Why the multiverse fails.

Well since I have not much time to write this article I will just post this link I read on the multiverse actually a couple of links and a reference to check.

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5741
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=7289

Check out reasonablefaith the thrid edition
Check out Contending with Christianity's crtics the second chapter.

So sorry I had some problems

Recently I had some family problems to resolve but everything is resolved. I know i said this before tomorrow for sure I will answer the multiverse hypothesis.

Tomorrow I will post about the multiverse.

I did some more research and I am ready to blog it tomorrow. Also tomorrow I will have so much coffee and caffine and energy drinks I will die!

Forgetting to blog part 3

Yes I promised the multiverse hypothesis. Yes I know when are you going to do it? Soon. It's just a lot of material I am undertaking at the moment. Okay to be honest. It has to do with a girl got it. I am preoccupied with a girl and trying to win her over. Okay! There I said it. When I find some time on my schedule I will blog about the multiverse hypothesis. Please forgive me for not doing anything for now.

Forgetting to blog part 2

I know I promised you guys to have a article on the multiverse hypothesis but a lot of things are going on in my social life that I must resolve before I get into the academia. I can't even study because of her. But I have said to much. My areas of study right now are God and abstract objects.

Girls, girls, girls!

Well today I decided to blog about my personal life today. So bear with me. Well I really like this girl she is amazing and awesome. She smart, funny, cute, just a great girl. So I asked her out and she said no. I been trying hard to win her over but I have failed. So I am moving on. This time I mean it. I feel like my feelings are starting to fade away. I still like her but my feelings are turning more like that of a friend. And praise God for that because I am tired of liking her. So there are two other girls. One is a Christian and the other is probably not. So anyway the Christian girl is cute and funny, smart, nice, shy and a devoted Christian. I don't like her she is just a friend the thing is I just want to ask her out. Get to know her etc. The other girl is not a Christian but she is a blond latina. In other words she is a ten out of ten (excuse me for being so vulgur) she is really, really, really, hot. She is also cute. She has that hot-cute look to her. She has a innocent face yet she has that hot girl look. But it is not just the looks she is also really nice and shy and fun and cool. She is one of those eco friendly types and is just awesome. But she is not a Christian. Well what am I to do. If you ask me I rather go with the non Christian. I am sorry but I know her better we are friends already. Plus she is really hot. But God help me.

The second premise

2. It is not due to chance or necessity.


Well to begin with what do we mean by fine tunning? Well the laws of nature are so precise so to speak to allow life to exist. What do we mean by life? Any organism that uses energy from food and can reproduce. So the laws of nature are so fine tunned to even allow the most simplest cell to exist. Well some of you might object saying okay but that means nothing. Well it does since there is only one universe and it is highly unlikely that the laws of nature would have been this way. It is more probable that the laws of nature would have been life prohibiting than permitting. Most scienctist agree that the universe doesn't have to be the way it is, it could have been different. So this fine tunning requires explanation.


Chance.

Some say well the laws just happen to be the right ones. Like the lottery it is highly inprobable you win it but someone got to win it. So the same with the universe. But this analogy fails because were are not asking why a universe exists. Of course some universe must exist. But we are asking why a fine tunned universe exists. So I agree some universe must exist but it is highly more likely that the universe be life prohibiting than permitting. Some respond by saying any universe is equally improbable. Well yes but it is more probable that the universe be life prohibiting than permitting. To give the proper analogy example, suppose we have 1 white ball thrown into a sea of black balls. And you have to blindfolded chose one. Any ball you grab is highly improbable. But you got to grab a ball but it is highly more probable that the ball you grab be a black ball than a white ball.

The anthropic principle.

Some people object by saying that we shouldn't be surprised at the fine tunning because if it weren't we wouldn't be here to observe it. Well this is a horrible objection. To give a analogy suppose you are put in front of a firing squad of 100 trained marksmen. The captain gives the orders READY, AIM, FIRE! You hear the roar of the guns and to your surprise you are still alive! And you say to yourself I shouldn't be surprised they missed because if they hadn't I wouldn't be here to observe it! Would you actually consider that answer for a minute. NO! You shouldn't be surprised that your not dead because your alive to observe it but you should be surprised that you alive. So the same applies with the principle.

The multiverse hypothesis.

The only way the principle can work if it were linked to a multiverse. Saying okay it is highly improbable that a fine tunned universe exists but there are many universe and some of them have to be fine tunned so we are just one of them. Well the multiverse hypothesis has nothing to be said in it favor. One of the main problems is that there has yet to be mentioned a mechanism to generate the many worlds. And the ones that have been proposed often themselves require fine tunning. So the problem get even worse. I will have more to say on the multiverse hypothesis tomorrow in a special article for it.

The teological argument.

Most of you know this argument and think probably it has been refuted by science and evolution. But think again I think science give us good clues to think the universe is designed. But for this article we are going to just list the argument in premises.

1. Either the fine tunning of the universe is due to necessity, chance or design.
2. It is not due to necessity or chance.
3. Therefore it is due to design.

Premise one presents us with three options which I think are the only ones around. So if there is another option one would have to include it in the first premise. But since I see no other alternatives than premise one is sound. I don't think anyone objects to premise one. Now the part they object is premise 2 but in our next article we will disucuss premise 2 of the argument.

Cashcrate.

This is where I get my money from. The link is on the right if you noticed. Now this website is great because you can get paid just by doing surveys, offers, and shopping! The surveys are quick and easy and they pay decent amount. They send you a check if you hit the 20 dollar mark. That is the mimnimum. Now if you make 100 dollars they send it to you on the 15th of the next month. I have personally recieved checks from them and they are real and valid. There is also a great refferel system where you can make even more money. For example if you sign up they give you a special refferel link just for you and if people click on that link and they sign up under that link you make 20% of what they make! And people who sign up under them you make 10% from them! SO imagine you refer 20 people and they refer another 20. Just imagine how much you can make! So click the link on the side and get started now if you do you can get two dollars free!

