Absolute nonsense. Like I said - torturing autistic children with Calculus.

I guess this sort of philosophy is too high IQ for the layman. I recommend reading the Kybalion and Mind Power: Secrets of Mental Magic to better understand the concepts at play here.

But to simplify the concept even further; before *anything* can happen, there must *first* be a desire *for that thing* to exist, before it can *actually* exist.

So before the whole of reality was created, something or *someone* needed to have desired it.

And that *someone* is the Lord God.

Ergo the whole of reality and everything you understand is underpinned by God's desire.

This isn't debatable, it's the logical beginning to any sort of argument that could ever be made. Without acknowledging this basic fact, you will never, *ever* be able to form a coherent argument for anything.

GG @Fuskand, you just advanced to level 1!

Why does existence require desire?

Because before you do anything you need to desire it to happen. It's the process of actualization.

the universe doesn't operate under the same limits of human will and body. There's a quasar right now shooting hundreds of trillions of gallons of water from a collision with another celestial body, and nothing more causes that than the trajectory both were following.

Except for the fact that desire isn't an exclusive quality of living matter.

Take, for example, the existence of molecules.

yes it is, more specifically sentience and will. Only human traits.

Atoms themselves demonstrate likes and dislikes. Atoms have preferences for which other atoms they will pair up with or reject.

Desire isn't a human quality, it exists within *everything*.

you're anthropomorphizing basic physics, and I don't see why.

Then explain *why* atoms have preferences and how molecules are formed without an arbitrary standard.

I'll wait.

the essential laws that dictate the material universe. No why, no what if, just how.

And the essential laws are based off of a desire for *those specific laws* to be the effect.

So it all comes back around to who or what desired these laws and their intended effects.

Otherwise you have no basis to go off of and any argument you make is completely arbitrary and cannot stand on its own.

Again, you're baselessly shoehorning the concept of desire to inanimate objects.

A rock can travel hundreds of miles a desert due to wind. "What" desired that?

I'm not though. There is a base, and I've already demonstrated that. Atoms have their preferences, their likes or dislikes, concerning what other atoms they join up with to form molecules.

You cannot explain that phenomenon without the basis of desire

It's not preferences, it's compatibility within the laws of physics.

And you cannot attribute desire without some form of sentience.

And those compatibilities were an end result *that was desired*. Otherwise there is no reason or basis to believe that the laws of physics behave the way we experience them, since there is no empirical beginning to it.

There was nothing "desired". Two magnets slam together because that's what polarity does. There was no thought or will behind it.

Then why do magnets also repel each other?

GG @Fuskand, you just advanced to level 2!

You should shift this through an Aristotelian perspective (potentiality and actuality), @Fuskand, else you won't get anywhere.

Based off what polarity is available? Because the polarities have their *preferences*.

Depends on the polarity and their position, due to again, simple physics, relatively anyway.

Except you cannot explain simple physics in any coherent way other than as a desire.

Everything else described is just a result of what was desired.

It just explains the ending of the actualization process without actually touching on where it *began*.

Looks like some cruel motherfuckers showed up after all

No, as an event that is testable and replicatable. Your terminology is your obsession, not mine.