Conquer Club

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

mybike_yourface wrote:why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

Reminds me of an old piece of wisdom, "Trust he who seeks the truth, doubt he who finds it."

vtmarik wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

Reminds me of an old piece of wisdom, "Trust he who seeks the truth, doubt he who finds it."

so you have no opinion?

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

Right...so god had physics on his side when he created the world?

Or did he just creat physics as well? my word!! why does pi=3.141....blah blah, because god says so!!

Shouldnt 'newtons law' be renamed "gods law 234819"?

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

i think there's a problem with language and terminology. since in our language everything is a something, we can say nothingness is a something. but what myself and daoist philosyphy(and other systems too) is refering to is a nothingness that's basically inconcivable for us. a nothing that's before, before.

vtmarik wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

Reminds me of an old piece of wisdom, "Trust he who seeks the truth, doubt he who finds it."

what's with the black flag with the r in it? i've seen 2 of you with it now? are you inserectionist anarchists?

Norse wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

Right...so god had physics on his side when he created the world?

Or did he just creat physics as well? my word!! why does pi=3.141....blah blah, because god says so!!

Shouldnt 'newtons law' be renamed "gods law 234819"?

What on Earth are you talking about? That doesn't have much to do with what you quoted.

The discussion at the moment is about the irrationality of theism (belief in something with no origin) vs. the irrationality of atheism (belief in something coming from nothing).

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

i think there's a problem with language and terminology. since in our language everything is a something, we can say nothingness is a something. but what myself and daoist philosyphy(and other systems too) is refering to is a nothingness that's basically inconcivable for us. a nothing that's before, before.

But you believe that something can come from said absolute nothing? That's simply illogical - equally illogical as something (ie God) which has existed forever.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:
What on Earth are you talking about? That doesn't have much to do with what you quoted.

The discussion at the moment is about the irrationality of theism (belief in something with no origin) vs. the irrationality of atheism (belief in something coming from nothing).

My point stands, choobo, if you cant see the link, then find it.

damn it, you got to think outside the box a little more, your tunnel vision is beginning to irritate me.

Norse wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:
What on Earth are you talking about? That doesn't have much to do with what you quoted.

The discussion at the moment is about the irrationality of theism (belief in something with no origin) vs. the irrationality of atheism (belief in something coming from nothing).

My point stands, choobo, if you cant see the link, then find it.

damn it, you got to think outside the box a little more, your tunnel vision is beginning to irritate me.

I think you're a bit tunnelvisioned, to be honest. What makes you think an all-powerful being can't create a universe and laws to govern it (Physics)?

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Norse wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

Right...so god had physics on his side when he created the world?

Or did he just creat physics as well? my word!! why does pi=3.141....blah blah, because god says so!!

Shouldnt 'newtons law' be renamed "gods law 234819"?

What on Earth are you talking about? That doesn't have much to do with what you quoted.

The discussion at the moment is about the irrationality of theism (belief in something with no origin) vs. the irrationality of atheism (belief in something coming from nothing).

actually the belief in something coming from nothing isn't necessarily atheist. zen buddhism, religous daoism and philosophical(non religous)daoism all share it as a belief.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

i think there's a problem with language and terminology. since in our language everything is a something, we can say nothingness is a something. but what myself and daoist philosyphy(and other systems too) is refering to is a nothingness that's basically inconcivable for us. a nothing that's before, before.

But you believe that something can come from said absolute nothing? That's simply illogical - equally illogical as something (ie God) which has existed forever.

why do think it's illogical? back it up.

logically since something has to arise from another something the only logical origin is nothingness.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Norse wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:
What on Earth are you talking about? That doesn't have much to do with what you quoted.

The discussion at the moment is about the irrationality of theism (belief in something with no origin) vs. the irrationality of atheism (belief in something coming from nothing).

My point stands, choobo, if you cant see the link, then find it.

damn it, you got to think outside the box a little more, your tunnel vision is beginning to irritate me.

I think you're a bit tunnelvisioned, to be honest. What makes you think an all-powerful being can't create a universe and laws to govern it (Physics)?

Who is this all powered being? al gore?

Your naivety sickens me.

