The MSS - 13 November 2011 - Part 6 - Philosophising god into existence!

The Magic Sandwich Show is broadcast every 2 weeks from here:
http://www.blogtv.com/people/magicsan...

• Category

  Education

[kommissarw]

These proponents of Kalam, whatever the variation. Where they have rival religions, they need to debate each other, using their Kalam argument. If they are not willing to do this, they know their argument is vacuous.

[Johan Biemans]

I had to make a comment about infinity:

It is perfectly reasonable to say that there is a potential infinite future number of events, because we never have to reach the end of the sequence.

The reason that people like Dr Craig object to the infinite past is the fact that they are stuck in the mode of thinking there must have been a "first" cause. If there is a first then it must, by necessity have happened a finite time ago.

remove the first and the problem goes away.

[utubepunk]

The dangerous thing about WLC, besides his used-car salesperson slickness is that he's a true believer. Like they said- if every one of his arguments could be disproved with facts, evidence, he would still believe! If he said that to me, I would point out that makes him not rational & incapable of sound judgment.

[SocialDissimulation]

And therein lies why religion is so dangerous. The assumptions they make about the universe whilst knowing of only a fraction of its contents is breathtaking, stupid and as I said, dangerous.

[alex leduc]

For the longest time I was uncertain whether c0nc0rdance's delightful elocutions were contrived for the purpose of making an engaging video. I'm further delighted to discover that this is not the case, and that c0nc0rdance sounds this way all the time.

[integralmath]

@theVulcanGuy: it's not my show, so I don't get to control the conversation. Further, I don't think a professional scientist actually thinks that Zeno's Paradox is really a paradox. Or if he does, then he's going to consider it a veridical paradox. I think most people would assume that I'm naturally deductive, but I actually spend very little time doing any formal logic.

[theVulcanGuy]

i got that you didn't mention time (quit rubbing my nose in it ;) ), my question was motivated by cOncOrdance's referring to said paradox, and your reply, specifically: why not simply point out that it isn't really a paradox even by it's original form, it's simply a matter of calculus. as for my bonus question?

[integralmath]

1.) I didn't mention Zeno's Paradox. 2.) the problem with it is that it's quite clearly false that one can't traverse some distance. 3.) at least one dimension of time is necessary for all motion in this universe. 4.) I never said time was mentioned in the original paradox. 5.) I mentioned time as it relates it to WLC and his argument that our present time is somehow called in question if the series of past events is infinite.