Does the cosmos have a reason?

[Yakuda]

Only if you don't know why believe in something.



No it's not. That's a simplistic dodge. LOL. Not even worthy of you.

If you cant see the difference please stop responding to me. Thank you in advance.

 

[Kafka]

He's like Yakuda. Trolls you with insults then gets self-righteous when you point it out.

LOL. Yet I am providing MORE CONTENT to this thread than you are. YOU must be the troll.

STICK TO THE TOPIC, TROLL

 

[Kafka]

If you cant see the difference please stop responding to me.

Awwww, widdle Yakuda can't defend his own position and now wants to take his toys and go home to mommy.

You are not unlike Cypress. He gets bent when someone questions his assumptions as well.

If you don't know WHY you believe in something it doesn't really matter WHAT you believe.

 

[Yakuda]

Awwww, widdle Yakuda can't defend his own position and now wants to take his toys and go home to mommy.

You are not unlike Cypress. He gets bent when someone questions his assumptions as well.

If you don't know WHY you believe in something it doesn't really matter WHAT you believe.

You can't see the difference between, a purpose for the cosmos and why I think there is a purpose for the cosmos? You're not unlike the rock in my front yard. Dense.

 

[Kafka]

You can't see the difference between, a purpose for the cosmos and why I think there is a purpose for the cosmos?

Because there must be a REASON you believe there is a purpose to the cosmos. Just to believe there is a purpose without being able to explain WHY one believes that is something I would expect from someone with severe brain damage.

You're not unlike the rock in my front yard. Dense.

the fact that you don't know WHY you believe something is amazing to me. I am utterly fascinated. It sounds like brain-damage thinking.

 

[Yakuda]

Because there must be a REASON you believe there is a purpose to the cosmos. Just to believe there is a purpose without being able to explain WHY one believes that is something I would expect from someone with severe brain damage.



the fact that you don't know WHY you believe something is amazing to me. I am utterly fascinated. It sounds like brain-damage thinking.

I do believe there is a reason the cosmos has a purpose and thats different than do the cosmos have a purpose. I can't overcome your limitations.

 

[Cypress]

Sigh. Your poor reading skills always catch me off guard. I keep forgetting how you can't really reason yourself out of a paper bag.

I do NOT demand others have a reason for the cosmos, but rather I suggest they have a REASON FOR BELIEF in any given hypothesis.

I know you can't possibly understand this as it is really subtle (not really)



Not at all. I'm quite fine if someone says "I don't know" but to suggest it means that there's a possibility of an intelligence or any other CHARACTERISTICS is pointless navel gazing. It brings nothing meaningful to the table (for reasons already discussed) and it have no evidence for it.

Honestly I wish JUST ONCE you would read my posts and actually THINK about what I'm saying instead of just seeing my name and getting pissed off and shouting at me.

You simply believe there's no answer to the rational intelligibility and rational organization of the cosmos.
But that's just a belief and assumption, and you have no explanation for how mathematical rationality popped into existence out of nothing.
There might be an answer, there might not be an answer, there might be an answer we cannot ever understand. There is no logical necessity of accepting your preferred answer as the correct one.

You are demanding other people give precise explanations for their beliefs, while you reserve to yourself the privilege of uncertainty.

 

[Kafka]

I do believe there is a reason the cosmos has a purpose and thats different than do the cosmos have a purpose. I can't overcome your limitations.

Then tell me what the reason is. help it make sense.

 

[Yakuda]

Then tell me what the reason is. help it make sense.

I've answered this in my first reply on this thread. Explain to me how repeating it will help you understand it better or have it "make sense" to you?

 

[Kafka]

You simply believe there's no answer to the rational intelligibility and rational organization of the cosmos.

That is a somewhat different question of a "meaning" to the Cosmos (the OP). You are asking why it is organized in a certain way which I don't believe is an answerable question, but I DO think the "What is the meaning of the Cosmos" is a silly meaningless question.

What is the meaning of a giraffe? If a giraffe is part of the Cosmos then it and everything else is serving that "meaning" or "purpose" so you can EASILY answer that question if it exists.

Or you can see it for the silly question it actually is.

You are demanding other people give precise explanations for their beliefs, while you reserve to yourself the privilege of uncertainty.

If someone believes there's a meaning to the cosmos then I should HOPE they would understand what that question even means and why they believe such a meaning exists.

I don't believe the question is even legitimate.

 

[Kafka]

I've answered this in my first reply on this thread. Explain to me how repeating it will help you understand it better or have it "make sense" to you?

No it isn't. Your first reply on this thread was "yes".