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

i think there's a problem with language and terminology. since in our language everything is a something, we can say nothingness is a something. but what myself and daoist philosyphy(and other systems too) is refering to is a nothingness that's basically inconcivable for us. a nothing that's before, before.

But you believe that something can come from said absolute nothing? That's simply illogical - equally illogical as something (ie God) which has existed forever.

why do think it's illogical? back it up.

logically since something has to arise from another something the only logical origin is nothingness.

Nothing = the opposite of something.

If you say: "Since something comes from something, the origin must be nothing", you're making a self-denying statement. The first part disagrees with the second. Hence it's illogical.

Norse wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Norse wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:
What on Earth are you talking about? That doesn't have much to do with what you quoted.

The discussion at the moment is about the irrationality of theism (belief in something with no origin) vs. the irrationality of atheism (belief in something coming from nothing).

My point stands, choobo, if you cant see the link, then find it.

damn it, you got to think outside the box a little more, your tunnel vision is beginning to irritate me.

I think you're a bit tunnelvisioned, to be honest. What makes you think an all-powerful being can't create a universe and laws to govern it (Physics)?

Who is this all powered being? al gore?

Your naivety sickens me.

Norse, what is your point? I say there exists something with no origin, and you say everything came from nothing. Both make no logical sense whatsoever, so before you go about bashing my side of the fence, how about you prove that yours is right?

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Norse, what is your point? I say there exists something with no origin, and you say everything came from nothing. Both make no logical sense whatsoever, so before you go about bashing my side of the fence, how about you prove that yours is right?

Well, Im not going to fucking spoon feed you, you idiot. Work out the relevance from my previous posts.

I know they dont teach you this in sunday school, but maybe you should learn to read fact before fiction, if you catch my drift?

mybike_yourface wrote:

vtmarik wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

Reminds me of an old piece of wisdom, "Trust he who seeks the truth, doubt he who finds it."

so you have no opinion?

Not a complete one, I don't have enough info to form a complete conclusion.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

i think there's a problem with language and terminology. since in our language everything is a something, we can say nothingness is a something. but what myself and daoist philosyphy(and other systems too) is refering to is a nothingness that's basically inconcivable for us. a nothing that's before, before.

But you believe that something can come from said absolute nothing? That's simply illogical - equally illogical as something (ie God) which has existed forever.

why do think it's illogical? back it up.

logically since something has to arise from another something the only logical origin is nothingness.

Nothing = the opposite of something.

If you say: "Since something comes from something, the origin must be nothing", you're making a self-denying statement. The first part disagrees with the second. Hence it's illogical.

chicken and the egg

the idea is that nothingness gives rise to everything. nothingness's only comparable conterpart would be everything, the infinate.

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

mybike_yourface wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

freezie wrote:In theory, and logically thinking, something came from nothing.

Exactly. Except that's a logical fallacy. My point is that atheism and theism both boil down to a basic irrationality.

why is that a logical fallacy? this is an age old philisophical arguement by the way. i'm personally on the unknowable nothingness side

You don't think that logic fails if you say that something comes from nothing?

i think there's a problem with language and terminology. since in our language everything is a something, we can say nothingness is a something. but what myself and daoist philosyphy(and other systems too) is refering to is a nothingness that's basically inconcivable for us. a nothing that's before, before.

But you believe that something can come from said absolute nothing? That's simply illogical - equally illogical as something (ie God) which has existed forever.

why do think it's illogical? back it up.

logically since something has to arise from another something the only logical origin is nothingness.

Nothing = the opposite of something.

If you say: "Since something comes from something, the origin must be nothing", you're making a self-denying statement. The first part disagrees with the second. Hence it's illogical.

chicken and the egg

the idea is that nothingness gives rise to everything. nothingness's only comparable conterpart would be everything, the infinate.

How does nothingness give rise to everything, and what does its "counterpart" have anything to do with this?

And the egg came first, assuming you believe in evolution

because you feel convict thats why they are annoying...people dont like it when they feel convicted

Epic bump.

Look at all of those beautiful embedded quotes...

Neoteny wrote:Epic bump.

Look at all of those beautiful embedded quotes...

there is an almost spiritual beauty in their order

Why would anybody bump this?



Oh... hang on, whoops.

Neoteny wrote:Epic bump.

Look at all of those beautiful embedded quotes...

those were the days, endless quoting.