Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Ultimate Question - Why is there something rather than nothing?
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2476 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 181 of 366 (627690)
08-03-2011 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by PaulK
08-03-2011 11:40 AM


Re: Nothing doesn't have states; it is a state.
PaulK writes:
If nothing is not a thing then there is no need for it to exist as such.
Right. So wouldn't "why existence" be a better unanswerable question than the one in the O.P. which seems to imply that nothing could "be"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by PaulK, posted 08-03-2011 11:40 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by PaulK, posted 08-03-2011 1:15 PM bluegenes has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 182 of 366 (627693)
08-03-2011 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by bluegenes
08-03-2011 12:57 PM


Re: Nothing doesn't have states; it is a state.
I'd say that "why existence?" is worse because it is even harder to understand. "Why do things exist?" is better than that. There are two things that tilt me in favour of the original formulation. Firstly, it is explicit about the possibility of nothingness, secondly it is already well-known.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by bluegenes, posted 08-03-2011 12:57 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by bluegenes, posted 08-03-2011 1:36 PM PaulK has replied

frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 183 of 366 (627694)
08-03-2011 1:17 PM


Stephen Hawking writes:
Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.
Stephen Hawking: God did not create the Universe | Daily Mail Online
So there the anwser hy there is something rather then nothing.
Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by bluegenes, posted 08-03-2011 1:38 PM frako has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2476 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 184 of 366 (627697)
08-03-2011 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by PaulK
08-03-2011 1:15 PM


Re: Nothing doesn't have states; it is a state.
I forgot an earlier question you asked about reality, because someone had said something like "nothing would be the state of reality". I'd say that all adjectives, including real, would have to be irrelevant to true nothingness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by PaulK, posted 08-03-2011 1:15 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by PaulK, posted 08-03-2011 1:40 PM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2476 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 185 of 366 (627698)
08-03-2011 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by frako
08-03-2011 1:17 PM


frako quoting Hawkin writes:
Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.
Spontaneous creation is something.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by frako, posted 08-03-2011 1:17 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by frako, posted 08-03-2011 2:36 PM bluegenes has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 186 of 366 (627699)
08-03-2011 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by bluegenes
08-03-2011 1:36 PM


Re: Nothing doesn't have states; it is a state.
Then you cannot consider reality to be a thing. "Reality" would be abstract, akin to " truth".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by bluegenes, posted 08-03-2011 1:36 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by bluegenes, posted 08-04-2011 6:27 AM PaulK has replied

frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 187 of 366 (627707)
08-03-2011 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by bluegenes
08-03-2011 1:38 PM


nope it is nothing until it happens

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by bluegenes, posted 08-03-2011 1:38 PM bluegenes has not replied

Black Cat
Junior Member (Idle past 4613 days)
Posts: 28
From: Canada
Joined: 07-21-2011


Message 188 of 366 (627741)
08-03-2011 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by Panda
08-02-2011 11:28 AM


Panda writes:
I didn't claim that he did intend to quote Dawkins diectly.
Panda writes:
Doctor Craig claims he was quoting directly.
Edited by Black Cat, : No reason given.
Edited by Black Cat, : No reason given.
Edited by Black Cat, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Panda, posted 08-02-2011 11:28 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by Panda, posted 08-03-2011 8:30 PM Black Cat has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 189 of 366 (627752)
08-03-2011 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Black Cat
08-03-2011 6:55 PM


Panda writes:
I didn't claim that he did intend to quote Dawkins directly.
This is a statement about the intentions of Dr. Craig. You can see this from the use of the word 'intend'.
Panda writes:
Doctor Craig claims he was quoting directly.
This is a statement about what Dr. Craig actually did.
-
It is no surprise that you think that Dr. Craig's summary of Dawkin's list is accurate: your grasp of English is not good enough to know any better.
I also notice that you have been unable to argue against Dr. A's detailed description of some of Dr. Craig's deceit (Message 161).
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 6:55 PM Black Cat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 8:47 PM Panda has replied

Black Cat
Junior Member (Idle past 4613 days)
Posts: 28
From: Canada
Joined: 07-21-2011


