• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Are cause - effect sequences always mechanical

GrowingSmaller

Muslm Humanist
Apr 18, 2010
7,424
346
✟56,999.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Welcome to the supposed "pure land" space-time continuum of Chenrezig (aka avelokiteshvara)....(see here for details).


"The ground sprinkled with perfume and spread with flowers,
The great mountain 4 lands sun and moon,
Seen as a Buddha land and offered thus,
May all beings enjoy such pure lands..."

(Buddhist Prayer).

"Do not throw stones intothe well from which you get your water." Jewish saying.

Sky tv may be ok, but do you get role models like this? We have a programmable "self model" this relates to tantra - and other various forms of religious related identity construction ( wizard, sorcerer, witch, jihadi, imgo dei etc) - as well as pop culture.
]
Ok we may be a baseball star in our hopes and dreams, but add to the mix a being from a high heaven and see where that leads?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

1Cor13:11

Member
Jul 13, 2015
14
6
✟22,673.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Previously posted by someone else:

Restricting our viewpoint to the natural, there's very good evidence that causation is, at the quantum level, a non-applicable concept. There's so much weirdness there with no apparent cause that, as Sean Carroll explained, "causality is not the right language" (if you want an introduction to some very interesting concepts in quantum physics, check out his debate with William Lane Craig). However, at the macro level, the level we're all acquainted with, it's basically a given that it's mechanistic if we disregard supernatural explanations (which we should).

At least, as far as I can tell. I'm no expert on this.[/QUOTE]

My rebuttal:

I disagree with this statement on quantum mechanics, though I am not an expert either. The problem with using causality to describe subatomic systems is that we cannot directly observe atoms or any particle smaller than an atom. Probability based math is used to describe reactions within systems that we cannot observe. Deterministic calculus is used to describe physical systems that we can observe. It is the inability of physicists to observe quantum particles that has lead to the use of probability to describe the way that subatomic particles behave. Probability is not the best way to describe an entropic system. Probability is used because it is the "least worst" way to describe a system that we cannot see. Causality should hold true for the "subatomic world." We just cannot confirm that this is true because we have not observed subatomic particles directly (as of yet). It would be bizarre beyond reason if causality did not hold true for inanimate matter at any level. I have not heard a solid justification for why causality would not hold true at the quantum level. If you have heard one, please summarize it for me. I am too busy at the moment to watch any videos or read any long articles.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
Your flat Earth either has man-made geostationary satellites and satellite TV, or it doesn't. Anything else is a dodge.

... and you believe that flat earth is incompatible with satellites because ... ? (note that I didn't assert their incompatibility).
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
... and you believe that flat earth is incompatible with satellites because ... ? (note that I didn't assert their incompatibility).
I cannot say they are incompatible. There may be those of the opinion that fairies keep the "satellites" where they need to be, and bend the radio waves as needed to account for the angles of the dishes based on latitude, and a giant conspiracy covers it up with talk of "orbital velocities" and "lists of satellites in geosynchronous orbit" and where they are allegedly located.

Does your flat Earth have man-made geostationary satellites and satellite TV?
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
I see no reason why satellites cannot exist at a point of balance between the flat earth and the limits of the outer aether. Geostationary satellites are more a testimony for a flat, stationary earth than a spherical, heliocentric earth
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
I see no reason why satellites cannot exist at a point of balance between the flat earth and the limits of the outer aether.
Are all of the GPS satellites and astronomical telescopes etc at that same point?
Geostationary satellites are more a testimony for a flat, stationary earth than a spherical, heliocentric earth
And this is testimony for us living in fortunate times, when we do not have to really know how things work, as long as the screen lights up where we push the on button.
 
Upvote 0

dms1972

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 26, 2013
5,199
1,367
✟728,215.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
So what causes machinery to work?



Do you mean what is the first cause? Such as a battery or someone turning a crank?

Or do you mean how can machinery function if there are no cause / effects sequences. How can there be chains of events?

I apologise my OP could have been better. I wasn't quite clear in my own mind what I was asking.

Machinery has cause/ effects sequences. If that is the right way to put it, what I mean is one cog turns another cog - is that cause and effect? But I am wondering about whether that extends beyond machinery in the same way.

I'm just trying to get a better understanding. Sometimes one can have a complete misunderstanding, other times one may partly understand something but have a deficient understanding in some respect - not be able to take account of all thats involved, or think something simple when its not.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others


Cause is as much intent as mechanical.
People do seek "mechanical" reasons for actions, but too often ignore
the fact that "Hard" reasons of action can be overridden by intellect.

People will do almost anything when they are hungry enough and it can
certainly change how the mind processes it's thoughts. Still, people
will starve themselves for a "cause."
 
Upvote 0

GrowingSmaller

Muslm Humanist
Apr 18, 2010
7,424
346
✟56,999.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Yep, cause can be mental which is non mechanical (unless you force the analogy)...

I "desire", "will" and "intend" etc, they are all causes of action but non mechanical, and non reducible to the mechanical.

Rather they are novel phenomena, and therefore cant be reduced to the interaction of the substratum of parts, and be "done away with" in a scientific send off.
 
Reactions: dms1972
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others

Sure they can. Animals "desire" food when hungry, "will" themselves to move and seek food, and "intend"
to feed themselves or family so they don't die.

 
Upvote 0