Ways to self-brainwash! | Ways to God

Ways to self-brainwash! | Ways to God

CarneadesofGa's blog

CarneadesofGa's blog

No fine -tuning,no absolute beginning

    Willaim  Lane  Craig  tries to find  divine intent,eventhough as Strato notes, none exists to  lie behind natural phenomena. The fine-tuning and probablility arguments just flaunt reduced animism = theism as without that intent, theism is just that and thus, no more realistic than full animism or polytheism.Necessity holds as Leucippus notes.  
       He presumes that we just has to evolve as those parameters favour that. Why, he has matters inverted when the conditions that  made us evolve depended on necessity,including randomness. No divine intent favored the  flowering plants, the warming periods, the demise of the dinosaurs and mutations that led to us. We were thus not the desired outcomes that Carneades' atelic argument notes as that begged question.
       The inversion rules: the paramaters were not made for us but instead we  evolved as they worked their way. As the late Douglas Adams poses the question : does a puddle form, because of intent  as the puddle would think or didit just  happen,because of a pot hole in a road and rain? 
    No absolute origination of the Multiverse happened but instead a series of Big Transformations- Big Bangs- of the eteranl  quantum fields in accordance with the description- law- of the conservation of energy.
     He claims that why, there had to be a choice for our Universe to happen but that is agains that reduced animism at work that Lamberth's reduced animism argument explains. That personal explanation is nor more than God did it: did He do it by the magic of let it be? He and other theists should give evidence of how He does it instead of favoring animism. That explanation means nothing.

Lawrence Krauss vs. William Lane Craig – Pharyngula

Lawrence Krauss vs. William Lane Craig – Pharyngula

Pat Robertson to the rescue!

Pat Robertson  revels in implicating God in natural disasters  to punish even the innocent for what he perceives as evils. He claims that Haiti has a pact with Lucifer ,so it deserved its gargantuan disaster. He claims that God takes revenge on homo- and by implication bisexuals.
His God is Yahweh, that perverse monster!
 Robertson sees intent design , the pareidolias for mechanism and patterns, as Lamberth's argument from pareidolia claims. Thus he a theist= reduced animist sees what is not there as full animists do and thus is as superstitious.
  His Yahweh in his scriptures that Yahweh did not have written, but instead mere misanthropes uttered from their miserable minds, did do such revenge.
  He, Paul Copan and WLC seek to preside all that why, Yahweh is good, No! They ll delight in that contradiction betwixt evil Yahweh and what is good, That makes Him thus no more than a square circle as He and goodness so contradict each other!
  When an item finds itself contradictory, it cannot exist. Yahweh cannot perforce exist as God. And the God term itself  contradicts itself and is so incoherent. Neither then can either exist!
   Robertson claims to partake in that will-that intent- with seeing those in pain    - the claim to see sickness and cure it.. Obviously, that is a far-fetched claim that fulfills itself post hoc- coincidentally as does prayer itself.
   Most Christians disagree with his proclamations and curing-claims but still find biblical accounts of revenge true and good. That outrages reason!
   To see that divine intent is superstitious,yes, and fulfills the counter-claims to Aquinas' superfluity argument, which  boomerangs on him with his attempt to counter-claim!
    Thus, claiming to perceive that intent -that superfluity- people murder others! Any good therefrom, people can obtain elsewhere.To perceive that superfluity ranks with seeing any paranormal event, so theists rank with paranormalists as the recently deceased Paul Kurtz calls : The Transcendental Temptation."
     Robertson self-indicts as a purveyor of  wily, woeful woo! Fool.

SUPERSTITION- RELIGION

 Since as Strato notes we need to avoid teleology in science and I add any divine intent anywhere, then theism is indeed just reduced animism as both depend on supernatural intent. Prayer evinces that. Answered prayers are just examples of the post hoc fallacy- coincidental whilst theists ever rationalize about failed ones. No difference then ensues betwixt both reduced and full animism. 
   Animism is superstition. Why then this superstition?
   Theists put forth the arguments from angst and from happiness-purpose, whence arrives Lamberth's non-genetic argument that ti's theists themselves who validate our naturalist arguments about why they believe, and thus we commit no genetic argument!
   Aquinas' superfluity argument bespeaks how theists use their reduced animism in that they find the need to use God, He has no valid explanatory function- Lamberth's the god of the explanatory gap. The  God of the scientific gaps finds God where science has no answers whilst this gap finds Him as the overreaching answer- the Primary efficient explanation in a hierarchy of causes- Aquinas's' etiological argument- the Primary Cause.
     Percy Bysshe Shelley implicitly states it thus:" To suppose that some existence beyond, or above them [ the descriptions-laws - of Nature, S.] is to invent a second and superfluous hypothesis to account for what already is accounted for." To further insist that no, this is a category mistake, begs the question thereof.
  In the name of this superstition and -superfluity, people murder others!
  This superfluity is no better warranted than a square circle or married bachelor and plays no more a role than gremlins and demons!
 

No divine intent for child from rape!

  Sen. candidate Mourdock  [Ind.] claims that God wants women to carry to term foetuses of rape! No, no divine intent exists for that or any other matter. He is being just a supercilious,superstitious simpleton.
   He sees the pareidolias of intent-teleology and design instead of the realities of mechanism and patterns per the Coyne- Mayr-Lamberth teleonomic argument discussed here previously. To see that intent instantiates animism as the Lamberth reduced animism notes, because in stressing that non-intent theism is just as superstitious as full animism and polytheism.
   So, that very animism causes people to maintain stupidity as truth.
   How would the fool know the will of that One anyway? Other reduced animists say otherwise as He speaks with a forked tongue!
    Not only in science is that animistic intent harmful but also elsewhere.
    Answered prayer means superstition as no divine intent made for the success, because it is coincidental- the post hoc fallacy.
    Follow Strato,not those fools!

Philosopher Thomas Nagel goes the way of Alvin Plantinga, disses evolution « Why Evolution Is True

Philosopher Thomas Nagel goes the way of Alvin Plantinga, disses evolution « Why Evolution Is True

Rationalist Griggsy: Naturalist Griggsy: Skeptic Griggsy: How Convenient! The Epistemic Rationale of Self-validating Belief Systems - Maarten Boudry

Rationalist Griggsy: Naturalist Griggsy: Skeptic Griggsy: How Convenient! The Epistemic Rationale of Self-validating Belief Systems - Maarten Boudry