Message 190 of 366 (627753)
08-03-2011 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by Panda
08-03-2011 8:30 PM


Panda writes:
Doctor Craig claims he was quoting directly.
Panda writes:
This is a statement about what Dr. Craig actually did.
Since Dr. Craig actually did claim he was quoting directly, can you please show me where that is?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by Panda, posted 08-03-2011 8:30 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Panda, posted 08-03-2011 9:02 PM Black Cat has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 191 of 366 (627754)
08-03-2011 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Black Cat
08-03-2011 8:47 PM


Black Cat writes:
Since Dr. Craig actually did claim he was quoting directly, can you please show me where that is?
Message 151
As Dr. A showed (in Message 161), Dr. Craig also acted as if he had quoted directly.
Any ambiguity you try to claim exists in Dr. Craig's opening sentence is removed by his actions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 8:47 PM Black Cat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 9:12 PM Panda has replied

Black Cat
Junior Member (Idle past 4613 days)
Posts: 28
From: Canada
Joined: 07-21-2011


Message 192 of 366 (627755)
08-03-2011 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by Panda
08-03-2011 9:02 PM


Panda writes:
As Dr. A showed (in Message 161), Dr. Craig also acted as if he had quoted directly.
We aren't discussing whether he acted as if he had quoted directly. We are discussing whether he did actually claim he was quoting directly.
Again I'll ask, where did Dr. Craig actually claim he was quoting directly?
Edited by Black Cat, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Panda, posted 08-03-2011 9:02 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Panda, posted 08-03-2011 9:32 PM Black Cat has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 193 of 366 (627756)
08-03-2011 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by Black Cat
08-03-2011 9:12 PM


Black Cat writes:
Again I'll ask, where did Dr. Craig actually claim he was quoting directly?
Ok - I'll spell it out...
.
I don't see any ambiguity in:
Dr. Craig writes:
On pages 157-8 of his book, Dawkins summarizes what he calls "the central argument of my book." It goes as follows:
It is Dr. Craig claiming that he is quoting Dawkins directly.
.
Only you see ambiguity in that sentence (Message 152):
Black Cat writes:
From the introductory sentence it doesn't seem clear whether his intention was to quote directly or to summarize.
.
But any ambiguity you try to claim exists in Dr. Craig's opening sentence is completely removed by his actions.
Dr. Craig acted as if he had quoted Dawkins directly.
(Some of these actions have been described by Dr. A in Message 161.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 9:12 PM Black Cat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 9:46 PM Panda has replied

Black Cat
Junior Member (Idle past 4613 days)
Posts: 28
From: Canada
Joined: 07-21-2011


Message 194 of 366 (627757)
08-03-2011 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Panda
08-03-2011 9:32 PM


Dr. Craig writes:
On pages 157-8 of his book, Dawkins summarizes what he calls "the central argument of my book." It goes as follows:
Panda writes:
It is Dr. Craig claiming that he is quoting Dawkins directly.
No it's not. He cites Dawkins' work but he does not indicate that he intends to quote any part of Dawkins' book directly.
For the third time I'll ask, where did Dr. Craig actually claim he was quoting directly?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Panda, posted 08-03-2011 9:32 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by Panda, posted 08-03-2011 9:55 PM Black Cat has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 195 of 366 (627758)
08-03-2011 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by Black Cat
08-03-2011 9:46 PM


Round and round...
(Bolding is mine)
Black Cat writes:
No it's not. He cites Dawkins' work but he does not indicate that he intends to quote any part of Dawkins' book directly.
Black Cat writes:
From the introductory sentence it doesn't seem clear whether his intention was to quote directly or to summarize.
You seem to disagree with yourself.
{abe}
Black Cat writes:
For the third time I'll ask, where did Dr. Craig actually claim he was quoting directly?
For the third time, I'll answer:
Dr. Craig writes:
On pages 157-8 of his book, Dawkins summarizes what he calls "the central argument of my book." It goes as follows:
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 9:46 PM Black Cat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 10:07 PM Panda has replied
 Message 197 by Black Cat, posted 08-03-2011 10:12 PM Panda has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024