# Thread: Why I do not believe in God

1. Originally Posted by Eric B
What he's referring to is that since "points" are themselves infinitely small, there are an infinite number of them between any two points. If you start out with a millimeter, you can keep dividing it down to smaller and smaller units. So what he's saying is that any movement; even a millimeter, crosses an infinite number of points, which otherwise sounds like an impossible feat.
They are not infinitely small. We can try reducing them ad infinitum to no end, which in itself evinces the finitude of our universe. Noone has ever reached the smallest possible point, yet the smallest we have reached could be recorded in finite numbers, therefore it is not infinite.

2. Best song evar.

3. Originally Posted by BlueWing
What on earth are you talking about? How is this relevant to anything I said?
It's relevant because you obviously don't know what the fuck you're doing when it comes to mathematics. Your use of it here is another example.

Numbers are never manipulated. The "=" is the fulcrum of a balance. Both sides remain the same. Just because they look the different...

From the little of your post that I do understand,

Huh...????

Where do the infinite number of points happen in our experience? Mathematics is fallible. Okay sure thing, all of human reasoning has been proven worthless. ( I doubt the identity of mathematics and logic, this is the famous doctrine of Frege called logicism).
The universe can only suredly be divided into infinitely small parts. You can't know that it's infinite just because you think there was no beginning.

You say that no God created the universe because we would have an ad infinitum string of gods creating the next god down.
So instead, you suggest that the universe created itself.

But if the universe created itself, why couldn't a God have done the same thing? Thereby making himself capable of creating the universe, thereby giving it a starting point, thereby making the universe finite thereby tossing your entire thesis out the metaphysical window.

Either you're trying to get a rise out of everyone on the forum, or you're dumber than I thought.

4. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
The universe can only suredly be divided into infinitely small parts. You can't know that it's infinite just because you think there was no beginning.

You say that no God created the universe because we would have an ad infinitum string of gods creating the next god down.
So instead, you suggest that the universe created itself.

But if the universe created itself, why couldn't a God have done the same thing? Thereby making himself capable of creating the universe, thereby giving it a starting point, thereby making the universe finite....
We used to believe that the Earth rested on the back of a turtle. But the clever asked, on what does the turtle rest? And the mystic replied, it is turtles all the way down.

And this may well be true as below the quantum level the world may rest on two dimensional fractals - and on two dimensional fractals resting on two dimensional fractals ad infinitum.

And of course each two dimensional fractal is the same as the two dimensional fractal that supports it.

So it's turtles all the way down.

5. Does Victor propound that it is turtles all the way up as well?

6. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
It's relevant because you obviously don't know what the fuck you're doing when it comes to mathematics. Your use of it here is another example.....
Still don't see the relevance.

Originally Posted by Nocapszy
Numbers are never manipulated. The "=" is the fulcrum of a balance. Both sides remain the same. Just because they look the different....
5 +4=9, and 5x+2y=100z

and so on. All of our interaction with mathematical symbols are defined as 'manipulation' in this context. The same could be said with respect to all of our other interaction with ideas through symbols which are non-mathematical. Accordingly, all interaction with ideas is to be considered 'manipulation' because it is not possible to entertain ideas without symbols.

Originally Posted by Nocapszy
The universe can only suredly be divided into infinitely small parts. You can't know that it's infinite just because you think there was no beginning.....

:yim_rolling_on_the_

Originally Posted by Nocapszy
But if the universe created itself, why couldn't a God have done the same thing? Thereby making himself capable of creating the universe, thereby giving it a starting point, thereby making the universe finite thereby tossing your entire thesis out the metaphysical window.

Either you're trying to get a rise out of everyone on the forum, or you're dumber than I thought.

No, no the universe did not create itself. Creating oneself is not possible, (the famous nothing comes from nothing principle). It always existed.

Whoever claims that something is infinitely reducible is talking stark non-sense, as to say something is reducible to something (in this case infinitely) means to assign a finite value to such an entity.

If I were to say, I am going to go infinitely left, I would never know where I have ended up as my journey obviously would never end. Hence, I cannot say my journey is infinitely prolongable, because 'journey' is the definition of the entity I am dealing with. The same goes with any entity we wish to 'infinitely reduce', if we somehow were able to infinitely reduce this, we would keep reducing forever. This has never been done. Therefore, because we loose sight of the entity itself upon performance of any infinite procedure with respect to such an entity, it is not possible to perform.

In other words, I could say, for example that this line, or this set of numbers go ad infinitum, but I cannot quite imagine what exactly it means to have this equation as an infinite enty. Accordingly, numbers and mathematical figures represent this world and laws by which it is governed. Because the sign of infinity is unimaginable as aforementioned, it does not represent any entity of this world. Therefore it is a void concept. All we know about it is that it exists, but we cannot assign any particular properties to it. In terms of modern philosophy, it is a universal, not a particular.

Nominalism in Metaphysics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

7. Discussions like these remind me of Kierkegaard's statement that debating the existence of God makes for great comedy. And he was a theist!

Originally Posted by BlueWing
No, no the universe did not create itself. Creating oneself is not possible, (the famous nothing comes from nothing principle). It always existed.
Come again? What about the Big Bang theory?

8. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
Does Victor propound that it is turtles all the way up as well?
Naturellement!

My name, as you know, is Victor Shortus. And I was known in primary school as Shortus the tortoise because I was a bit slow.

How cruel little children are!

So you can imagine how delighted I was to discover that it is turtles all the way down.

Of course I would prefer tortoises, but I will settle for turtles.

9. Magnifique.

10. Originally Posted by Victor
Naturellement!

My name, as you know, is Victor Shortus. And I was known in primary school as Shortus the tortoise because I was a bit slow.

How cruel little children are!

So you can imagine how delighted I was to discover that it is turtles all the way down.

Of course I would prefer tortoises, but I will settle for turtles.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO