Aristole's Causes: my thoughts and your comments

[twinc]

You obviously have nothing to say!

what makes you think that - so what’s the matter with you - twinc

 

[inocente]

Science says that if you have two objects in the same vacuum room, the space between those two objects contains “nothing.” In between the neutrinos of atoms in space, there is literally “nothing”

Science says the space in your room is a quantum vacuum, bubbling with virtual particles and flooded by electromagnetic waves.

Space is a very long way from nothing.

 

[inocente]

since the greatest achievement of Science has been the dematerialisation of matter then matter is a nothing or no thing that has been accepted as a something - this the ancient Indian seers and sages as philosophers of the first rank regarded as maya[illusion] - twinc

One of the greatest achievements of science is the principle of the conservation of energy - energy cannot be created or destroyed. It is possible to transform matter into another form of energy (E=mc2), but you’re still left with something.

Well, a really big load of something.

 

[twinc]

To say that there is “nothing” between two objects, is merely to say that there is a “space” that is not being occupied by an object.They are not making an empirical inference to nothingness. “Scientists” make inferences to empirical or measurable realities.“Nothing” is not an empirical/measurable reality; and thus it is impossible that a good scientist could mean literally nothing in an ontological sense like how you are implying it. Instead they are using the word only to describe a difference between two types of spaces; for example, one with material objects such as planets and stars and one without. Empty space is not nothing; it is simply empty space. If they say that there is “nothing” in that space, they do not mean it literally, but rather they mean only that there is space alone/by itself, as opposed to space with material objects inside it that are distinct from space. The scientist, if he or she is to remain legitimate, can only mean that there is no material object in this particular space.

Why is that so difficult for people to grasp?

the difficulty lies with you since you seem to be unable to grasp that objects cannot be material or matter since matter has been dematerialised - twinc

 

[MindOverMatter2]

the difficulty lies with you since you seem to be unable to grasp that objects cannot be material or matter since matter has been dematerialised - twinc

What are you talking about?

 

[twinc]

What are you talking about?

I am talking about the update on mind over matter that you should know about but apparently do not know or accept as also most others.Some of us are aware that every seperate thing of which man is or can be aware is apparently a product of two ingredients,the mental and the material,and not of the material alone.But in what proportions the two are mixed is a question we have yet to answer.How much of a thing is supplied by the mind and how much is received from the external world is a riddle which has puzzled men from Kapila to Kant,more because its right answer is too unexcepted and unsuspected to be acceptable than because its difficulty is too insuperable to be overcome - if interested send email for source and further details etc - twinc

 

[MindOverMatter2]

I am talking about the update on mind over matter that you should know about but apparently do not know or accept as also most others.Some of us are aware that every seperate thing of which man is or can be aware is apparently a product of two ingredients,the mental and the material,and not of the material alone.But in what proportions the two are mixed is a question we have yet to answer.How much of a thing is supplied by the mind and how much is received from the external world is a riddle which has puzzled men from Kapila to Kant,more because its right answer is too unexcepted and unsuspected to be acceptable than because its difficulty is too insuperable to be overcome - if interested send email for source and further details etc - twinc

I would be quite pleased if you didn’t take me for idiot, as nothing i have said on this forum should lead you to suspect that i would be ignorant of the difference between intellect/will and material reality.

You have not yet explained why you think that immateriality equals absolutely nothing; that’s what we were talking about.

 

[twinc]

I would be quite pleased if you didn’t take me for idiot, as nothing i have said on this forum should lead you to suspect that i would be ignorant of the difference between intellect/will and material reality.

You have not yet explained why you think that immateriality equals absolutely nothing; that’s what we were talking about.

I am sorry,if I seemed to convey the idea of idiot.This is exactly the opposite for you are on the same track and wave length as I am and hence my offer to you and you alone so that we could discuss further the topic of Mind over Matter - it seems that,my source states,it is not immateriality but materiality that equals absolutely nothing - twinc

 

[MindOverMatter2]

materiality that equals absolutely nothing - twinc

How have you come to this conclusion?

 

[inocente]

OP – giving my thoughts as a counterpoint to MindOverMatter2 and twinc.

Atoms? or would it be something forms nothing which was formed from “nothing”?

Nothing ever comes from nothing. All the stuff in the known universe is made of energy, and energy can neither be destroyed nor created.

From “nothing” comes something? Is that pre-existing idea potential infinity, or potential infinite possibilities?

Same again, forget “nothing”, it’s a red herring. There are many possible causes for the universe, but not infinitely many, as most wouldn’t work or couldn’t give rise to a universe like ours.

If our universe started from “nothing” could we say that there were potentially infinite number of possibilities that could have happened? If we have infinite number of possibilities, could that have started a new plane of existence? (conscious plane, which is reflected in a limitless minds)

No, as above. And what are these “planes” of which you speak?

