RevBogovac

Jonathan, Jonathan, Jonathan... Dear Jonathan, let me help; Hey Dan: !

Basically the reason why the only pious christians I take seriously are Quakers and the like... 😁 But yes, I'm all "Darwinian" in that sense (like Jonathan) too...

The examples already given cover that; it's the social sciences in action (on metaphysical questions).... it's the overlap that makes it interesting...

Sure, I'd take that explanation too... but the original question was: Based on : Then: Would keep the responses (re: god actually being the author) in line. But yes, god being a fantasy certainly explains it (even better)...

Interesting, but indeed...

That's basically what I meant. You could see it like this: some questions social studies (like Psychology, Sociology and Anthropology) study are economical in nature, some are meta-physical in nature and other - for instance - historical...

Probably... It's hard (for me) to have a deep (enough) discussion in a third language... but as I quoted before: So yes, again; Distinguising between the "hardcore" and more practical appliance of metaphysics as a branch of philosophy... PS I personally find Hume a bit too extreme and have always been inclined to a fundamental Aristotelian "golden mean"...

Good question, I'm inclined to "believe" there is only one universe (god?). But at the same time I'm convinced we're (not even close to) knowing this (any time soon)....

Yeah, but there are basically two views on that expansion rate: exponential and s-curve; the former is used by the present day majority to "prove" their ("short"-term) point of view, the latter is supported by a small progressive part that simply extrapolates that in nature there is no (proof found of) endless exponential growth but it always comes down to s-curves. More of a "pulsating" universe; expanding a.t.m. but somewhere in the (very distant) future it will be condensing again (and so forth).... And as you often like to point out; a lot of valid ideas started out once by a small minority...

Nice hoop! So the original writers were inspired by god, but god didn't think the writings were important enough to inspire the translators too...? Hmkay....

Because being the all-mighty, all-knowing, omnipresent god wanting all people to be united in eternal love and peace; he might want to speak with one voice so there would be no misunderstandings (which are the mother of all F#@&-ups)...? Just a thought...

True, but empirical studies of metaphysics do help us (all) to advance further away from religions that provide people with a certain "function"... e.g. if we know what gives our lives (measurable) sense of "belonging" or "fulfilment" the need for fairy tales to do so gets less...

Hi Dan... One would think that if that book really was inspired by an almighty god it would be more consistent and less prone to interpretation...

This is an obvious error in the bible, as basic physics (measurement of light, carbon dating et cetera) disproves it.... Unlees you jump yet through another loop and declare some mythical creature put all those things in there just to deceive us...

Well, this is a bit outdated (again) as science is moving back to the "steady state" theory. In short: the big bang came from a massive black hole which had swallowed all previous matter from our galaxy and all matter in our current galaxy will be swallowed up back again when all the stars become black holes one by one again. Culminating in one big black hole again which wil eventually burst again in a new big bang... This is also philosophically the only explanation as everything that has a start, must have an ending...

Ah, sorry... definitely "lost in translation"... Smal steps... you can't empty a sceptic tank with one scoop of a shovel. But if we keep shovelling... it just feels sometimes like the ** is pouring in faster than we can shovel it out... But to me, personally, it feels really good that social studies have empirically proven some basic ingredients that "full-fill" people's lives (more than believing in fairy tales and waiting to die): sense of belonging to a community, having a loving family/friends, a day-filling (either voluntary, hobby or paid job) that gives accomplishment/makes the world a better place, et cetera... smal steps, real answers.

Aren't you contradicting yourself? Or maybe something gets lost in translation... ? (Sorry English isn't my native language.) But you just summed up a bunch of questions/fields that are part of metaphysics and provided us with clear and empirical answers to some important metaphysical questions... Sure, the "hardcore" meta-physics aren't good for anything that matters (at the moment?). But we're getting further every (little?) step...

Ehhhh... I quote: "Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that examines the fundamental nature of reality, including the relationship between mind and matter, between substance and attribute, and between potentiality and actuality" and especially "although metaphysics as a philosophical enterprise is highly hypothetical, it also has practical application in most other branches of philosophy, science, and now also information technology"... "Ontology", "Identity and change" being "Central questions"...

This is not entirely true. If we look at historically the most important meta-physical question: Why are we here? What is our purpose? et cetera... There is a lot of empirical research and evidence that supports some answers: - we should support our environment; - we should have some practical goal to work towards; - we should take good care of ourselves and the environment; - et cetera...

A very healthy attitude. I can only concur 100%!

Hey Dan!

Probably not long, as Dan is posting some nice fallacies, as usual; 1. "hecklers" somehow doesn't sound like any respect is shown; 2. for the N'th time: that someone doens't take the bible for 100% true, doesn't mean they "don't have any belief or genuine interest in biblical topics"; 3. for the N'th time: it is the Agnostics and Atheists who are actually open to discussion and have NOT "made-up their minds". On the contrary, their "positions are [NOT] unshakable" (as those of religious fanatics ARE). They are actually open to real evidence and debate... But hey, what else is new...

I would think that to anyone who takes any book literal any view that strays from that book is "difficult to understand"... 🤷‍♂️

Yeah, that's what the other 583977620342725087397763461253743 religions say too... Even if we narrow it down to Christianity; which 1 is right? Danism?!?

And capitalism was invented when the first wiseass put a fence around a piece of land and proclaimed it his... and the fools that believed him. 😁