You obviously aren’t into quantum theory or parapsychology. Hardly a surprise. Either is rather rare, not called for in every day life. The theory was presented that you be aware how other factors came to shape my views on God and medieval superstitions. If it went too far over your head to comprehend rationally, sorry.Higgenbotham wrote: ↑Sat Oct 28, 2023 8:09 amYou're obviously having trouble processing basic information. Once again, I will go through this step by step, very slowly...
But Langan’s supposition is that if I hypothesize a theory by which God is not necessary tor the impression of mind over matter, this is supposedly a proof that God exists. No. If you create a theory that assumes God exists, it is easy to prove that according to that theory God exists. I am willing to admit that CTMU is self consistent. I am not willing to accept it as the only self consistent theory of knowledge.
We learn. You have to accept that as we learn we must give up on what we believed earlier. Currently, in astrophysics, we are searching for a lot of antimatter which should be around somewhere. When and if we find it, we will likely have to adjust our theories. The supposition that all theories are tautologies, are inherently true, is just not useful.
This reminds me a discussion involving the debate between Newton and Bishop Barkley. Newton pretty much defined modern science with Principea Mathematica. Barkley put his mind games ahead of the study of the universe. I was with Newton then, and still am.
You are telling women what to do with their bodies, thus telling others what to do in their house. The government is not supposed to force one group’s religion on others.