Let's begin.

Now it might surprise you that premises 2-6 of the ontological argument are not disputed. That most philosophers will agree that as long as the concept of God is even possible he must exist. Now what it all depends on is the concept of God being logically possible. Now the detractor of the argument has to show whether God is a incoherent concept like a married bachelor or a round square. Now what do I mean by maximally great? Well a being who is omniscience, omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent and he would exist in every logically way. Since a maximally great being must exist in every possible world it must exist in the actual world since this too is also a possible world. That is what it means to be maximally great. Now is God existence logically possible. I think so. There is nothing incoherent in God nature to make him logically impossible. The atheist has to maintain that God existence is impossible. So that is it for the ontological argument! Pretty short right? Next time I will answer some objections to the argument.


Well I haven't blogged about my personal life in a while. Right now I am doing a two week study on some topics I have been putting off. Right now I am doing a study on abstract objects. This is a serious topic to the Christian philosopher because many philosopher think that abstract objects exist necessarily. Therefore uncreated. But God is the source of all reality and thus created all things. But if God didn't create abstract objects then they exist independently of him. Which makes God part of a infinite number of abstract objects. This is a serious problem for the Christian philosopher. I need to resolve this. I also want to look into Intelligent design a bit more and see if a warrant for design is warranted in biology. Then I want to look into ethics and ethical choices and something about Cognitive faculties and ethics and moral progress.


So I have a lot to study. Maybe I will take a time off facebook. I said I was going to be off for 2 weeks but the number of topics I need to study is overwhelming. Maybe a couple of months. I don't know. Let's talk about that girl I like. I need to stop liking her she is not a Christian it is not going to work out. But there is this other girl that is a Christian who is also smart but I barely see her. But maybe I should ask her out. I don't know but sometimes I feel somewhat lonely. I am a man after all I want to have someone to share my knowledge with make them happy. To be there for them and to love and treasure them. I can't date a unbeliever because of the ethical thinking we differ. So a believer would be great. But most Christians teens are not really Christian as in born again. Because the girl I like she claims she is a Christian but the Bible says by their fruit you shall know them. She think sex before marriage is okay, and she curses etc. So obviously she is one of those people who think that going to church makes you a Christian. It's like saying going to the gym and sitting down makes you fit. So I have decided to look for a believer to date. Make God help me. Or else I will die alone. Well not alone as in God is with me. But you know what I mean. Not that being single is bad but.....



Okay that is it for this blog!

Been busy studying

I have been busy studying philosophy trying to figure out about abstract entities. Now I can go into a article about what they are but that would be superfluous. So tomorrow I will being to ontological argument. I will be presenting the most current form of the argument which I believe goes like this.

1. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
2. If it is possible that maximally great being exists, than it must exist in some possible world.
3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, than it exists in all possible worlds.
4. If a maximally great being exists in all possible worlds, than it exists in the actual world.
5. If maximally great being exists it exists in the actual world.
6. Therefore a maximally great being exists.
7. Therefore God exists.

Pretty long argument right? Well some of you might be asking what is possible worlds. Possible worlds is just a description of asking how could have been reality. For example the proposition that John mcain is president is false in the actual world but can be true in some possible world. A possible world is the description of reality with different propositions. Or a way reality could be. Re-read that a couple of times in order for you to get it. Well that is it for this article the ontological argument is fairly quick so it should be done in a day or two.

Conclusion

Well the contingency argument seems sound. Now some of you might object what if the universe exists necessarily? Well not many atheists have been to eager to endorse this idea. Now when I say necessary I mean that the universe the way it is has to be this way there is no other way it could be. But I think we can grasp the universe contingency. With the rise of modern science we know that the planets and start etc, have been created some 4 billions years or so by some external cause. No one would seriously would endorse the idea that a planet is a necessary being. But the entire universe is composed of atom which are composed of quarks. Now to say that the universe exists out of necessity of it's own nature is to say that a quark is necessary. Now no one thinks the quarks has some special property that makes it necessary. The universe does not exist out of necessity of it's nature. Because we can envision that in some possible world a universe composed of different quarks can give arise to a universe. Now is that universe the same or different. It's different because it is composed of different quarks. Most scientist would agree that the universe doesn't have to be this way that it could have been different.

No there is one more way to escape the argument. Now some will object okay the universe might not exist necessarily but nonetheless something must exist! It is impossible that nothing exist. Since the universe is that something it does not need a explanation. Well this objection seems absurd. Now note this reasoning let's just agree with this for the moment. Something must exist. Well let's say that nothing exists and that it is impossible for anything but a unicorn to exist. And since something must exist it entails that a unicorn must exist. This strikes me as absurd.

Tomorrow I will discuss the ontological argument for the existence of God.

Too lazy to blog

Well I am off for thanksgiving vacation so I will blog tomorrow.

Second premise and thrid premise.

2. The universe has a explanation of it's existence and that explanation is God.

This might seem question begging but it is not. This is logically equivalent when the atheist asserts that the universe has no explanation for it's existence. If atheism is true the universe has no explanation for it's existence but if atheism is false than the latter theism is true, and the universe has a explanation of it's existence which would be God. Now if you don't understand what I am saying re-read this. Because you wont understand until you do. Now the third premise says the universe exists. Now is there anyone who would like to volunteer to raise a objection to that? Now premise 1 confirms 3 which confirm 2. Now since everything that exists has a explanation for it's existence and the universe exists, therefore the universe has a explanation for it's existence, and that explanation is God since on atheism the universe has no explanation. Hopefully you understand now what I am saying.


Plus, premise 2 is plausible in it's own right. Since the universe has a explanation for it's existence and the universe cannot be explained in terms of necessity of it's own nature. It must lie in a external cause which must be beyond space and time. Which must be personal as well. Which fits well with the description of God.



Next time we will conclude the argument and then move onto objections of the argument. Then I will do a article on the ontological argument for the existence of God and show why I think it is coherent.

