tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post8008106266987210673..comments2024-03-14T08:15:15.207-07:00Comments on CADRE Comments: All Phenomena Without Exception (except for... ... wait...)BKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01967809861892681780noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-52845169507547383002009-11-22T20:50:55.716-08:002009-11-22T20:50:55.716-08:00Just commenting so I can delete the forgoing comme...Just commenting so I can delete the forgoing comment which violates rules.BKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01967809861892681780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-15725844694375281622009-11-22T12:33:23.011-08:002009-11-22T12:33:23.011-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-34178359262323303232008-10-22T13:22:00.000-07:002008-10-22T13:22:00.000-07:00Peter,Good follow-up comments, btw.{{The character...Peter,<BR/><BR/>Good follow-up comments, btw.<BR/><BR/>{{The characteristics of randomness if difficult. (i.e. can God create a truly random [even to him] phenomena?)}}<BR/><BR/>That’s an important topic, too. This is where I’d point to some chapters I’ve posted up, except they’re in Section Three and won’t be posted for a long time. {wry g} I would currently argue that the answer is ‘yes’, but IJason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-76395485289935688982008-10-21T16:01:00.000-07:002008-10-21T16:01:00.000-07:00Thanks for your feedback. The characteristics of r...Thanks for your feedback. The characteristics of randomness if difficult. (i.e. can God create a truly random [even to him] phenomena?)<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure what your "universes that exist extra-naturally" and "universes that exist as independent facts" really are. Bible describes supernatural realm as possible having properties, at least one dimesional time, similar dimensional space, same Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01636524117308077140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-52917267964422069312008-10-19T07:32:00.000-07:002008-10-19T07:32:00.000-07:00LG,Aseity: a short way of saying 'independent self...LG,<BR/><BR/>Aseity: a short way of saying 'independent self-existence'.<BR/><BR/>Positive aseity: the self-existent entity depends upon itself for its self-existence. This tends to involve active self-causation, and tends to imply that intentional action is intrinsic to the fundamental character of the entity. (I briefly mentioned this in the same sentence that I mentioned the term 'positive Jason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-84288116035446928102008-10-19T06:44:00.000-07:002008-10-19T06:44:00.000-07:00p.s. Any suggestions on a quick place (book, web p...p.s. Any suggestions on a quick place (book, web page, articles, etc.) to get up to speed on some of this stuff? Assuming that's possible...Alejandrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08578877429793660591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-31886991209213477262008-10-19T06:42:00.000-07:002008-10-19T06:42:00.000-07:00JRP:You lost me at "positive aseity," but that's c...JRP:<BR/><BR/>You lost me at "positive aseity," but that's clearly where I run smack into my lack of any technical expertise at this. I mean, I couldn't even take a stab at what "aseity" means. <BR/><BR/>I probably didn't make this clear, but I agree that the laws of physics are not an independent reality anymore than the rules of chess, although I didn't quite put my finger on the idea that Alejandrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08578877429793660591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-44906090487517828352008-10-18T15:22:00.000-07:002008-10-18T15:22:00.000-07:00Righty, then; some comments as I come across them....Righty, then; some comments as I come across them...<BR/><BR/>Adude: {{I think that "without exception" is a separate issue. Standard function can hardly rule out an <I>edge case.</I>}}<BR/><BR/>In the larger context of the paper’s argument, though, the “without exception” is vital to the position being argued for. Any identified ‘edge case’ would involve a denial of the aimed position. Jason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-91085978768428028902008-10-15T05:22:00.000-07:002008-10-15T05:22:00.000-07:00Thanks for the comments so far! The author (who se...Thanks for the comments so far! The author (who sent me the paper this was excerpted from, earlier this summer after I finished posting up my <A HREF="http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2008/04/hsibas-catching-up.html" REL="nofollow">HSIBAS</A> entries, claiming he thought it created a problem for "theism") has provided me a link to an html version of the original paper now; which I've added to Jason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-77877101363117301152008-10-14T16:24:00.000-07:002008-10-14T16:24:00.000-07:00I'm going to take an amateur stab at this as well....I'm going to take an amateur stab at this as well.<BR/><BR/>A) It appears that individual atoms might decay randomly without a dependence upon prior phenomena. Also Hawkins radiation information loss (contested) could be used to argue that cause link is broken even if dependency might exist. So, it might not be cogent argument.<BR/><BR/>B) I would say it is too early to deny the existence of an Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01636524117308077140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-86282012544890133902008-10-14T12:19:00.000-07:002008-10-14T12:19:00.000-07:00I'm going to take an amateur stab at this, and it'...I'm going to take an amateur stab at this, and it's more of just my passing thought rather than an attempt to answer your questions as listed. <BR/><BR/>A) How can ALL phenomena be dependently arisen AND, by necessity, dependent on prior existing phenomena? You would need to account for at least one phenomena that exists without being dependent on a pre-existing phenomena or the ball never Alejandrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08578877429793660591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-59177039364431694542008-10-14T12:10:00.000-07:002008-10-14T12:10:00.000-07:00I think that "without exception" is a separate iss...I think that "without exception" is a separate issue. Standard function can hardly rule out an <I>edge case</I>. <BR/><BR/>That clause introduces an infinite regress, which is fair enough, but fights against the idea total comprehensibility that naturalists shoot for. <I>Gaps</I> are a given, when you have an infinite number of preceding events to account for. <BR/><BR/>The popular argument of adudehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14060925478720656455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-86904847950418004922008-10-14T09:02:00.000-07:002008-10-14T09:02:00.000-07:00Just a mark for tracking comments.I'm hoping to pu...Just a mark for tracking comments.<BR/><BR/>I'm hoping to put up a link later, to the 50-page paper this statement was excerpted from.<BR/><BR/>JRPJason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.com