FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-02-2003, 03:14 PM   #41
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southeast of disorder
Posts: 6,829
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by stretch
Of course not ... if you say that things must be material, and God isn't material, God can't be a thing.
Well, strictly speaking, God could be an abstract thing but for his alleged ability to affect physical things.
Philosoft is offline  
Old 07-02-2003, 03:16 PM   #42
stretch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Philosoft
Well, strictly speaking, God could be an abstract thing but for his alleged ability to affect physical things.
Then abstract things aren't necessarily potentially materially existing?
 
Old 07-03-2003, 01:49 PM   #43
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: little rock,ark.usa
Posts: 10
Default

The currently accepted concept of both the islamic god and the christian god is incoherent.Each named attribute jettisons the others out of the realm of possibilities." Does God exist"? This is really a moot question if the accepted properties are absolutely necessary and binding on this particular concept of god. The reason is because you are asking if square circle exist.
fcs25 is offline  
Old 07-03-2003, 02:24 PM   #44
stretch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by fcs25
The currently accepted concept of both the islamic god and the christian god is incoherent.Each named attribute jettisons the others out of the realm of possibilities." Does God exist"? This is really a moot question if the accepted properties are absolutely necessary and binding on this particular concept of god. The reason is because you are asking if square circle exist.
For example ..... ?
 
Old 07-03-2003, 02:25 PM   #45
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southeast of disorder
Posts: 6,829
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by stretch
Then abstract things aren't necessarily potentially materially existing?
Good question. The way I define "thing," a member of the group "things" would have to be physically existing or potentially existing. So, to amend my previous statement, for God to be an abstract thing, he would need a thinkable form.
Philosoft is offline  
Old 07-03-2003, 02:28 PM   #46
stretch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Philosoft
Good question. The way I define "thing," a member of the group "things" would have to be physically existing or potentially existing. So, to amend my previous statement, for God to be an abstract thing, he would need a thinkable form.
I'm much better at questions than answers.
 
Old 07-03-2003, 02:37 PM   #47
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southeast of disorder
Posts: 6,829
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by stretch
I'm much better at questions than answers.
Well, at some point I fully expect to find massive flaws in my thinking, so your queries will likely prove invaluable.
Philosoft is offline  
Old 07-04-2003, 07:07 AM   #48
stretch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Philosoft
Good question. The way I define "thing," a member of the group "things" would have to be physically existing or potentially existing. So, to amend my previous statement, for God to be an abstract thing, he would need a thinkable form.
I'm not sure what you mean by thinkable form, and how that relates to abstract things.


The term form is conjuring up an image of something that has to be material .... something that has a 'shape'. By form are you talking about something what takes up space?

Or by thinkable form do you something else. There are lots of non-material entities that don't literally have a 'form' .... an idea has no length or breadth or depth (i.e, we don't literally think deep thoughts ), but I assume that there are acceptable definitions of 'idea' in your way of looking at things.

Quote:
Well, at some point I fully expect to find massive flaws in my thinking, so your queries will likely prove invaluable.
Ditto. IMO, all who philosophize are to some extent 'full of sh*t', including myself.
 
Old 07-04-2003, 09:18 PM   #49
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southeast of disorder
Posts: 6,829
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by stretch
I'm not sure what you mean by thinkable form, and how that relates to abstract things.

The term form is conjuring up an image of something that has to be material .... something that has a 'shape'. By form are you talking about something what takes up space?

Or potentially takes up space, like a unicorn or a Norwegian Ridgeback or a Basselope.
Quote:
Or by thinkable form do you something else. There are lots of non-material entities that don't literally have a 'form' .... an idea has no length or breadth or depth (i.e, we don't literally think deep thoughts ), but I assume that there are acceptable definitions of 'idea' in your way of looking at things.

Sure. A unicorn doesn't physically exist, but I can picture one in my head as it might look if it did exist.
Philosoft is offline  
Old 07-04-2003, 09:44 PM   #50
stretch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Philosoft

Or potentially takes up space, like a unicorn or a Norwegian Ridgeback or a Basselope.

Sure. A unicorn doesn't physically exist, but I can picture one in my head as it might look if it did exist.
I was actually (taking a step backwards and) referring to the definition of/idea of 'an idea', not the definition of/idea of 'a particular idea' such as a unicorn or a Basselope.
 
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:24 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.