Contigency argument.

The first premise of the argument is as follows:

1. Everything that exists has a explanation of it's existence either in necessity of it's own nature or in a external cause.

Now let me explain some terms than move on to a defense of the premise. So what does it mean to exist necessarily. Well many philosophers think number exist this way. That they cannot not exist they are necessary. For example numbers always exist because quantity always exists. For example if I have three oranges in front of my what is the number? 3. It immediately corresponds to reality. Now to the next one a external cause. What does that mean? Well something contingent. Something that came into existence from something else. Like cars or planets or stars etc.

Now this argument is great because it would apply to everything even if the object is eternal. So this argument would hold if the universe was eternal. So the premise is rooted in the principle of sufficient reason. That everything must have a explanation. That there is nothing that exists that has no explanation. This is consistently confirmed in science. If everything did not have a explanation than science would be destroyed. To give a analogy, suppose I find a ball in the woods. You stumble across it during a hiking expedition with your friend. You look at the ball and say how did it get here? And your friend just said forget it! It exists inexplicably! Would you take that response? NO! You would find his answer without logic. You know it must have a explanation. Now suppose the ball was the size of a car. Wouldn't still cry out for a explanation? Suppose it was the size of a building? Wouldn't cry out for a explanation? Suppose now it was the size of a planet? Wouldn't still cry out for a explanation? Suppose now that it was the size of the universe. Wouldn't it still cry out for a explanation? So does the size somehow make it inexplicable the object in question? No! It still requires a explanation. Now some people respond that since the universe came into being from nothing and since there was nothing before it. It is a exception to the principle. Well this is question begging because they are presupposing atheism to be true. But on theism there is a state of affair prior to the big bang namely God. Now some just say the principle is true to things inside the universe but not the universe as a whole. This is just committing the taxi cab fallacy. Which is dismissing a principle because it doesn't fit your conclusions. For example I say all guys are perverts. Than I call my brother not a pervert. Well what makes him a exception? He still a guy. Then he is a pervert. Just because he is my brother doesn't make him a exception. So either I am wrong in my assertion all guys are perverts or that my reasoning is wrong. So with atheist who claim the universe has no explanation they do not like the conclusion it would lead to if it did. What makes the universe a exception to the principle it exists therefore a explanation is needed.


That is it for today. Tomorrow I will discuss the second premise.

Sorry if I kept you waiting.

Today I won't talk about the argument just share some thoughts I been thinking about lately. First off I am debating a atheist on the problem of evil and God existence I will write that a later. So that is why I didn't blog yesterday. And also I hung out with the girl I am in love with yesterday. We stayed after school for chemistry. But I didn't stay for her I really didn't get the material we covered in class. Okay I did it for her like 80% the other 20% was for myself. Hey that is how it is. She graduates this year after that I will never see her again she says she will keep in touch but how long is that going to last? Okay I am blogging my personal life her bear with me. I am really going to miss her.


Anyway I am writing a article on post Christian culture. Which I will discuss how the culture of the united states is now more against traditional values. Such as marriage. Well That is what I have been doing recently. Tomorrow I promise if I don't stay after school that I will continue the contingency argument for the existence of God.

Contingency Argument.

Let's move on shall we? This is the introduction to each of the premises of the argument. I will just lay out the argument and argue each of the premises on a another post. So here is the argument.

1. Everything that exists has a explanation for it's existence either in a external cause or in necessity of it's nature.
2. If the universe has a explanation, than that explanation is God.
3. The universe exists.
4. Therefore the universe has a explanation of it's existence.
5. Therefore the universe has a explanation of it's existence and that explanation it God
6. Therefore God exists.

Pretty long argument. So I want you to think over the premises and think about how each one follows logically to the conclusion. Let me get this out of the way now. WHO HAS A OBJECTION TO PREMISE 3?!!!!!!!!!

Conclusion

As we have seen the moral argument for God's existence seems to be sound. So the conclusion is God must exist. So yeah I guess that is it for this blog. I believe last time we discussed the second premise. Well I guess I can mention why I was so angry yesterday. You can imagine why though. If you know me personally. Anyway I decided to give it one last shot but this time I am going all out. One last shot for love to find a way. If I fail yet again it is over I am done. One more time I am going to get back in the ring and win her over.


Well next time I will move on to contingency argument for the existence of God.

I give up.

Well I am not going to say what I am blogging about today or will I ever say it. It's time to close the books on this one. Forget it bury it under the water. I give up it's pointless, superfluous waste of my precious time which the Lord has given. To be worrying for such trivial pursuits. I give! Screw it! I give! Forget it's over a door shut right in my face. Why should I care?! What's the point?! I try I try I try and fail, fail, fail, fail. My reason tells me yes you failed it's okay to give up. But my heart says no keep trying it will work. When I am alone contemplating I say to myself " reason is right it's the logical thing to do..." When I am around her reasons goes right out the damn window. Let go of my intellect and go out on the heart. But why trust this wicked heart and for what?! It's over and tried and I fail. You can't tell me I didn't try because I did. I tried and failed while daring greatly! Waste of my time and heart and effort. Screw it! I tried.


Tomorrow when I cool down I will give my argument I am just to vexed right now to do it.

Premise two of my argument.

Well last time we observed premise one of the argument. Let's look a premise two.

2. Objective moral values do exist.

Well I think our moral experience give us enough warrant to believe this is true if you don't believe me go out and rob somebody and see what happens. But let me respond to a few challenges. Some people say because evolution is true and our morals evolved than they are not true. Well this is a good textbook example of the genetic fallacy. Which is trying to disprove a belief by how it originated. Our moral values can still be true regardless of how they came to be about. There is a stronger version of this argument which states since our moral evolved they were chosen for their survival value and not for their truth value. So we have no warrant in believing in them. Well two answer can be given. First off it is question begging to say that since they evolved we should not trust them. Why because the person giving the argument is presupposing naturalism. But if God does exist than our morals can still be correct regardless of how they came to be about. Two it is self refuting to say that since our morals evolved that we have no warrant for believing in them. Why? Because on naturalism all of our beliefs are without warrant. Including naturalism itself so therefore it literally refutes itself.

Well some people endorse moral relativism. Which is what is good for me may be bad for you. Well I don't think anyone can live with this philosophy. Why? Well moral relativist cannot condemn moral actions. For example if I rape a child and abuse it. The moral relativist cannot say that was wrong. Because what I am doing might be right to me. It happens all the time in the animal kingdom. But here is the thing that everyone who is a relativist usually support gay rights, abortion, etc. Well where does this notions of rights come from? We are just animals and animals are not moral agents. Well if we have right so should animals. It should be illegal to kill chickens. And vice versa we should arrest a animal for killing humans. But here is the thing people say well animals do have rights. Okay let's me put their reasoning.

1. Humans are animals.
2. Humans have rights.
3. Therefore animals should have rights.

Well let's see where this leads us.

1. Humans kill animals when we no longer need them or when we must eat.
2. Humans are animals.
3. Therefore we can kill humans when we no longer need them or when we must eat.

You see the problem here. I am sure animal rights don't see the logic of it. I agree animals should have rights but against abuse that is it. Some of you might look at this and say well it is not right to kill a human being. Why not? We kill animals and we are just advance primates why not kill humans? Whoever says because we shouldn't because is wrong is guilty of specism. A unjustified biase for one's own species. Well the relativist must accept all of this and stay quiet and say it is okay. But who can honestly say that!


Michael ruse one said in another context.

" For the man who says that rape is morally justified is just as mistaken as the man who says 2+2= 5"

Well that is it for today. Tomorrow I will conclude my argument respond to common objections.

Well let's get to buisness.

I will be discussing the moral argument for the existence of God. Now if you refer to my blog on tuesday I lay out the premises. So I will be discussing premise one which most atheists and theists agree on.

1. If God does not exist the objective moral values do not exist.


Now before I begin I think it is crucial I make some of my terms clear. First off, I am not saying God is necessary to know right from wrong. I don't need God to tell me that I should not abuse my child and torture him/her. God is not necessary for our knowledge of moral values. Now what I am saying God is necessary for them to be objective. Now this is the difference Moral ontology means the existence of moral values. Moral epistemology means the knowledge of moral values. Many detractors of the argument always seem to raise that common misunderstanding. So read this a few times.


Okay now we all know evolution is true. Livingstone if your reading this please bear with me. So we evolved so everything that we as humans have are byproducts of evolution. So since we evolved than the sense of moral values we have also evolved and are merely subjective. Michael ruse explains

" The position of the modern evolutionist....is that humans have an awareness morality...because such a awareness is of biological worth. Morality is a biological adaptation no less than our hands, feet and teeth.... Considered as a justifiable set of claims about an objective something, ethics is illusory. I appreciate it when somebody says ' love thy neighbor as you love thyself ' they think they are referring above and beyond themselves..... nevertheless.... such reference is truly without foundation. Morality is just a aid to survival and  reproduction and any deeper meaning is illusory...."


Since we evolved morals did too. And moral values weren't selected for their truth value but for their survival value. Since they help our species survive they are just subjective. They don't mean anything they are just the result of socio-biological evolution. So when the rapist or the sex offender commits a crime they are just acting out of fashion in contrary to our subjective beliefs of morality. They didn't do anything wrong. If God does not exist we are just accidents of nature and we are not special in anyway. We are morally equal to the life of a pig or fly. Our morals are just accidents and don't mean anything.



So I think that premise one is something most atheists would agree with after some reflection. Now to be clear I don't adopt this view of morality I think morals are objective and whoever breaks the moral code is worth of being punished. Next time we will discuss premise two of the argument. Then after that I will give answers to objections and then I will finally move on to my next argument which is the contingency argument for the existence of God.

So happy!

Today forget the argument I will start tomorrow. First off, I was talking to the girl I absolutely like right now and we went on for 3 hours or 2 and half. A lot of feelings came out. Well there was a point in the conversation where she told me she couldn't go out with me because of her parents. So I told her to be honest with me completely honest. She agreed. I had enough audacity to ask her if your parents said you could go out with anyone would you go out with me? Before I answer what she said I was a nervous wreck at this point! I was talking to livingstone while doing it. We were discussing some debates we had. Anyway she answers and say the most wonderful words I have ever hear.

Totally.
YES


I was flabbergasted I stayed quiet for a while trying to conjure up some sort of retort. I answered Woah! After that we talked some more I felt she opened up some more. But I noticed she acts a tad different when we area talking online alone than at school. Like she doesn't let her feeling show in school but when online alone with her she does. I find that rather strange. So you can only imagine how I feel right now. So that is enough for this blog sorry for losing my demeanor for a second. Tomorrow I will discuss the argument for morality.

Moral argument.

Well for today since I have a billions of things to do. I am only in high school I don't have the time to sit around on a computer and debate all day. So I will make this quick.



1. If God does not exist then objective moral values do not exist.
2. Objective moral values do exist.
3. Therefore God exists.


I will just introduce you to the argument and let you think on each of the premises and if they sound reasonable to you. And one more thing I want to make the distinction between knowledge of moral values and existence of moral values.

My views on evolution.

This is quite random but I think it is necessary to talk about. What do I believe about evolution? Well my friend Livingstone put forth a good argument against evolution I must admit. But, I am not going to say that ID is something I will affirm. Nor am I saying that evolution has the upper hand. What I will say though is that I see both sides. And there is nothing theologically holding me from belief in evolution. If fact Dr Aayla (probably spelled wrong my apologies) puts forth a good argument against ID and his believe in what is called theistic evolution. Now ID proponents also give good reason to deny evolution. Like Michael Behe. So what do I affirm about evolution.

