My argument against materialism

[Q
UOTE=laca;6887406]How does that solve anything? The creation would still have occurred.
Click to expand...

An infinite time is an eternity, this would mean the creation happened more than an eternity before now, as eternity is endless. The creation couldn't happen, we have a paradox.

I must have missed it. What is the cosmology you're suggesting?[/QUOTE
Click to expand...

I'm coming to that.

There's no paradox.
Click to expand...

Please provide a solution to the banana paradox.



Well, imaginary ones are of course no obstacle. Real ones however tend to be really pesky.



Say what now?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

A method of reason which can somehow tackle things beyond the paradoxes.
 
Last edited:
punshhh said:
[Q

An infinite time is an eternity, this would mean the creation happened more than an eternity before now, as eternity is endless. The creation couldn't happen, we have a paradox.



A method of reason which can somehow tackle things beyond the paradoxes.
Click to expand...

Throw your banana into a black hole and it'll take infinite time to reach the center.

Kerr space time is time-independent, meaning that nothing in Kerr space time changes over time. In effect, time stands still. A black hole in such a state is essentially stationary.


http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=234968
 
punshhh said:
An infinite time is an eternity...
Click to expand...
Only if you choose to define it that way.

Eternity is a theological term and theologians don't mean "infinite time", they mean something to which "time" does not apply.

Why would you expect something "beyond the universe" to be temporal when time is something of the Universe?

And here is another thing - even if there were such a thing as a universe or superverse with time stretching back infinitely, that does not mean it could not have been created.

You have to think about this carefully. If a universe is created, what makes you think that the creation event has to be the first event or before the first event in the universe?

That would contain the assumption that the creating agent was itself subject to the time constraints of the universe it created - which does not make sense.

So there is no paradox or impossibility involved in the concept of a superverse with time stretching back infinitely that was also created.

Apply that to our universe and suppose that it has a creator.

Would the creation event have to occur before the Big Bang?

No - in fact if there was a creation event for our Universe then it would have no temporal relationship at all with our Universe or the Big Bang.

So, you keep thinking you see paradoxes because you have this dogged idea that something "beyond" the Universe would have to conform to the intuitions of naive realism.

But if you are to attempt to think about something beyond the Universe then you have to leap down the rabbit hole head first and divest yourself utterly of any such intuitions or preconceptions.
 
Pure Argent said:
Neither of which are paradoxes. They're simply you being incoherent and claiming that it's paradoxical.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of the limitations of the language employed, I may not have worded them very well.

I still see a paradox implied in what I write.

I would be interested in your explanation of why these are not paradoxes?
 
Robin said:
Only if you choose to define it that way.

Eternity is a theological term and theologians don't mean "infinite time", they mean something to which "time" does not apply.
Click to expand...

Thankyou Robin, you have made this a lot easier.

Yes, I am struggling with how to find a way of words which are not too theological.
I was equating eternity with infinite time as equivalent in some sense;

ie; if an event occurred an infinite time ago, that is equivalent to,
if an event occured in an eternity.

In both cases, it can be argued that the event may not have actually taken place, while having the 'appearance' of having taken place. This is nonsensical/pardoxical.

Why would you expect something "beyond the universe" to be temporal when time is something of the Universe?
Click to expand...

I don't, I'm bringing the argument to the temporal event horizon.

And here is another thing - even if there were such a thing as a universe or superverse with time stretching back infinitely, that does not mean it could not have been created.

Yes, I am bringing the argument towards an idea of a non creative creation,

ie; a situation where the result of the act of creation is observed or known to exist, while the actual act itself did not, or need not have taken place in any real or logically coherent way.

You have to think about this carefully. If a universe is created, what makes you think that the creation event has to be the first event or before the first event in the universe?

That would contain the assumption that the creating agent was itself subject to the time constraints of the universe it created - which does not make sense.

So there is no paradox or impossibility involved in the concept of a superverse with time stretching back infinitely that was also created.
Click to expand...

I was coming to this paradox.
Apply that to our universe and suppose that it has a creator.

Would the creation event have to occur before the Big Bang?

No - in fact if there was a creation event for our Universe then it would have no temporal relationship at all with our Universe or the Big Bang.

So, you keep thinking you see paradoxes because you have this dogged idea that something "beyond" the Universe would have to conform to the intuitions of naive realism.
Click to expand...

I was using this 'naive realism' to bring the argument to this point

But if you are to attempt to think about something beyond the Universe then you have to leap down the rabbit hole head first and divest yourself utterly of any such intuitions or preconceptions.
Click to expand...

Not exactly, I use a system of thought akin to calculus or a Zen koan to contemplate the form of the 'road map' down the rabbit hole.

I then use these 'road maps' as templates for contemplation on the 'nature' of, for lack of a better word, 'divinity'. I am not assuming the existence of a God here, I see no necessity for one.

Now I appreciate that this may be as far as I can go here, unless someone would like to take it further.

What interests me is how materialism deals with this situation, if it even acknowledges it atall.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Dancing David said:
Isn't that the reverse of Xeno's paradox?

They can't reach the limit because of the repulsive force, right?

The distance can not reach point of contact because of the force, right?

So the asymptote exists right?

Just because the value is not reached does not mean that is not the value.

maybe we have to take this to the SMT forum?
Click to expand...

Can you give me a link to the SMT forum?
 
punshhh said:
An infinite time is an eternity, this would mean the creation happened more than an eternity before now, as eternity is endless. The creation couldn't happen, we have a paradox.
Click to expand...

The only thing that follows from the above is that you haven't got an adequate concept of at least one of the following concepts: eternity, endless, creation or paradox.

punshhh said:
A method of reason which can somehow tackle things beyond the paradoxes.
Click to expand...

There's no reason beyond the paradoxes. If there would be, they would not be called paradoxes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom