mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, but that is not all time.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
100% surity. Does it exist
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
Yeah, but that is not all time.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Thoughts and imagination alone do not apply to reality. It was never there to begin with at the start, so any future probability or outcome is completely zilch, zero.
That is good enough for me. I am 100% certain you are correct.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
That is your belief. I have a different one.
You have never observed the beginning nor the end and neither have I. But you claim you have evidence, but you don't. You have how you think the beginning and the end are.
You are doing philosophy as rationalism and it doesn't work for all of the everyday world as everything.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, I do same. I am correct for now. As for all times, I don't know and I don't claim that.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Dosent negate the fact involving peoples complete inability to produce anything of substance.
If they cannot do it for thousands of years then, they certainly won't do it for thousands of years to come either.
It's pretty well established.
No more than me actually receiving my intergalactic invasion force on backorder anytime soon. *sigh*
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Stop claiming your personal interpretation is relevant for all humans. That is no different than the believers you attack.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I'm just stating the reality of it all.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
You don't have access to all and neither have I for now.
You are an absolutist just like some religious believer in the end. You know. I don't.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
No. Unless you really think I'll get my intergalactic invasion force on backorder at some point.
PureX
Veteran Member
We have to use what we have available to us: reason, intuition, experience, and even luck. Because we can't have certainty.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
No, you know what all of reality is as correct for all humans as for what matters. That is normal for a lot of humans. You just do it as you.
You are not a negative for what matters. You just do it differently than some other humans. So do I. That is all we can show evidence.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
And know the limit of even "we" as for how we do it in part as individuality.
As I recall you seem to in effect believe that you can do that with logic for all humans as a positive.
Well, then I will just answer - No! and no matter how illogical that is, it is a fact that I can do it illogically.
There are no absolute statements ─ well, outside this sentence there aren't.
In the first place, everyone here appears to make the same assumptions as I do ─ that a world exists external to me, that my senses are capable of informing me about that world, and that reason is a valid tool. (What those three have in common is that you can't demonstrate their correctness without first assuming they're already correct.)
What if one, or two, or all three are wrong?
Then there are propositions that aren't expressed in falsifiable terms ─ such as that the universe sprang into existence at midday last Thursday, fully formed as we see it, memories and fossils and all. Or that we're really characters in a kind of Tron game. Or dreams in the brain of a superbeing. And so on and so on.
No one knows anything with 100% certainty ─ as above. But the beauty of skeptical reasoned enquiry is that it avoids a whole lot of traps while we're looking for truth ─ truth, in the sense of making statements that accurately reflect the real world, the objective state of things.
So it's possible to avoid many kinds of errors, and to build on past learning ─ always retesting it to be sure we still see it as correct. That's how we get modern medicine as well as as better atom bombs. That's how we put rovers on Mars, and look for life on Europa.
No, we haven't yet described a possible path from chemistry to biochemistry to the self-replicating cell. But with scientific method (a subset of skeptical reasoned enquiry) we have as good a platform for our investigations as has ever been.
The more you understand about biochemistry, the more you see the central questions; and as at 2022 CE the more clearly you can see what is more promising, is better supported by the evidence, and what is not, and what's just folktale and wishful thinking.
As for whether humans will ultimately be able to live forever, no they won't, because the universe won't live forever. But maybe lifespans of hundreds of years will be possible in the future, though I think they're a really bad idea as things presently stand.
And I'm incredibly unconfident of that and I don't think he was.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Some of the world is in me and a part of the world is me. As long as you ignore that, we won't agree.
As far as I'm concerned, you're part of the real world. (It's good to get these things clear.)
Heyo
Veteran Member
That's why scientists usually give a confidence level in standard deviations. 100% certainty would be a confidence level of 5σ (99.9767). As you didn't specify a precision of your 100%, 0 positions after the decimal point are assumed and 99.97 ≈ 100.
In other words, if I speak to 1,000 believers and less than 0.3 can prove god, my confidence is 100% that no-one can prove god.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
I can't point to God or the real world. Both are ideas in a mind.
I'm 100% sure that 100% surety doesn't exist.