Nothing I really don't think it makes a difference on whether or not God exists. So I am free to believe it. But I remain a agnostic on evolution. I don't know if it is true. If someone were to ask me if I believe in evolution I usually respond. I think the arguments on both sides are equally balanced so I have no formal opinion. So that is it for this blog I am sure livingstone will find it interesting. Next time we will do whatever. God bless!

Ramblings about love.

Today apart from the debate does God exist? I would like to take the moment to blog about my personal life. I love talking about my issues because it helps me deal with stress. I met this girl a few months back and ever since I started liking her then some more then some more. Now I am absolutely crazy about her. I can't study because she is on my mind. Any miscellaneous activity I do I either thinking about her or thinking about her. I just can't get her off my mind. In some of my blogs I even mention her! I never felt this was about a girl before. So I naturally did the logical thing and ask her out. I was rejected. But I didn't give up. Something about her behavior tells me that she does have some feelings for me. So I want to give up on her she said no about 4 times. But whenever I am around her I just lose control I can't think rationally. I don't use logic. I just act out on the heart.

Now let's talk something rational. Does love exist? Or is it some chemical hormone released by the brain to propagate the human species. But it seems to me to be abstract apart from the physical world beyond it. Perhaps it is a essential property of the mind? Well it can't be abstract because in the absence of people love would not exist. So it must be grounded in God? Perhaps since we are made in his image and God is a mind with no body. We are minds with bodies. So perhaps love is grounded in God and when God made use he gave us love. But then we delve into another issue does the mind exist? But we can argue that later.



So back to my personal life. I have no idea what to do with her anymore. Not even natural theology is harder than trying to figure the mind of a girl! One can be a scientist but that is the one thing we as men will never figure out! Well I guess that is enough for now. I leave you with the philosophical rambling about love and mind etc.

Philosophical argument against infinite and some personal issues.

My next argument will be formally called the impossibility of tranversing the infinite. The argument goes as follows.

1. A actual infinite cannot be formed by successive addition.
2. A universe that is eternal implies a infinite formed by successive addition.
3. Therefore a eternal universe cannot exist.


Now first let me make clear but what I mean by infinite. There is two types of infinite. The actual and potential. The actual infinite is a collection of members whose numbers exceeded any natural number. The potential infinite is a set whose member progress toward infinity as a limit point but never get there.

Now let me talk about philosophy of time. There is two theories of time. The a theory and the b theory. A theory holds that the present is all that exists. That the past is done and the future has yet to exist. That we do endured moment by moment. The b theory holds that all time is actual that the people in 1988 are just as real as the people now and the people in 2020. That it is a illusion that time progresses moment by moment. For my argument I will assert a theory. Since I see it as sound and confirmed in our experience.

Now if the universe never began than the number of past events is infinite. That the universe has endured infinite days prior to today. But if that is true than we could never reach today. Since before today exist yesterday would have to arrive but if yesterday were have to arrive than the day before yesterday would have to arrive and so on a so forth. To give a analogy suppose person 1 goes to person 2 for a pen but person two doesn't have one so he goes to person 3 but he doesn't have one. And so on and so forth. Person 1 will never get that pen since everyone in this series is a borrowing lender. So back to my argument if the universe never began then we could never reach today. But here we are so the universe must have a beginning.

Now some of my personal issues. I recall this girl I blogged about now I asked her out and she rejected me etc. But I need to stop trying I feel that I am all over her. We are constantly fighting and flirting. But she has a boy friend. I need to give up but when I am around her I don't know something comes over me that I cannot control myself I lose my demeanor. I start acting barbaric. Like a caveman or something but I need to stop. But I really like her a lot. But she is not a Christian and it would be unwise to go out with her because she can distract me from God. So I need to give her some space. So yeah! That it for now next time I might share my second favorite argument for the existence of God namely the Axiological argument or the moral argument. Well tally ho!

Went to Church today

A great services the Lord spoke to me again and I was broken by his words. They were so comforting and soothing to my soul. I tell you guys look for God and he will find you and accept you for who you are and will show mercy on those who seek his face. I honestly say this. That God has been kind to me. Anyway besides that tomorrow I will  give the second philosophical argument for the second premise and show why it is sound. Besides that there is not much to say now so I leave you with this question. If your a Christian born again. How have you a God communicated? Or have you not communicated with God? If so go pray. For other non believers. Is it possible to have justification that God exists on the basis of experience. Such as a properly basic belief?

To continue...

Now I will be giving a defense of premise two.


The universe began to exist.


I will start out by giving two philosophical arguments followed by two scientific arguments and in my next blog I will give a defense of the premise to objections. Okay let's begin!


First off the argument for the beginning of the universe is based on the notion of a infinite. A infinite cannot exist.


Here is the argument:


1. A actual infinite cannot possibly exist.

2. A universe that never began entails a actual infinite exists.

3. Therefore the universe began to exist.


Now the notion of a infinite existing is incoherent. Because the infinite leads to absurdities. Let's take a illustration. Hilbert's hotel. Now let's envision a hotel with a finite amount of rooms and all the rooms are full. Now let's say a guest come looking for a room he has to be turned down. Now let's say that the hotel has a infinite amount of room and all the rooms are full. And a guest comes looking for a room the manager says no problem no problem so he moves the guest in room 1 to room 2 and the guest in room 2 to room 3 so on out to infinity and as a result room one is now vacant! And the new guest gratefully checks in. Now it can get even stranger. Now let's say a infinite amount of a guests come asking for a room. The manager says no problem and moves the guest in room 1 into room two he moves the guest in room two into room 4 the guest in room 3 into room six. He moves every guest in each room twice his own. 1 into 2 , 2into4 and so on out to infinity. As a result all the odd number rooms are vacant! And the infinity of new guests gratefully check in. And yet before they arrived all the rooms are full.  As Dr. craig puts it if hilbert's hotel could exist it would have to have a sign out front saying " NO VACANCY GUESTS WELCOMED" Now hilbert's hotel use correct logic but it is absurd. It is impossible for something like hibert's hotel to exist.