The final cause is that for the sake of which a thing exists or is done, including both purposeful and instrumental actions and activities. The final cause or telos is the purpose or end that something is supposed to serve, or it is that from which and that to which the change is.

Aristotle didn’t require everything to have a final cause, many things have no purpose.

The universe not atoms allows us to live

The universe is everything physical, including the atoms and us (possibly excluding our souls, for the pedantic at heart).

if something happens all or most of the time, we cannot say that it is by chance.

Why not? If something happens most of the time then it’s by chance that it doesn’t happen some of the time. The scale of probability runs from 0 (never) to 1 (always).

Overall, the best I can offer is Turtles all the way down – we’re here because we’re here because we’re here. It’s just as satisfying as any other answer, and avoids all the tedious mucking about.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Overall, the best I can offer is Turtles all the way down – we’re here because we’re here because we’re here. It’s just as satisfying as any other answer, and avoids all the tedious mucking about.

I feel sorry for you if you really think that this is an intelligible/logical answer to why there is something rather than nothing, and is as reasonable as any other conceivable answer. You need to get our more.

 

[inocente]

You need to get our more.

Need to get our more …tasty muffins? …rational ideas? …intelligent spell checker?

I was pointing out that if no learned genius has ever cracked the first cause to universal acclaim, perhaps we won’t either. I was thinking of Psalm 131 (NIV)

1 My heart is not proud, O LORD,
my eyes are not haughty;
I do not concern myself with great matters
or things too wonderful for me.
2 But I have stilled and quieted my soul;
like a weaned child with its mother,
like a weaned child is my soul within me.
3 O Israel, put your hope in the LORD
both now and forevermore.

 

[inocente]

I’m no good at philosophy, does this work?

There is normally a chain of cause and effect, which can be stated cause → effect.

The first cause can then be stated as nothing → effect, i.e. the first cause is the effect produced by nothing.

That is illogical, and no example of nothing → effect can be discovered.

Ergo “nothing” is illogical. The universe must either be eternal or be created supernaturally (eternal God, eternal mother universe, simulation on some super-alien’s PC, etc.).

 

[twinc]

How have you come to this conclusion?

From some real philosophy I have read and studied I have come to the conclusion that in reality we live in a mental and spiritual dimension but have fallen into[maya]an illusion of material and physical - hence the magic of the mind and mind over matter - more later or direct on personal request - twinc

 

[JohnDamian]

I’m no good at philosophy, does this work?

There is normally a chain of cause and effect, which can be stated cause → effect.

The first cause can then be stated as nothing → effect, i.e. the first cause is the effect produced by nothing.

That is illogical, and no example of nothing → effect can be discovered.

Ergo “nothing” is illogical. The universe must either be eternal or be created supernaturally (eternal God, eternal mother universe, simulation on some super-alien’s PC, etc.).

To be honest, that is a rather ambiguous and imprecise formulation, this would be better:

Cause (Nessecary) -(create)-> Objects (Contingent) :: is consistent.
Nothing -(create)-> Objects (Contingent) :: is absurd.
Object (Contingent) -(create)-> Objects (Contingent) :: is absurd

 

[twinc]

as regards cause and effect as I read it from real philosophy - if A and B are in causal relation,then A always comes first.Cause precedes effect.Now what do we experience fiurst of the external objects? Why we become aware of the mental impression of them,and nothing else at any time! Hence if the mental impression comes first,it must be the cause".To make the external object the cause of the internal sensation is equal to making sensation the cause of sensation,i.e.to beg the question and to attempt what is impossible and inconceivable[The magic of the Mind" - Mentalism - Dr.Paul Brunton] - twinc

 

[inocente]

[The magic of the Mind" - Mentalism - Dr.Paul Brunton] - twinc

twinc - can’t find the book, is it by this particular mentalist & occultist or is there another Paul Brunton?

Thanks to Mme Blavatsky, the Pyramid became an essential point of pilgrimage for all self-respecting occultists . Among the notable necromancers and magi who made the journey were the Russian mathematician and mystic PD Ouspensky, whose cult is still alive in various forms today;** the largely innocuous self-appointed guru ‘Dr’ Paul Brunton, who wrote a bestselling book, A Search in Secret Egypt (1935), where he recalled his conference with weird spirits inside the Pyramid**; and the most famous of all Black Magicians , Aleister Crowley (1875-1947), who claimed to have spent his honeymoon in the Pyramid, bathed in supernatural light.

BBC History - A Short History of Pyramidology - Occultists

 

[twinc]

twinc - can’t find the book, is it by this particular mentalist & occultist or is there another Paul Brunton?

The “magic of the mind” is chapter XI in his book The Hidden Teaching - btw chapter XII is the “downfall of materialism” - Mentalism has been dubbed as his overall philosophy - twinc

 

[inocente]

Must be the occultist guy then - thanks but no thanks.

 

[twinc]

Must be the occultist guy then - thanks but no thanks.

why not just be very fair and first read the book before jumping to faulty conclusions - twinc