Parliament Hunkadelic

It’s not the destination that matters, it’s where your journey takes you.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@JTAlexander @mhartl This is a good comment. I say that unironically. But A) RT ratings aren't zero sum and B) It's been 23 years, it should be 95%+ by now.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@JimNorton @DaneCook Who knew Dane was the third Weinstein brother

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@sugarbets_ @JoeLibertarian1 @TerseReply @BobMurphyEcon Except it is literally code. Four discrete symbols mapped through a codon table to amino acids.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus As for a terminator, you're applying the rule asymmetrically. You require a terminator for God but exempt your infinite universe from the same. Why? Both views require something untermimated. Calling yours "the universe" and mine "God" doesn't get past that.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus Simpler isn't the standard, parsimony is. Random assembly is simpler than a watchmaker, but the watch's features make the watchmaker necessary. An infinite unmoved universe has to do everything intelligence would do but without causation.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus They are adding intelligence, not personhood. Theists may personify, but the raw notion that the universe is the deigned/intentional product of intelligence designed does not require personhood.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus I don’t think so. An unmoved infinite universe doesn’t fit observation better. Full stop. Nothing we observe is infinite or unmoved. Also, seems like a self-grounding universe runs into a Godel-style problem, i.e. a system defined from within. You need an external terminator.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus “Replacing one infinity with another” is exactly the point. Both views require something that violates observable causation. Neither side gets a free naturalist default.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus Also, rejecting an unmoved mover doesn’t escape the problem. It just forces you to posit an unmoved universe instead. Either infinite in time or uncaused at its start. Both violate observed reality just as much as a necessary being does.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus Not relocate. Ends. That’s what necessary means. A necessary being can’t not exist, so asking what caused it is the mistake. Reject that, and you’ve rejected what made regress a problem in the first place. You can’t say regress matters but necessity doesn’t.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus Nope. The regress problem is itself an extrapolation from observed causation. If we can’t reason from contingent causes to a necessary one, we also can’t reason from them to a regress needing terminating. You can’t use causal logic to pose the problem then ban it from the answer.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus Yes, it avoids the regress. That’s the point of an unmoved mover. It’s exempt from the causal rules as it’s the terminus rather than a link in the chain. Asking it to obey them is a category error.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@Yayay82827 @darwintojesus They not only know this but rely upon it. See fine tuning arguments.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NewZarathustra @darwintojesus Presumably from a mind that is exempt from such a constraint. A non-programmed agency that created a universe/system in which information/programs are possible.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@SwipeWright But you can explain a complex mystery by invoking a much bigger but simpler one? Atheism takes you to an infinite universe and/or a non causal one. Those are your only two options, both of which, while simpler, are every bit as mysterious as the concept of a prime mover.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@ClueCultComm @glukianoff Never mind it’s just odds. 9 is not prime 🤦🏻‍♂️

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@ClueCultComm @glukianoff Funny I got the same by using a sequence of primes as the difference between each number on the right. 24+11=35 and then 35 + 13=48. Your way is much more elegant.

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@Babygravy9 Savin’ Private Ryangelo

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@paul_hundred 16oz, 9 lives

[Parliament Hunkadelic @Adama44]

@NiedsG @ATRightMovies Agreed. And absolutely inessential plot wise. A scene that would never be shot in a blockbuster film today. Reason 19376838 movies have gone to crap.