Would you like to see ALL of your posts on this thread? Tell me which one is the one explaining WHY you think there is a purpose to the Cosmos. Is it that you think the cosmos is organized?

Yes

I don't know. I don't need to know in order for there to be a reason. Explain how my lack of knowledge about the purpose means there is no purpose.

There is no requirement. It has nothing to do with what you think.

We may not apprehend it but there is plenty of evidence to suggest this is not all the result of random forces or "nature" as some hilariously refer to it.

It doesnt anymore than the parts of a car randomly fall into place to make an operational automobile. To even suggest such a thing is ridiculous.

That's been explained already.

It's not my responsibility to add explanatory value. Again what we understand or do t understand has no necessary bearing on what's true.

I don't know the purpose of a giraffe. So what? What you need to show is that a giraffe only has a purpose if we know what it is.

Sure it's been explained. You dont like the explanation. I don't care what you like.

And AGAIN just because I do t know the purpose that doesn't mean there isn't .purpose. You need to explain how the purpose of the universe of a giraffe is co contingent upon my knowledge of that purpose.

Yes I understand your drviel, it's just not relevant. The question is does the cosmos have a purpose? I answered "Yes". You don't like it. I wish it mattered

No I'm correct. It's irrelevant

Why I think the cosmos has a purpose is a different question than does the cosmos have a purpose. The question of this thread is the latter question not the former.

If you cant see the difference please stop responding to me. Thank you in advance.

You can't see the difference between, a purpose for the cosmos and why I think there is a purpose for the cosmos? You're not unlike the rock in my front yard. Dense.

I do believe there is a reason the cosmos has a purpose and thats different than do the cosmos have a purpose. I can't overcome your limitations.

I've answered this in my first reply on this thread. Explain to me how repeating it will help you understand it better or have it "make sense" to you?

 

[Yakuda]

No it isn't. Your first reply on this thread was "yes".

Would you like to see ALL of your posts on this thread? Tell me which one is the one explaining WHY you think there is a purpose to the Cosmos. Is it that you think the cosmos is organized?

My mistake. My second. Drone on

 

[Kafka]

My mistake. My second. Drone on

So your reason for assuming there is a purpose to the cosmos is "I don't know. I don't need to know in order for there to be a reason. Explain how my lack of knowledge about the purpose means there is no purpose."??????

Woah. That's deep.

 

[Kafka]

I remember learning an important lesson in philosophy class. Sometimes the most devastating argument one can make about a proposition is to question the underlying assumptions.

And when the people you are debating against can't explain the underlying assumptions or explain why they amount to anything meaningful it is kind of a "tell".

 

[Hume]

I remember learning an important lesson in philosophy class. Sometimes the most devastating argument one can make about a proposition is to question the underlying assumptions.

And when the people you are debating against can't explain the underlying assumptions or explain why they amount to anything meaningful it is kind of a "tell".

Stop lying. You never took a philosophy class.

 

[Kafka]

Stop lying. You never took a philosophy class.

LOL. Just because you don't understand the topic or the discussion doesn't mean _I_ am lacking education.

 

[Hume]

LOL. Just because you don't understand the topic or the discussion doesn't mean _I_ am lacking education.

Don't lie. You never took a philosophy class.

 

[Kafka]

Don't lie. You never took a philosophy class.

Curious why you think that? Is it because you and Cypress are so abysmal at debating topics that you assume that others must be as benighted as you?

It's really funny seeing you and @Cypress when you get into your "battle of the name drops". It's funny .

 

[Hume]

Curious why you think that? Is it because you and Cypress are so abysmal at debating topics that you assume that others must be as benighted as you?

It's really funny seeing you and @Cypress when you get into your "battle of the name drops". It's funny .

You lie about taking a philosophy class.

 

[Kafka]

You lie about taking a philosophy class.

LOL. No I don't. It's like @Cypress and my advanced degree. It really has nothing to do with the conversation but I do have all these things in my background.

I remember telling you that I didn't believe you actually DO have an MFA (given your previous inability to coherently talk about art) but in reality I assume you actually DO have one, just that you suck at what you studied.

I assume the same thing about philosophy. I assume you actually HAVE read philosophy maybe even taken some classes. But whatever mental issues you have have gotten in the way of you applying them in a rational manner. Instead you come onto this forum and scream at people, call them names, wish HORRIBLE things on them....even when they AGREE with you from time to time.

That sort of pathology is kind of unsettling to see but it explains why you seem so incapable of actually debating a point. You are like Cypress and you just want people to think you are smarter than you actually are.

Try debating the TOPIC rather than screaming at people and you might find those unused parts of your brain light up again.