Phi for All

Things that are wrong, imo (partial list): 1. Some people see mainstream scientific study as too difficult, and so they invent a fantasy where they step "outside the box" and use their "intuition" to seek the "Truth". It feels right to them only because they get to feel they are seeking answers without any of the responsibility of actual, rigorous study. They get to flit from topic to topic, only choosing what interests them most and cherry-picking those bits of data that support what they have chosen as "Truth". They make conclusions base on inadequate knowledge, building hypotheses on a foundation full of gaps and pockets of misunderstanding. I feel this is wrong because it robs those people of the knowledge of all those who HAVE put the time into building "the box" into a set of explanations with the most supportive evidence. It's wrong because it dupes those people into thinking that mainstream science is wrong because it's hidebound and lacks their "intuitive grasp" on the subject. It's wrong because it makes them think their rejection of mainstream study is a form of skepticism, when it's really just a lack of focus, attention and appreciation for a seemingly plodding, time-consuming and often uninteresting methodology. It's wrong because it somehow makes them ignore the fact that the methodology works, it works very well, and it's the best process humans have ever come up with for explanations about the real world. 2. Littering. 3. People who claim X is wrong, but admit they don't really know much about X.

Do you also agree with him now that he has acknowledged that it IS a paradox?

The Bible's. Many of those who interpret that work often say it's because we couldn't bear to see him (even though we're made in his image), or that if he revealed himself to us it would negate free will, or that it would make faith meaningless. No matter which version you believe, God is, by definition, not going to allow himself to be observed in a testable, repeatable, predictable way in order to satisfy science of his existence. Are you saying that "unlimited power" has the limitation that it can only be used within the parameters of the physical laws of the universe? That would separate it from "the ability to do anything".

I'm there right now, with at least ten others logged in. We're going to play You Might Be A Geek If... pretty soon.

God is unobservable scientifically by definition. He seems to have chosen not to manifest himself in a way we can test. It could be that omnipotence is just another definition that puts God more firmly in the realm of the supernatural.

I thought I made it fairly clear that I wasn't sure of your point because you kept referring to yourself and God with regard to omnipotence, and therefore wasn't sure it was a misspelling. It became the point because you kept doing it. It didn't make sense to me. We agreed on that quite some time ago. And now we agree that it is a paradox, it seems.

Perhaps it's spelling mistakes, but when you continue to use yourself as a referent for omnipotence and mix "he" and "we", it makes it seem like you're saying because we can't do it, he can't do it. The paradox, and yes it does exist, is with the definition of omnipotence, not with God's lifting ability. It can't happen because there will always be something that omnipotence can't do, making it internally inconsistent.

I don't understand your point. Did anyone ever claim omnipotence was anything other than a property of a god? It's not a property you can use yourself as an example for. And the claim that God is omnipotent is what motivated the observation that such was a paradox, so it's a logical rebuttal, not "something ridiculous like that".

The Joe Nacchio story is very appropriate here. He was headquartered here in Denver, and I remember well the campaign against him. The spin going on then made me nauseous. Every story in the local papers made it seem like he bilked investors, and they even fined him and then gave the money back to investor "victims". And the only real crime there was the FBI announcing the bogus investigation for insider trading, which sent Qwest stocks tumbling. It's doubtful Nacchio was completely clean, but he wasn't the one who made the stocks drop. The government selected his case to prosecute, among all the other questionable insider-trading cases.

The statement IS logical. If you're capable of doing anything, then both these things should be within your power, lifting an unliftable weight and making a weight too heavy for you to lift. SamBridge can weld anything he wants to, but nobody is calling him omnipotent, so his argument isn't applicable. You really don't get to decide that. That's why we're discussing it. It's not really questioning God, it's questioning this concept of being able to do anything you can think of, this omnipotence. If God could really do ANYTHING, then why hasn't he done some non-paradoxical things like growing a limb back for an amputee? Supposedly, he cures people of all kinds of cancers and diseases on a daily basis, but there's no documented cases of regrown limbs.

Bravo, Daedelus!

Bummer. Baked beans are off.

I'm very curious, how would Texas handle the matter, EdEarl?

I think we just have some sleepers, bot accounts that got in while the filters were off but didn't post any spam right away. The filters are back in place, but they're already members. The filter's probably only protecting us from spammers joining.

