Conversation
Notices
-
sat chit ananda
-
@georgia arguments like this are dumb because "being" makes no sense in the first place, does-not-apply rules
-
@georgia hear other people saying such too, like "maybe existence is the defaultbut something rather than nothing is unanswerable in principle, like to give an answer to / explanation for something you need to add context. but any context you give to "existence" is just "more existence". there can't be an "outside the universe" etc
-
@shmibs i actually had the same thought as this guy albeit in different words when i was in middle school. also, "what is being anyway" is a bad take. consciousness is self evident, and it is the answer to why is there something instead of nothing.
-
@Moon @georgia consciousness experience not being some kinda indivisible unit is first-person apparent definitely in dissociation
-
@georgia @shmibs it seems self evident but isn't there something like your brain decides things before you consciously decide
-
@Moon @georgia ※conscious experience
-
@georgia there cannot be platonism when you stop confusing your model of the world for the world itself
-
@shmibs there can be an outside the universe when you stop conflating the manifest with the real
-
@georgia hmm, think you're kinda repeating what i said, but getting some other meaning out of it somewhere?and kinda aside, GR's predicting a "point beginning" shouldn't be taken seriously, as we know it's only a generalisation and can't apply to really small scales (and singularities are generally a sign of places where simplified model breaks from messy realityregardless, though, yes, that's exactly what i said. there being a "first thing" makes no sense. but there not being a "first thing" also makes no sense. and so it's a fundamental unknowable / nonsense statement from within the universe as a system. and anything not within the universe as a system by definition cannot affect it, and so is irrelevant
-
@shmibs even if you do conflate the real with the manifest, the universe, beginning as it did at a point, would need an impetus, a catalyst triggering an inherent tendency to expand and differentiate, the universal substrate itself cannot meaningfully or adequately explain the current presence of the universe, it being a perishable thing.
-
@georgia yes, if a god affects a universe then the god is part of the universe. is what the word means, "all the stuff
-
@shmibs "and anything not within the universe as a system by definition cannot effect it" see how readily you preclude the existence of god
georgia
バツ子（痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;;
Infected Moomin
All senooken JP Social content and data are available under the 