ontological, the Eternal Return is the most intriguing and appreciable; furthermore, Nietzsche's own perspectivism "kills" any form of classical metaphysics such as Platonic, which some critical philosophers regard as "dogmatic"; But to this topic Nietzsche prefers to criticize Plato not for the sake of true or false, for they are submerged and not given at all, but for valuation issues, such as ethics and the ways of apprehending life.

reality varies from one to another; everything is perspective whose driving force is the will to power


I disagree reality is independent of mind mind can change his own reality not onto-logically in the sense of changing his whole exsistance but rather a mental image of himself the will to power helps only in relation to you and your mind it has no ontological effect on material reality unless your claiming mind constructs reality which i disagree with.


Infinity is incomprehensible to many, this is common; on related theories, not merely in a metaphorical and poetic sense but also ontological,

True but i am tempted to go full Aristotle here and just say infinity cannot exist as exsistance is identity what's fucking with my head here is the b theory of the eternal universe it doesn't just say that past and future can go into eternity but instead the very concept of past present and future exist eternally so they are all determined and their is no cause and effect in the sense of a Aristotelian universe it's more their is no longer potential as potential is only possible in a non actualized future that means if this model is true everthing at the start point was self caused which makes no sense.

the Eternal Return is the most intriguing and appreciable; furthermore, Nietzsche's own perspectivism "kills" any form of classical metaphysics such as Platonic, which some critical philosophers regard as "dogmatic";

Eternal return (also known as eternal recurrence) is a theory that the universe and all existence and energy has been recurring, and will continue to recur, in a self-similar form an infinite number of times across infinite time or space.

If this is the theory this i can work with this still works with the cosmological argument as it is concerned with the relation of potential to a actual what fucks with the cosmological argument is if the block universe b theory is true then the past present and future is already determined their is no longer potential in anything as potential is just a logical conclusion of a non determined that's what fucks with this argument.

; But to this topic Nietzsche prefers to criticize Plato not for the sake of true or false, for they are submerged and not given at all, but for valuation issues, such as ethics and the ways of apprehending life.

I'm not interested in ethics tbh i'm more into the ontology and metaphysics idea's but tbh your idea can work with my idea the block b theory fucks with all logic

 

[Antinous]

I'm not interested in ethics tbh i'm more into the ontology and metaphysics idea's but tbh your idea can work with my idea the block b theory fucks with all logic

I have only talked about the eternal return to say that it is appreciable and that I agree with it, I do not intend to "refute" or counter-argue with you, nor do I debate: I have been writing, apart from that, long essays on the Will to Power and her relationship with Nietzsche's perspectivism; what you said about reality apart from perspective, that it exists beyond that, I meant that perspective is the Willpower-based interpretation of reality, and any belief system and concept or valuation, whether moral, ethical, religion, any valuations of any kind is based in that, all is effectuation and power; only that
But I am not interested in metaphysics, so this is something else for you to appreciate and elaborate for yourself; the only metaphysics I have as a worldview is that of the will to power and perspectivism as well as eternal return, and these may be mere metaphors and maxims used by Nietzsche, because he also seems not to be interested in metaphysics, anyway.

 

[Deleted member 1774]

 

[reptiles]

love this one tbh mogs the other 2

 

[Deleted member 1774]

View attachment 104551 love this one tbh mogs the other 2

ikr, also dont see it as disrespect i like your content but yeah DIDNT READ

 

[reptiles]

ikr, also dont see it as disrespect i like your content but yeah DIDNT READ

JFL

I have only talked about the eternal return to say that it is appreciable and that I agree with it, I do not intend to "refute" or counter-argue with you, nor do I debate: I have been writing, apart from that, long essays on the Will to Power and her relationship with Nietzsche's perspectivism; what you said about reality apart from perspective, that it exists beyond that, I meant that perspective is the Willpower-based interpretation of reality, and any belief system and concept or valuation, whether moral, ethical, religion, any valuations of any kind is based in that, all is effectuation and power; only that
But I am not interested in metaphysics, so this is something else for you to appreciate and elaborate for yourself; the only metaphysics I have as a worldview is that of the will to power and perspectivism as well as eternal return, and these may be mere metaphors and maxims used by Nietzsche, because he also seems not to be interested in metaphysics, anyway.

I have only talked about the eternal return to say that it is appreciable and that I agree with it, I do not intend to "refute" or counter-argue with you, nor do I debate: I have been writing, apart from that, long essays on the Will to Power and her relationship with Nietzsche's perspectivism; what you said about reality apart from perspective, that it exists beyond that, I meant that perspective is the Willpower-based interpretation of reality, and any belief system and concept or valuation, whether moral, ethical, religion, any valuations of any kind is based in that, all is effectuation and power; only that


Oh fair enough yeah it works fine with the cosmological argument the argument is just concerned with the conception of potential to actual we deduce the rest for the argument to work here and know if it ends up being a infinite eternal or even finite universe doesn't change a god damn thing god here in this view is just a unmoved mover a pure act as for religion ethics morals does not interest me tbh it is what it is that maybe your field i'm more interested in metaphysics and the exsistance of purpose and truth rather than morals and other stuff like that.

But I am not interested in metaphysics, so this is something else for you to appreciate and elaborate for yourself; the only metaphysics I have as a worldview is that of the will to power and perspectivism as well as eternal return, and these may be mere metaphors and maxims used by Nietzsche, because he also seems not to be interested in metaphysics, anyway.


Fair enough again this argument is just for a uncaused cause not for anything like morals ethics that's separate