There is another illustration I love which I call the jupiter-saturn paradox. Now let's imagine the universe is infinite into the past. It never began. Everything that exists has always existed. The planets and everything. Now jupiter rotates twice as fast as saturn. So whenever saturn completes a rotation jupiter completed twice as much. Now if the universe is infinite these planets have been rotating forever. So they both completed a infinite amount of rotations. But it still true that jupiter completed twice as much. This is absurd. But it get even stranger. Let's take the rotation of one planet. That planet completed a infinite amount of rotations. We could ask is the number odd or even? It has to be one or the other right? So the answer is both! This is absurd. So I think we are well enough justified in affirming the absurdities if a actual infinite could exist. But if a actual infinite cannot exist than the universe cannot be infinite. So it must have beginning.


That is all for today's blog. God bless!

Sorry I have been busy.

There has been a lot of tests in my school so I been hitting those books and trying to pass the exams. Anyway tomorrow I will blog about the KCA but for now let me talk about some issues that I have know about I have yet to resolve. First of cloning. I think that cloning will take away what it means to be human. For example if I make myself a clone well we can then ask does this clone have the same soul? The same mind? Also would it be human? Now of course it would be human by classification. But I think what makes us human is being unique having a clone would remove that uniqueness. Would we be within our right to kill the clone? So this is a issue that flies into ethics. Now my other issue is the problem of induction now the Christian has a good response to it but I have yet to understand it. How does God solve the problem? The problem of induction is simply how do we know that the future will be like the past. If I observe that snow is white today how do I know that it will be white tomorrow? Now some of you might ask well that is a stupid question! Of course it will be white tomorrow! But here is the thing how do you justify that assertion in other words what justification do you have for that assumption? Now one could say that if we observe that is displays certain behaviors than we a justified in inducing that it will always display the behavior. But then that leads too that nature can never change but science looks for change. Now somehow God solves the problem. I just don't understand how. When I do I will blog on it. Now the third thing is why do I keep on trying to ask this girl out after she said no three times! It is like trying to fly knowing it is impossible. I have to give up! Maybe after feb 14 I will. That is it for now take care and God bless!

Very tired.

I just went to cash my check and since the bank I go to is far from my house I had to walk a mile or two. Then come back up carrying the coffee maker I bought. Then once I got home I made some french vanilla. Then I proceeded to clean the bathroom. Then I cleaned the whole house. Now I have to go cook. Since my mom works I do everything she would do to keep this house running. I am very tired. But anyway let comment on the importance of studying. I know a lot about the existence of God but what frightens me is that I do not know enough. There is so much for me to learn. But I am very lazy! When I look at people in debates I do understand what they say but sometimes I get confused. I get kinda of angry when I see somebody smarter than I. So what I want people to do is study! Study what you love. I love philosophy but I should study it more but I am too lazy to do it. So don't be like me. Study educate yourselves and learn.

I got my check and I got nothing.

I asked out this girl but she said no. But hey that is life. So anyway you guys probably notice that thing on the side with cashcrate. Well today they sent me my check. I got paid for doing work at home so you can too you should join.

Objections to the first premise.

I would like now to put on my philosophical demeanor and defend the first premise from common objections. Two are mainstream and one isn't as popular and one is recent. The first objection comes from the law of thermodynamics. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. So if energy cannot be created the universe which has energy can not be created so it is eternal and never began to exist. This is the objection and it also implies that nothing begins to exist! As most people say. Well first off whoever championed this objection has to go to a mental clinic. This is really bad ontology. "If such a conclusion is not evidently absurd, reflect I have essential properties, properties without which I would seize to exist. For example it is essential for me to be human, but the atoms prior to my conception were not a human being therefore they were not I."- Dr. William Lane Craig. This objections tries to confuses who we are with what were made of. To give a analogy I have all the parts to a honda accord in my house. Does the honda accord exist yet? No! It has not yet been built. If we were to accept this conclusion we would have to accept absurd conclusions. Such as, I existed when dinosaurs were around. I think we can also say that this objection goes flying right in the face of our common sense notions.

The second objections comes from quatum realm. In the quatum realm there is exist virtual particles that seem to come into being uncaused out of nothing. So the first premise is invalid. First of all these virtual particles exist in a sea of fluctuating energy. The virtual  particles use this energy to bring themselves into existence for a moment then the energy returns into the vacuum. So these virtual particles do have a cause. They are caused by the vacuum. Second this objection can also be answered by responded by saying this is just one view of quatum mechanics. Third, according to the indeterminacy principle we do not know if there is a cause of the particles. So if we don't know something we cannot say that they have no cause.

The next objection is a little bit harder. That the first premise begs the question because it only postulate a cause like God. Which the argument is trying to prove. Now this objection is weak to me. Begging the question means to include your conclusion in one of your premises. Now if you look at the first premise:

Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

Do you see God in there? Not really. So how is it begging the question. Also the argument does not attempt to prove God exist but it proves that the universe has a cause. The cause is God and this comes from doing a systematic analysis of the conclusion of the argument. So it does not beg the question.

The final objection is more complex but I will simplify it. The first premise commits the fallacy of equivocation. That means that you make your premise mean something else than what it really is. According to this objection the first premise equivocates whatever begins to exist with a cause. Whatever begins to exist means coming into existence from something that already exists. And that whatever begins to exist from creations ex nihilo means coming into existence from nothing. So we have two meanings of beginning to exist. So the first premise equivocates the first meaning instead of the later. Since the universe came into existence from nothing it does not mean it has a cause because whatever begins to exist means to come into existence from something that already exists. Since we have creation ex nihilo the first premise is invalid. Now re-read that a few times if you don't understand it. Now there is a simple answer to the objection. Whatever begins to exist means that whatever brings about or produces an effect. So the charge of equivocation is groundless. Whether it came into being from something else or ex nihilo is no problem at all.

So the first premise seems to be sound.

