Recent content by Philocrat

  1. P

    Does the set theory prove that there is no God?

    This is not exactly true. Contradiction would exist if there were no 'Continuous Set' (that is, a set that eats up all contradictions), and God were not the owner of this set. Since Continuous set exists and God owns it, there is no contradiction. Just think about it for a moment.
  2. P

    If the universe came from nothing

    The problem with this question is that 'Nothing' is an illusive metaphyisical category (that is, it is not a proper metaphysical category, if any). Why? Because, it has neither a causal nor a mutational link with 'Something'. This means that 'Nothing' is irreducible to 'Something' nor...
  3. P

    Is space real ?

    A super-positioned entity or event (a zero-history type) is metaphysically and epistemologically devoid of the 'Reality of Space'. All diverse senses of time and space simply everporate. Do super-positioned entities or events communicate with each other? Yes, they do, except that they do so...
  4. P

    Define Distance

    The problem is that when a 'thing' or an 'entity' or an 'event' is 'Super-positioned', space distance and time always have zero values. This is also metaphysically and epistomologicallly equivalent to implying that the thing or entity or event has zero-history (that is, acting or occuring...
  5. P

    Why should life have a meaning ?

    The simplest of answer is that Life must have a meaning because a meaningless life is simply not worth living. Try to think and act senselessly or non-directionally and you'll probably appreciate precisely what I am getting at here.
  6. P

    Why is there something instead of nothing? Where do the laws of nature come from?

    Yes, there is a limit to physics and how much it can explain. This we are both in agreement and I think most of my postings on this forum either directly or indirect imply this. Besides, I have qualified my postulate with the term ’I am not quite sure if this is the case’. In other words it may...
  7. P

    Why is there something instead of nothing? Where do the laws of nature come from?

    Sorry, for my late response, Kant. Matter to me, at the metaphysical level, seems to behave very badly in the spectrum of reality. It appears as if it is 'multiply self-categorising' into everything. Of course this is in the assumption that matter (as we were all brought up to define and...
  8. P

    Is time just an illusion?

    Hello Outlandish, I totally understand your frustation over this very subject. At one point a few years back, I thought that I was the only one left alive on this planet who is deeply concerned with the sort of spooky tricks that the notion of time plays on the human imagination. Over the years...
  9. P

    Why is there something instead of nothing? Where do the laws of nature come from?

    This topic that you are posting, I have repeatedly dealt with its content in several places on this PF. On the issue of there being something instead of nothing, I have gone down on record in answering that this is due to the spooky appearance and behaviour of matter in the spectrum of reality...
  10. P

    Is time just an illusion?

    The problem with the analysis and understanding of time is that, the quality of what results depends entirely on the quality of the pervceiver. If the human sense of time is illusive, as it is being persistently claimed on this thread, then we must question the human perceiver who labours under...
  11. P

    Potential vs. kinetic energy

    In both philosophy and science, problems always arise when we treat information as distinct from energy. For example, if you took the route of 'Reductionism', it is not clear which of these reductive statements hold: 1) Man is Matter 2) Matter is Energy ------------------ 3) Therefore, Man is...
  12. P

    Can Everything be Reduced to Pure Physics?

    Yes, undisputedly, science in which physics is a part does make very interesting and useful deductions about the notion of physical reality. The deduced estimates, predictions and paradigms do hold because we do follow the arguments in the respective disciplines. But when we turn our attention...
  13. P

    Can Everything be Reduced to Pure Physics?

    PART-WHOLE RELATION This on its own is the biggest headache and the centre piece of this thread. It concerns the notion of REDUCTIONISM - that is, the reduction of a whole to clearly accountable parts and vice versa. The problem with this is that from the point of view of the ONLOOKER or...
  14. P

    Can Everything be Reduced to Pure Physics?

    Paul, thank you for your surgical analysis of my text and your analogies used to illuminate my thoughts in it. Similar analogies exist in philosophy. Depending on how far back in history you are prepared to travel, you we'll pick up along the way different versions of it. Whatever version...
  15. P

    Can Everything be Reduced to Pure Physics?

    RELATIVE CONSTRUCTION OF REALITY requires the fundamental notion of 'Multiplicity of Reference' (at least from the perspective of the actor-observer relations). But serious metaphysical and epistemological questions arise where one claims to be 'everything' or 'everyone', or simply where the...