Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RandomPrecision" data-source="post: 2380478" data-attributes="member: 29267">How about a finite but boundless universe?  Like the finite but boundless surface of a sphere.  The universe is a big hypersphere, and our perception is of the three-dimensioned hypersurface.Just talking about that the other day.  I once had a poll of people, both religious and atheistic, asking them (that presupposing God's existence) if God could do things that are logically impossible.  It turned out to largely favor "yes".  But off of that tangent, we know that God can either do things that are logically impossible, or he can't (it's called the Law of Excluded Middle; A is either true or false).  If he cannot, then he couldn't have made a rock that he couldn't lift, since that is logically impossible, so the question is invalid.  However, if God can do things that are logically impossible, then the answer is yes, he can lift a rock that not even he can lift, since logic doesn't restrict his actions.As for philosophy, I've always been amused by agnostic ontology.  While I might be walking the border of the no religion rule, I like to make the argument that one cannot prove either the existence or non-existence of God.  I don't think belief is unreasonable, but I don't think we can actually know that God exists (or doesn't exist).I also enjoy another neutral ground between theism and atheism, an idea propelled by Kant, Voltaire, and Nietzsche, among many others, but I feel that I take it to a different meaning.  I call it syntheism, and unlike strong agnosticism, it is not a lack of both theism and atheism, but the perfect union of the two.  Many similar ideas, such as some of the philosophers mentioned (for example, Voltaire's essay on how if God does not exist, man must invent him), take one side and paint it with the other, producing a bias.  However, I don't look at true syntheism as theism with a hint of atheism, or atheism with religious flavor, meaning that ultimately, we cannot say that man created God, or that God created man.  Rather, they create each other; they live in a sort of symbiosis.  Without one, the other couldn't exist.And sometime later tonight, I might remember the name of that guy who said that if the universe contained infinitely many stars, the sky would be infinitely bright.  However, realize that he also postulated several excuses to provide for this, such as interposing matter, or starlight that hasn't yet reached us, and at least one other that I cannot remember, I believe.</blockquote>

Verification