Message from @Firefly

Discord ID: 322913906441846785


2017-06-10 01:31:22 UTC  

Where is it registered?

2017-06-10 01:31:28 UTC  

By who?

2017-06-10 01:34:11 UTC  

Necessity is defined as 'unable to cease to exist'. A necessary beingness must exist, either its the universe itself or God. For the universe (matter/energy), the Principle of Conservation of Mass-Energy says matter and energy are never lost but rather transmute into each other. The problem is that we do not know if this law is eternally true. If it ever changed, or had emerged the way it is sometime in the past, it would mean that the universe could cease to exist. Also if matter and energy are also necessary then no changes could take place because it would destroy the relations within the universe, which are supposed to be necessary (unmovable). Further if the universe infinitely regresses, there is no ultimate explanation of necessary being, and it is impossible to prove. The universe existing 'for itself' is not a defensible position.

2017-06-10 01:35:55 UTC  

@Deleted User I'm losing you now.

2017-06-10 01:36:14 UTC  

I am trying to condense a lot in small format.

2017-06-10 01:36:40 UTC  

Do atoms have a charge from first mover or they move by themselves?

2017-06-10 01:37:11 UTC  

It would be much easier if you read Aquinas.

2017-06-10 01:39:45 UTC  

@Deleted User I've read Christian philosophers 15 years ago. Was not impressed at all.

2017-06-10 01:40:00 UTC  

Sure.

2017-06-10 01:40:20 UTC  

I switched to Buddhist

2017-06-10 01:40:30 UTC  

They been more rational.

2017-06-10 01:41:01 UTC  

The idea that matter 'moves by itself' has no explanation. It is just a vague statement.

2017-06-10 01:41:24 UTC  

It is an observation.

2017-06-10 01:41:56 UTC  

No, the observation is that matter moves. The cause is not determined by only observation.

2017-06-10 01:42:12 UTC  

The cause is not important. It is abstraction.

2017-06-10 01:42:26 UTC  

The observation is correct.

2017-06-10 01:42:29 UTC  

So you observe that matter moves. Congratulations.

2017-06-10 01:43:10 UTC  

@Deleted User You just not make abstractions on top of it.

2017-06-10 01:43:18 UTC  

Is it hard to do?

2017-06-10 01:44:03 UTC  

I guess not. But then you statement is wrong. You said matter moves by itself. But really only abstractions can allow you to think about how it moves.

2017-06-10 01:44:34 UTC  

@Deleted User That is correct.

2017-06-10 01:45:13 UTC  

The question of what kind of abstractions. How much are they detached from matter.

2017-06-10 01:45:30 UTC  

That's fair.

2017-06-10 01:46:02 UTC  

Commie cancer

2017-06-10 01:46:14 UTC  

In Marx's opinion Hegel had absolutely correct abstractions. But all results of his thought were wrong.

2017-06-10 01:46:18 UTC  

The only thing you are good at is starving yourselves

2017-06-10 01:47:04 UTC  

Even correct abstractions detached from matter are incorrect.

2017-06-10 01:47:18 UTC  

Not to mention incorrect ones.

2017-06-10 01:47:47 UTC  

Hitler will bomb your ass with his amazing Stukas

2017-06-10 01:48:09 UTC  

Watch how he fucks over Poland in just a few weeks

2017-06-10 01:48:28 UTC  

Losing 80% of your army to starving Slav is not a good look for the Aryan Supermen.

2017-06-10 01:48:39 UTC  

(((Hitler)))

2017-06-10 01:48:47 UTC  

The only thing you Commies did that was good was kill those Muslim towelheads

2017-06-10 01:49:18 UTC  

did any of you vote for comrade corbyn?

2017-06-10 01:49:32 UTC  

14/88 and have a blessed white day, fuck Commies
KKK
KKK
KKK

2017-06-10 01:50:13 UTC  

@Firefly That's correct. You need to base your abstractions on observation.

2017-06-10 01:51:20 UTC  

Would you like to read Aquinas?
"Regarding the unity of the divine essence, we must first believe that God exists. This is a truth clearly known by reason. **We observe that** all things that move are moved by other things, the lower by the higher. The elements are moved by heavenly bodies; and among the elements themselves, the stronger moves the weaker; and even among the heavenly bodies, the lower are set in motion by the higher. This process cannot be traced back into infinity. For everything that is moved by another is a sort of instrument of the first mover. Therefore, if a first mover is lacking, all things that move will be instruments. But if the series of movers and things moved is infinite, there can be no first mover. In such a case, these infinitely many movers and things moved will all be instruments. But even the unlearned perceive how ridiculous it is to suppose that instruments are moved, unless they are set in motion by some principal agent. This would be like fancying that, when a chest or a bed is being built, the saw or the hatchet performs its functions without the carpenter. Accordingly there must be a first mover that is above all the the rest; and this being we call God."

2017-06-10 01:54:14 UTC  

@Deleted User thats from the time you couldn't know atoms moving themselves, right?

2017-06-10 01:54:36 UTC  

>But even the unlearned perceive how ridiculous it is to suppose that instruments are moved, unless they are set in motion by some principal agent.

2017-06-10 01:54:44 UTC  

'Atoms moving themselves'?

2017-06-10 01:54:49 UTC  

Do you really believe in that?