Does God have to be omnipotent? If God created the physical laws of the universe but can change them at his whim, does anything have any meaning? Omnipotence seems unnecessary. I would posit that either there is no God, or that what we think of as God is just a being that can do much more than we can and simply seems all-powerful. Like you would seem to an ant. Since I see no evidence of a being like that, and so far everything seems to have a very natural explanation for it, I'm going to go with there is no God. As primitives we imagined lions in the shadows and it helped us survive, so we imagined a bunch of other stuff we couldn't see and it just stuck, like gum on your shoe. It's comforting to have a magic Sky Father who will protect us with his all-powerfulness. Until you realize none of it really makes sense. "No God" is not only a possibility, I think it's the highest probability.

! Moderator Note Yes, we can.

"Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your spam. I love it. I'm having spam spam spam spam spam spam spam beaked beans spam spam spam and spam!" - Monty Python

I can see I phrased that badly. What I meant was that while our pols bravely stand against the inroads of Socialism and Communism in favor of American Democracy®, the public perception is that we'll never succumb to anti-Democratic rule. It's the perfect way to give us a false confidence and ignore all the things that are eroding our Democracy. Whichever group with a sympathetic charismaniac that decides the time is ripe will find us already whipped, fearful of reprisals and listening to whatever hope is being scripted from our corporate owned news broadcasts.

Yay, dave! Thanks very much!

Bob goes out and buys a parrot. The first day, he teaches the bird to say, "Who is it?" whenever the apartment doorbell rings. He's so pleased, he tells the bird he's going to go back to the pet store and get the bird a nice treat. While Bob is gone, the bird hears the doorbell ring and says, "Who is it?" A voice from the other side of the door says, "It's the plumber. The landlord said your faucets were leaking and I'm here to fix them." The bird repeats, "Who is it?" "IT'S THE PLUMBER! I'm here to fix the leaks!" the man insists. "Who is it?" The man begins screaming. "IT'S THE PLUMBER! YOU CALLED TO HAVE YOUR LEAKY FAUCETS FIXED AND I'M HERE! PLEASE LET ME IN!" Predictably, the bird asks, "Who is it?" The plumber loses his cool and starts jumping up and down. "FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, I'VE TOLD YOU THREE GODDAMN TIMES, IT'S THE PLUMBER!!!" Suddenly, the man grabs his chest and keels over right there in the hall. When Bob gets back, he sees the dead stranger in front of his apartment door. He drops his bags and kneels down, exclaiming, "Oh my God, who is it?" From inside the apartment, he hears the bird say, "IT'S THE PLUMBER!"

I would object but I'm reminded of all the shallow outrage that's generated by our politicians whenever socialism or communism are mentioned. They adamantly state that Communism will never happen here, and indeed the public seems confident they won't allow it to. Perfect way to set the stage for a fait accompli we'll never see coming.

The skirt helps contain and increase the air pressure, focusing it downward only, so it lifts the whole craft a bit higher, including the skirt which is attached. That's the way I read it.

Slippery Slope, like many logical fallacies, is not wrong in and of itself. It's only a fallacy when it's used to make general assumptions ("If you start eating sweets, you'll never stop until it kills you"). In certain cases, like burning books, it can actually be a very real concern. As with most fallacies, you err when you use them to automatically conclude something based solely on the fallacy. Each instance needs evaluation, especially if lives are involved. And not to nitpick, but assuming someone is going to be the next Hitler just because of something they said, and then "silencing them" for it sounds like Fascism at its best.

! Moderator Note I checked into this, for all concerned. The vast majority of negative rep points for everyone in this thread seems to be for condescending personal remarks rather than simple disagreement. Yet another piece of evidence that sniping and uncivil behavior don't help anyone or anything, and often cause further problems. EVERYONE needs to stop it.

Very disappointing for an administration that preaches change. I think iNow's toothpaste analogy is appropriate, but I'm not really sure there's a good way to brush with this kind of toothpaste. Which is more insidious, a terrorist attack that might kill hundreds, or the crushing bondage of knowing that your rights are being compromised yet again by the government who's supposed to represent you, and the millions it affects? I'm no longer convinced that good people have nothing to fear from tactics like this. This is a net that's sure to grab more dolphins than barracudas. We've allowed a wall to be built separating us from our representative government, and each time this kind of thing happens, effective democracy and those it hopes to represent are pushed farther apart. Because it's the NSA making the calls. The cruise is to Guantanamo.