Next time I will write about the second premise and give two philosophical arguments and scientific argument answer some objections.

My mom got a job.

Well my mom got a new Job and I give the Lord God all the praise he deserves. So I am happy about that I am sorry I don't blog enough I am very busy. So yeah she is working tomorrow and I get to be alone. And on other news I asked out this girl I liked but the way I did it was very corny. I did through facebook. Alas that is how I did maybe tomorrow I will do it more formal. Anyway I have a friend who has a new blog and if you want to check him out his name is Livingstone. Weird name huh? I am kidding Living! But seriously. Hey I am a honest man. Now later today I will do a blog on some objections to the argument I gave earlier and I will answer them and the give another argument I like. Which it would be the Moral argument or axiological argument.

So today was a good day I was mostly troubled by the thought of asking her out. Still once she get my message there is no turning back. So I kinda condemned myself. I hope she says yes. Ironic I said to myself I would never become attracted to a black girl (no offense.). Yet here I am now asking one out. I just hope it doesn't interfere with my school work. But I hope it won't. I getting carried away with myself. Anyway time to get back to my philosophical demeanor.

KCA

If you like philosophy of religion then you have come across the Kalam Cosmological Argument. This is one of my favorite arguments on behalf of the existence of God. The formulation is as follows:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore the universe has a cause.

In this blog I will give reasons why I think the KCA is sound and a good argument. Now the first premise is rooted in the metaphysical intuition that being cannot come from non being. That something cannot come from nothing. It is also confirmed constantly in our daily lives. And if things could come into being uncaused out of nothing than it is unexplainable why doesn't everything come into being uncaused out of nothing. If such a conclusion is taken seriously that things can come from nothing than that is evidence for clinical derangement.

Now we move on what I call the heart of the argument. I can offer 4 arguments on behalf of the second premise. But for your sake I will offer just one. This is the scientific argument. In recent year the Big bang theory has been proven by numerous evidences such as the background radiation. And Big bang cosmology proposes that the universe is in a constant state of expansion and if you were to extrapolate this back the universe will get progressively denser until we reach a point in which the universe did not exist. And before that there was nothing. But as we have stated that from nothing, nothing comes. Why does the universe exists? So the universe must have a cause that is beyond space and time. This cause must be timeless, inmaterial, powerful and personal. But why a personal cause?

Two reasons can be given. First the only two things we know of that exist in a inmaterial way are abstract objects and minds. But abstract objects don't stand in casual relations. Abstract objects are like numbers or propositions. Can the number three cause anything? Seems not. Abstract object do not stand in casual relations for if the cause were a mechanically set of causes, then the cause could never exist without it's effect. For if the sufficient conditions are given the effect must be given as well. To give a analogy before the universe began the temperature was 32 degrees. Any water present would be frozen right. There would be no beginning point where the water actually began to freeze right? So if a mechanical set of causes caused the universe the universe would be eternal but it isn't.


So as we have seen abstract objects don't work. But what about a mind? A mind is endowed with free will and could bring a effect in time. To give a analogy we have a man sitting down from eternity but he freely chooses to stand up. So the cause must be a unembodied mind. And in the words of Thomas Aquinas. This is what everyone calls God.

Therefore God exists.

Forgetting to blog

Well as the title says I do forget. But anyhow I am here. So I now I have a new person I am infatuated with and we are already friends. I am starting to like her especially after yesterday where she look so pretty. But enough with the ramblings of a teenager. So today I watched a lecture on ethics and theism. It was brilliant! It answered some things I been pondering about. Any fore those who were reading my blog I decided to stay a realist and affirm the existence of abstract objects. The argument for numbers I still yet to be found but there was a good argument. It goes as follows.

1.) Science is abstract.
2.) Abstract objects do not exist.
3.) Therefore science does not exist.

If your like me and you love science you would hate for it to be destroyed. Now think about it if numbers do not exist. Than the person writing numbers is doing nothing than scrambling symbols on the board. So it is analogous in saying the person doing science is doing nothing but look at a bunch of rocks and taking notes. See the logic? When we observe a geologist doing science he is probably observing a rock. He is doing science isn't he? So if abstract objects do not exist than science does not exist. But I think we have good grounds to say science does exist. So math is the same thing. When they are writing symbols on the board they are doing math and math uses numbers as part of the discipline. Now all I have to figure out if numbers are grounded in God.

I tried and failed but daring greatly.

Theodore Roselvelt said that once. He meant that you should try and if you still fail at least you tried and gave it your all instead of not trying and quitting. Well I tried to talk to this girl I like and I actually did but I failed but that just another failure in my life but hey I am used to. I don't feel like blogging today so that is just it.

I hate my job but at least it pays

I work at cashcrate I hate it because not of the  pay but because of how long it takes to do a offer or survey and tedious it is to do it. I am current;y seeing if i can get another job at a supermarket but this will have to do.. Anyway I guess I will blog about my job again. I work at cashcrate link on the side. I make money buy doing surveys and offers and once I hit the 20 dollar mark I get sent a check the next month. Now by doing a lot of surveys you can make at least 20 dollars but there is a sure fire way to make even more to make money. Caahcrate has a excellent refferel system. If you joing and you reffer someone you make 20 percent of what they make and if they refer someone you get 10 percent from them so you have to refer a lot of people to make this work. So if your popular on the web this is the way go so give cashcrate a try!

Fur Elise

I cannot tell you how great this song it is amazing but strange. There is beauty but no logic. The song seems to have a pattern at the beginning but the all the suddenly it goes from sad to happy in a blink of a eye then to sad then to mystrious. But the way beethtoven does it has elegance. Speaking of music has anyone heard of the song that plays when doctor craig podcast begins that is also a lovely song. Yeah and for you guys that think I am old fashioned because I listen to classical music well all I have to say is this don't knock it until you try it!

