What are our options?

(i) X is detectable then X exists (Rejected because of hallucinations)

(ii) X exists then X is detectable (Ok, can be used to demonstrate nonexistence via nondetectability) — Agent Smith

Detectable implies material, but God is not material.
Therefore "detectable" should be defined so that it includes nonmaterial detection, ie. psychological phenomena, fulfillment of prayer and similar.

Since I have concluded, intuitively & logically, that our world (our reality ; our existence) is highly improbable, given that its fundamental process is Entropy -- inevitably leading to death & disappearance -- the necessity for an exogenous causal force seems undeniable. — Gnomon

DENIED. ~Laozi & Zhuangzi
DENIED. ~Epicurus
DENIED. ~B. Spinoza
DENIED. ~A. Einstein
DENIED. ~H. Everett
DENIED. ~J. Hartle & S.Hawking
DENIED. ~D. Deutsch
Et al....
Not at all "undeniable", G; just another false dichotomy.

:up:

I like the way you make ideals another type of being. It's close to what I said once in another thread. There's no nonexistence, just different kinds of existence. I think Meinong of Meinong's jungle fame thought along the same lines. On this view it's wrong to say God, or anything else for that matter, doesn't exist. God exists but not in the same way as (say) a rock! Wordplay?

What are our options?

(i) X is detectable then X exists (Rejected because of hallucinations)

(ii) X exists then X is detectable (Ok, can be used to demonstrate nonexistence via nondetectability)
— Agent Smith

Detectable implies material, but God is not material.
Therefore "detectable" should be defined so that it includes nonmaterial detection, ie. psychological phenomena, fulfillment of prayer and similar — SpaceDweller

What about so-called hallucinations/mirages?

What about so-called hallucinations/mirages? — Agent Smith

We know upfront mirages are fake because it can be proven.
hallucinations, I don't know.

but things such as clinical death are real.

We know upfront mirages are fake because it can be proven.
hallucinations, I don't know.

but things such as clinical death are real. — SpaceDweller

I like how those who've really thought things through speak/act. Clinical death! :up:

There is a book called "life after death" (I don't recall who wrote it), it talks about survivors of clinical death, and their experiences.
most of them shared similar experiences, things such as "out of body" and "light and the end of tunnel" phenomena.

There is a book called "life after death", it talks about survivors of clinical death, and their experiences.
most of them shared similar experiences, things such as "out of body" and "light and the end of tunnel" phenomena. — SpaceDweller

Well, for some of us who got a raw deal in life, I hope there's a second chance!

I like the way you make ideals another type of being. It's close to what I said once in another thread. There's no nonexistence, just different kinds of existence. I think Meinong of Meinong's jungle fame thought along the same lines. On this view it's wrong to say God, or anything else for that matter, doesn't exist. God exists but not in the same way as (say) a rock! Wordplay? — Agent Smith

Of course, it's wordplay. But it's also Idea-play. That's what humans do. Those who deny Idealism, are repudiating Humanism. What distinguishes humans from animals? Mostly, it's the ability to convert sensory impressions into the communicatable concepts we call "Words" & "Ideas". We can then play-around with those "Memes" to construct worldviews that are more-than just sensory appearances. Those imaginary models of the world are what we label "Ideals" ; mental replicas of reality with improvements. They go beyond as-is Reality into as-if Ideality. And the positive result of that reasoning from IS to IF is what we call "Creativity". Of course, some creative ideas fall short of feasibility : e.g. Elon Musk says he wants to buy CocaCola, so he can put the Cocaine back in. I hope he's pulling-the-leg of Twitter twits.

Ironically, adamant philosophical Realists dismiss the practicality of the unrealistic mental tool that makes Philosophy possible : the ability to abstract the essence of specific concrete (real) things into general & universal (ideal) principles, which exist only in the un-real realm of Ideality. World-dominating human culture is the practical product of the homo sapiens ability to Idealize mundane Reality into Utopias & Sky Castles, that seldom become real, but do give us an advantage over the animals, who just make-do with what Nature provides -- humans make-believe. Without our talent for improving upon Nature, we would still be shivering cave-dwellers without fangs & claws. The Garden of Eden does not exist in the past, but only in the future world of Ideality. :smile:


