Anyway, enjoy mooing with the other unqualified farmyard animals. — Bartricks

What are your qualifications?

Just curious, what is, to you, worthy of worship? — Agent Smith

I agree with Einstein: "Spinoza's God" (maybe!) As I've recently replied to you .

PhD.

Now answer my question. Why do you think God can't make a stone too heavy for him to lift? Have you thought about it at all? What thought process led you to think that an all powerful person would lack the power to do that? What reasoning got you to the conclusion that being able to do anything must involve being unable to do some things? It's such an obvious contradiction.

Do you also think that, say, if A is bigger than B, and B is bigger than C, then A is smaller than C?

PhD. — Bartricks

I'm sorry, it's obvious you don't have a PhD.

Have fun playing at the man behind the curtain. Watch out for Toto, he's coming for you.

I do have a PhD in philosophy. You don't. If you did, you'd know I had one.

Now, how about 'doing' some philosophy? Answer my question. Or do you not have justifying reasons for your blurtings? In which case why are you on a philosophy forum?

I do have a PhD in philosophy. — Bartricks

No, you don't.

God has all power which exists, because God is the sum total of all things. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yes I do. It's a requirement of my job (as opposed to your job, the only qualification for which is, I imagine, that one have hands). Now, are you going to do any philosophy or is nay saying all you are good for?

Yes I do. — Bartricks

No, you don't.

The sum total of what exists is not equivalent to God. The sum total of what exists is just that: the totality of what exists. God is among the existent things. But if you are using the word 'God' to denote the sum totalof what exists then you are misusing the term. After all, that would mean everyone believes in God, for everyone agrees there's a sum total of what exists. The disagreement is over what that includes.

Yes I do.

Who are you to say, though, really. God is everything, whether you agree or not. Who am I to say?

Someone special.

Yes I do. — Bartricks

It's obvious to everyone on this forum who's spent any time studying philosophy that you have no qualifications.

Everyone knows. It's obvious.

The problem most of you have is that you think good thinking is thinking that echoes your own. But anyway, take me to school and show me the error in my reasoning.

Reason. Just consult your reason.

God denotes a person who is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.

It doesn't mean 'the sum total of what exists'.

If it did, then no one would dispute that God exists.

You could also ask people what they mean by 'God'. They don't mean 'the sum total of what exists'. Jeez.

God doesn't denote a person, but a being, a being which is the living universe, which meets the criteria of the definition of God. Jesus is sacrilege.

God denotes a person — Bartricks

God is a person? A PhD in ludicrosity?

Jeez. — Bartricks

You could also ask people what they mean by 'God'. They don't mean 'the sum total of what exists'. — Bartricks

So we find out what god is by asking people?

A PhD in pop theology?

God doesn't denote a person, but a being, a being which is the living universe, which meets the criteria of the definition of God. Jesus is sacrilege. — theRiddler

No, it denotes a person who has the properties of omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence.

Have you had anything published in the philosophy of religion in a peer reviewed venue?

If the answer is 'no', then shut up and be schooled.

No, it denotes a person... — Bartricks

Meaningless bald assertion, Doctor of Ludicrosity.

Have you had anything published in the philosophy of religion in a peer reviewed venue?

If the answer is 'no', then shut up and be schooled. — Bartricks

You can't fool us.

No serious philosophical journal has published your ludicrosities, doc.

Do you have anything philosophical to contribute?

This thread is about God and free will.

Now, tell me, what's the difference between a modest incompatibilist conception of free will and a robust modest incompatibilist conception of free will? And can you name me some contemporary defenders of each kind?

And what is a hard-line compatibilist? And can you name me a defender?
And what is semi-compatibilism - and can you name me a defender?
And what is agent-causal incompatibilism - and can you name me a defender?
And what is hard-incompatibilism - and can you name me a defender?
And what is a soft-line compatibilist - and can you name me a defender?

Do you have anything philosophical to contribute? — Bartricks

Like I said: I don't think we can have a meaningful conversation.

Your ridiculous assertions and the abusive pomposity in which you couch them make for easy trolling.


You can't claim you have a PhD in philosophy and then say god is a person. You gave your game away.

God is a person. What do you think God is, then? A potato?

God is a person. — Bartricks

How can this be known?

Ah, "how can it be known?" - the cry of the fool. It's what's called a 'conceptual truth'. The concept of God 'just is' the concept of a person who has certain properties. Someone who doubts this is what philosophers would call 'conceptually confused' and what others would call 'a spanner'.

The concept of God 'just is' the concept of a person — Bartricks

Again, childish, ludicrous, and further evidence of your lack of credentials.

Every concept of god is that of god as a person?

You could insist, if you want, that by 'God' you mean 'a potato' and that's fine - then your concept of God would be the concept of a potato. But then this thread wouldn't make much sense, would it? Because then it'd be "Does a potato have free will?" So, only a total idiot would think that 'God' in "Does God have free will" denotes something non-personal.
There are a host of philosophical questions to be asked about God - does God have free will? Does God exist? If God exists, why is there evil? These are questions that have vexed philosophers for millennia. However, these questions - 'does a potato have free will?', 'does a potato exist?' and 'if a potato exists, why is there evil' - have not, because only a total idiot would wonder about such matters or think that God meant 'a potato' or that those debating whether God has free will are wondering whether a potato has free will.

— Bartricks

Every concept of god is that of god as a person? — ZzzoneiroCosm

Answer the question or shut your mouth.

No, for you think God is a potato. Now answer mine.
What's a robust modest incompatibilist and now does one of those differ from a modest incompatibilist? And how do both differ from agent-causal incompatibilists?

No, for you think God is a potato. — Bartricks

Childishness.