So much rain

We have been getting lots of rain up here and it is strange the rain just seems to come out of no where. It is also really cold now the lowest have been 50 the highest has be 60's so that means that soon we will have the winter. I have not seen snow in a long time so I am really excited. Today was a good day I had lots of fun in school making new friends and meeting new people etc. Now I come home and not have to worry about somethings I worried about in Miami. So right now I am working from home doing some surveys.. It is really awesome they send my check this month so I can't wait to put it in my savings. So yeah not much to blog about today. All I have to say that I am disgusted with america right now because of how bad mouthed our youth is. I sound like a old man! Since when did that happened? So yeah that is about it. So back to work.

I met a hatian girl.

It is funny how haitian  students are far more sophisticated than their american counterparts. She cool and has funny accent. A lot more educated than the regular girls I meet. On;y if more people were like this. And no I do nt like her or have any intentions of that nature. She is just a friend. But the point I am trying to make her is that america has failed to make our students have some proper manners I don't exclude myself from the rest. It is as if they teach people differently in other countries where kids say good afternoon to their teachers and behave like home sapiens in class instead like our primate brothers. Maybe brittian is right we are bunch of pigs.

Philosophical Ramblings.

This is a philosophical thought I had recently. I am not talking about the symbol for the numbers like 3. I am talking about the concept of the number. I know it is kinda of hard to explain but just listing to what I call Philosophical ramblings. Now think about numbers if there was no people than numbers would not exist right. Unless you suppose that they exist and are grounded in God. Perhaps maybe. But if there is no people no numbers. Like plato view of morals. He thought that moral were abstract entities but if they were in the absence of people they wouldn't exist either. I think it is logically equivalent to saying that numbers don't exist in the same way.

Working on shyness.

Today I was trying to work through some of my self esteem issues that I have. Since I was little I have been always been put down. So I always have a negative view of myself I don't think to highly of myself.. So every time I try to talk to a girl you can imagine what happens. I turn around and walk away. Sometimes I can if it is someone I don't like or if had a lot of coffee that morning I mean A LOT OF COFFEE! So I am working on those self esteem issues and trying to get over them. On the side note today I had A LOT OF COFFEE!

Well I gues it's time.

I promised I will blog about my religious views. So without further ado we are off! I believe that there is a God that exists I believe that he sent Jesus Christ to die for the sins of the world. I believe that through him we are saved by his blood we are saved. I believe that God is a trinity Father, Son, holy Spirit. I believe every page in the Bible to be a direct revelation of God. I believe that Jesus will return one day to save the elect. I believe that only Jesus we are saved and that we are saved through faith and not by works. I think that is about it. Now I will talk about some philosophical views. I believe that there is objective morality. I believe that there is a objective truth. I believe in a A theory of time. I believe that there exist metaphysical truths such as the casual principle, the principle of sufficient reason, numbers(perhaps). I believe that there are thing not provable by science. I believe that in mind/body dualism. I guess that is it for my philosophy. Now what is my philosophy well I believe that we were created by God to come into a loving relationship with him. I believe that life without God is utterly meaningless. So I guess that is it for now so if you see me in my other blogs being a bit bias towards theism than you know that I affirm the truth of theism firmly established by the arguments of natural theology.

My new Job.

I work at home no need to go out and do work I just sit back at the computer and start making the cash. I am sure you heard about Internet surveys maybe you taken a few of them yourselves because some are really fun. The human being loves getting his opinions heard. But did you ever think of getting paid for it? Well I did I signed up for this site called http://www.cashcrate.com/2301842. I had made money so far just filling out surveys and it is quick and easy too. So you should give it a try.

Things I regret not doing.

Well I wasn't planning to blog until tomorrow but something I just saw sort of compelled me to do so. In life there many choices some of which are bad and good. There is no choice greater than God. That is our top priority. Or it should be. Soon I will share my Philosophical and religious views. Right now I went to my facebook. I saw a picture of a girl I was infatuated with (big word right I must maintain my sophisticated demeanor). I regret not engaging in a dialect with her. But I did not have enough audacity to actually do it. I realize I lost my chance and all is said and done. In the picture she look truly like a angle so pretty so flawless perfect. But what I can do now she is 3000 miles away I am up here she is down there. I will not say here name if your my personal friend you should know who I am alluding to . So my advice is this go after what you want as long as it is holy and good and do not falter nor take a step back to do it nor have second thoughts but assure your self with what you want and go after.

Now it's time to get things started.

Now that I properly introduced myself it's time to get things started. Not really though. So recently I moved from Miami to New York. And let me tell you this move has been one of the best choices in my life. I swore to myself that I would not step foot in Miami for as long as I shall stand. I mean it too. I love New York and I love the city of Yonkers where I was born and raised. I am sorry guys(I am talking to my miami friends who are reading this) but I refuse to go back to Miami. I hate it hate it and oh yeah HATE IT!!!!!!!!!!!
 So let me tell you how I am doing so far. Well for starters I have a New apartment in a nice neighborhood called Tudor woods. It's a nice place too its quiet and safe. I go to a know school too but the bad thing is I do not know anyone but I am making friends (some girls too.) just for you know tony. And it's so easy to get good grades up here I got A's or as they say up here 100's and I barely do any work. I don't have to where uniform to you just go as you please. Also you are allowed to use your phones in class too! So it is the life up here best of all I got a job on the web.But i'll do a whole article on that later.




So my family is doing well were all a happy bunch just like the brady bunch. We had some rough times but we pulled through with God's help and with our own strength. So in a nutshell I am doing pretty good up here and for clarification I LOVE NEW YORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My new blog.

Well as you can see I am new at blogging. I hope I can actually figure this out. So let me tell you the reasons for this blog. First I hope people can benefit from my knowledge and vice versa I from you guys. I also been looking to generate some extra income for my house but I know that going to take some hard work t get my blog up and running. But it is nothing I can't handle. And lastly to let me friend around the world know my political, philosophical, religious, and just random opinions on stuff. So welcome to my blog I hope that we can mutually learn from one another. And btw this first blog sounds like crap and it is corny.