Ideality :
* In Plato’s theory of Forms, he argues that non-physical forms (or ideas) represent the most accurate or perfect reality. Those Forms are not physical things, but merely definitions or recipes of possible things. What we call "Reality" consists of a few actualized potentials drawn from a realm of infinite possibilities.
1. Materialists deny the existence of such immaterial ideals, but recent developments in Quantum theory have forced them to accept the concept of “virtual” particles in a mathematical “field”, that are not real, but only potential, until their unreal state is collapsed into reality by a measurement or observation. "To measure" is to extract meaning into a mind. [Measure, from L. Mensura, to know; from mens-, mind]
2. Some modern idealists find that scenario to be intriguingly similar to Plato’s notion that ideal Forms can be realized, i.e. meaning extracted, by knowing minds. For the purposes of this blog, “Ideality” refers to an infinite pool of potential (equivalent to a quantum field), of which physical Reality is a small part. A traditional name for that fertile field is G*D. But you can call it the Enformation Field, if you like.
BothAnd Blog Glossary

In the former case, you acknowedge that reasons exist. Well, those can't exist unless God does. So God exists. — Bartricks

Why does reason depend on the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent person?

Because reasons - that is, reasons to do things and to believe things - are favoring relations. Only a mind can be the source of a favoring relation. And in the case of reasons, they all have the same source: Reason. Thus, it follows that Reason is a mind.

That mind will be omnipotent, because Reason's attitudes constitutively determine what's possible (all the laws of logic are prescriptions of Reason). Thus for her all things are possible as she is not bound by her own prescriptions.

That mind will be omniscient because Reason's attitudes constitutively determine whether a belief qualifies as an item of knowledge.

That mind will be omnibenevolent because Reason's attitudes constitutively determine what's good and bad. Reason will have a pro-attitude towards her own character, given she could change it if she in any way disapproved of it. Thus Reason will be good.

That mind will qualify as God, then (as possession of those properties is sufficient to qualify). If reasons exist, Reason exists. Reason is God. Therefore, if reasons exist then God exists.

You have a very good thing going on there, monsieur/mademoiselle.

Did you know, I'm sure you do, that mathematically speaking, everything reduces to points, lines, curves, each one of these translatable into an equation? In other words, if you want to know what Plato's world of forms looks like, go to bed with the Queen of the sciences (mathematics).

If reasons exist, Reason exists. Reason is God. Therefore, if reasons exist then God exists. — Bartricks

:yikes: :monkey: :lol:

Why are you crying with laughter?

If p, then q.
If q, then t
Therefore, if p then t
P
Therefore t.

There - wet your pants.

:rofl:

Their faith make them seem blind towards God's mercy — javi2541997

Don't you think ithat rather makes me a visionary? And the atheist scientist the one being blind?

Visionary on what? The atheist scientist being blind for what?

Visionary on what? The atheist scientist being blind for what? — javi2541997

That's exactly what I mean!

Did you know, I'm sure you do, that mathematically speaking, everything reduces to points, lines, curves, each one of these translatable into an equation? In other words, if you want to know what Plato's world of forms looks like, go to bed with the Queen of the sciences (mathematics). — Agent Smith

Yes. Some ancient philosophers (Pythagoras) and modern Physicists (Mario Livio) have imagined G*D metaphorically as a Divine Mathematician. My own metaphor, based on the Enformationism thesis, is that G*D is the Cosmic Programmer. These are not the kind of deities that you would worship, as a Tyrannical Heavenly Despot. Yet you have no choice but to obey His/Her Natural Laws. Fortunately, the Math Wizard has provided enough uncertainty in Nature, for humans to take advantage of the freedom to devise workarounds that result in Culture : nature modified to suit the special needs of big-brain bi-peds without fur & claws & fangs. :smile:

PS__Plato's Forms may be imagined as logical algorithms, mathematical equations, computer programs, or as musical scores.

God is a Mathematician :
Math sounds a lot like the attributes of God—eternal, omnipresent and omnipotent. According to theoretical physicist Michio Koku, “The mind of God we believe is cosmic music, the music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace. That is the mind of God.“
https://www.scienceandnonduality.com/article/god-is-a-mathematician

There's no nonexistence, just different kinds of existence. I think Meinong of Meinong's jungle fame thought along the same lines. — Agent Smith

I just Googled "Meinong's Jungle", and found that his view of Nominal vs Phenomenal existence was similar to my own assumption in the Enformationism Thesis. Phenomenal reality is what we know via the 5 senses. However, we also give names to abstract concepts (e.g. metaphors ; symbols) that exist only in the mind, and sometimes treat them as-if they were real things. But Materialists & Nominalists dismiss such imaginary "objects" (e.g. Unicorns & Pegasus) as non-sense. Ironically, that view would ignore most of what makes humans different from animals : imagination & projection into the not-yet-real future. Yes, those ideal "objects" even include popular religious figures and Marvel super-heroes.

In the Enformationism thesis, I treat Ideas (mental objects) as-if they have some kind of meaningful & useful, but non-physical existence. Literally, they don't "matter", but they do signify. That assumption is based on the science of Information (knowledge), which is essentially meta-physical, but also exists in various physical forms. [see below] Since Einstein, we have known that Matter (Mass) & Energy are interchangeable, and more recently that physical Energy & abstract Information are different forms of the same Rational Potential. That Ideal "kind of existence" is what Plato's Idealism referred to as "Forms". Their way-of-being is not Actual & Physical, but Potential & Meta-Physical. For humans, especially philosophers, ideas are just as important as food & shelter.

Unfortunately, the Materialists & Physicalists & Nominalists on this forum, object to my use of an ancient Theological term, "Metaphysics", which to them implies that ghosts, spirits & souls are to be treated as Real things. Instead, my intention is merely to treat those imaginary objects-of-thought as worthy of philosophical consideration. Presumably, most animals are limited to sensing only things that have physical phenomenal existence. But humans have a sixth sense that can conceive & simulate & manipulate unreal ideas & symbols, as-if they real. And the result is often what we call "creativity". And that includes religious metaphors & analogies, that served human philosophical purposes long before the advent of Empirical Phenomenal Science. :nerd:


Meinong, an Austrian philosopher active at the turn of the 20th century, believed that since non-existent things could apparently be referred to, they must have some sort of being, which he termed sosein ("being so") https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meinong%27s_jungle

In metaphysics, nominalism is the view that universals and abstract objects do not actually exist other than being merely names or labels. ___Wiki

Phenominalism : the doctrine that human knowledge is confined to or founded on the realities or appearances presented to the senses.

Is information the fifth state of matter? :
In 2019, physicist Melvin Vopson of the University of Portsmouth proposed that information is equivalent to mass and energy, existing as a separate state of matter, a conjecture known as the mass-energy-information equivalence principle. This would mean that every bit of information has a finite and quantifiable mass.
https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/information-energy-mass-equivalence/
Note --- In my thesis, I treat abstract Information as essential & fundamental, and its various physical forms as superficial & accessory. In other words, Ideal is prior to Real, as Plato assumed.

Physics & Metaphysics :
Two sides of the same coin we call Reality. When we look for matters of fact, we see physics. But when we search for meaning, we find meta-physics. A mental flip is required to view the other side. And imagination is necessary to see both at the same time.
BothAnd Blog Glossary

The "Enformation Thesis"?

Meinong, an Austrian philosopher active at the turn of the 20th century, believed that since non-existent things could apparently be referred to, they must have some sort of being, which he termed sosein ("being so") — Gnomon

Anything that can be referred to is a thing. Whether it has physical existence is a different question.
Do unicorns exist? Yes. Do flying horses exist, no.

My understanding of your Enformationism Thesis is basically this: As far as we, h. sapiens, and also other beings with more or less the same level of intelligence, are concerned, information is key to building a universe. Think computer simulations - information (on how to create a universe like ours) is prior to the (simulated) universe itself.

The next obvious question is, who is/are the programmer(s) [god(s)]? Someone/something must have used the information required to construct a universe, ours; this one maybe one among many others (multiverse).

What sayest thou?

I've always wondered about existence and God. Theists claim God exists, but they make it a point to state that God's immaterial/nonphysical. — Agent Smith

And rightly so. Ain't heaven a purely non-material state of existence? And the cosmos a material copy?

Do unicorns exist? Yes. Do flying horses exist, no. — Jackson

Flying horses don't exist and unicorns do?

Flying horses don't exist and unicorns do? — Hillary

That is what I wrote.

That is what I wrote. — Jackson

But why don't flying horses exist?

And rightly so. Ain't heaven a purely non-material state of existence? And the cosmos a material copy? — Hillary

Interesting!

But why don't flying horses exist? — Hillary

Horses cannot fly.

Pegasus airlines can.