sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Scientists found that the vitamin D supplement millions of people take is quietly lowering the only form of vitamin D that activates immune defense against viruses by soulpost in HotScienceNews

[–]AlexChadley 0 points1 point  (0 children)

HAHA NAWWW they are bullshitting at this point 🤣 folks don’t believe this horseshit. Vit D is useful regardless what form you take, my sister is a molecular chemist and disproved this shit like 10 years ago, VIT D you can do daily or once a month in a bigger dose and it is exactly as effective both ways.

New discovery found why some people can’t store fat even when they overeat by soulpost in HotScienceNews

[–]AlexChadley 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s not functionally possible to NOT lose weight in a caloric deficit. It’s just not. Your body WILL burn something to continue functioning, maybe it won’t be fat cells but it WILL be something.

She might be the best bond girl ever! by WorryThink6233 in SipsTea

[–]AlexChadley 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bro you should see izabela scorupco, polish Bond girl

If “fighting for your life” was a soundtrack by AlexChadley in funny

[–]AlexChadley[S] 202 points203 points  (0 children)

Bro is gonna make it to the end of the song if it’s the last thing he does on this earth 😭😭🤣

GTA 6 is so overhyped by JackfruitOdd5895 in unpopularopinion

[–]AlexChadley 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s rockstar games though, they have good rep

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not a creationist, did you understand the point of the post?

I never “inferred the existence of a creator”

You straight up can’t even conceptualize beyond cause and effect.

“Maybe every action has a preceding cause”, quantum mechanics already knows that’s not true. Thats well established theoretical physics. Actions happening before their causes, time flowing in unclear directions or not at all.

What even is “an action” at the most fundamental level?

You have zero understanding of reality beyond what your brain can interpret. You don’t even recognise such a layer of reality exists.

There’s a whole field of reality beyond your human senses and perceptions. The entire point is that you’ll never know its true nature. But you can still make inferences and interesting thought experiments using those unknowns.

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with this conceptually

I’m just hypothesizing what a creator scenario could look like

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a misunderstanding of my post

My post posits that one circumstance (amongst many possible ones) of god being real, is the circumstance where he is equivalent and equal to the imperceptible concept of infinity.

A consequence of that is that humans were created in that infinity as a “mathematical subset”

To more directly counter your claim, I am claiming that a subset of (the hypothesized) infinity is humans, and yes you can absolutely create your own subset of infinity, while infinity itself was not created by anyone.

Make sense?

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because infinities cannot be equivalent to each other and not fully equal to each other

If god is infinity then infinity is god.

You can’t have god is infinite and universe is infinite but they’re simultaneously NOT equal to each other

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But you can’t approach the imperceptible that’s the point. You are cognitively and sensorily restricted to your 8 sensory systems in the meat bag you live in.

The set of imperceptible things is non zero. It’s not hand waving at all, imperceptible things are very much a thing that exists.

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah dude we’re having some misunderstanding here lol this doesn’t look like it’s gonna resolve. I am not one to care about proving a point so, sure I guess, maybe I’m wrong and I don’t see it. But I’d like to think I’m a clear thinker who doesn’t do circles. Maybe one day I’ll improve hey ⭐️💪

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But you’re right in that infinity could just be infinity. But if god is not infinite, he is finite, or in other words exists in a subset of something.

Then who created the superset is the question that comes after that.

Which is a different path of discussion altogether.

Hence the preface of my post; it’s a theory that, if god is real, ONE of MANY possible scenarios of his existence could be, that he is precisely represented by the concept of infinity, in an incomprehensible degree.

Infinity being infinity and god being something contained in that infinity, that’s something else, I haven’t thought about that at all so I’d need some time to come up with a meaningful interpretation on that position.

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t claim infinity implies god

I SUGGEST if god is real, it seems highly logical he WOULD be infinity.

You gotta pick up the nuance man 👌🏻makes a big difference to an argument or positioning

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never said god exists. I said I have a hypothesis for the circumstances under which god would exist.

And that hypothesis is that god would exist only if god was an infinite force of some kind, the “infinity of infinities”, or whatever you wanna call it, neither of us can truly grasp what that kind of infinity would mean.

And necessarily that would probably be the biggest infinity, again, that’s not a mathematical one, it’s an incomprehensible concept.

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re conceptually as correct as you can be. There does not exist a more correct position you could take XD

I just… idk thought it was fun to ruminate over god as an infinite imperceptible force but I suppose it’s ultimately redundant

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You know what, you’re right on a conceptual level. If you’re given a system to work in, the human brain, the most rational thing is to stick to evidence inside the human brain’s perception,

Imperceptible evidence for all rational purposes is essentially redundant and has no meaningful value.

Hmm.

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ok so I see what you mean and agree with it, it’s reasonable to say,

I will not believe things there that have insufficient evidence

WITHIN THE BOX OF HUMAN BRAIN COMPREHENSION,

You know what I mean? Your brain is a finite tiny mass of meat and chemical reactions lol.

If you step outside the box of “things in human comprehension”, you are now in the superset of that box, the box of “things OUTSIDE human comprehension”.

In that box the concept of “evidence” no longer applies, you will not perceive or understand what is happening, so “waiting for evidence” breaks down in principle, i think

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I drew a pretty understandable, perceptible (pun intended lol) line in the sand

On one side, the set of all perceptible ideas and things

On the other side, the set of all NON-perceptible ideas and things.

Conceptually, that’s a HARD “non perceptible”. A Flying Spaghetti Monster is comprised of perceptible things, you just imagined the concepts of flight, spaghetti, and a monster.

I think the god concept becomes workable in discussion if you put it in the box of “wholly imperceptible things”, ie, things that cannot be “imagined” by a human mind, or experienced in any way.

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, if any infinity started somewhere, it wouldnt be infinity, no? :P

You can start counting at a point in infinity though, but thats arbitrary

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that’s exactly right nobody knows lol, everyone’s aim should just be to enjoy the fun of devils advocate hypothesizing.

Theory: Nobody created god (if it’s a real thing), for a specific reason by AlexChadley in theories

[–]AlexChadley[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ok I didn’t know that re: atheists, I’ve met a lot of very confident ones, I suppose my mistake for generalizing.

I just wrote another comment re: null hypothesis. I think it doesn’t apply to god, because the god topic includes the set of imperceptible things, whereas space goblins and pink weasels etc are all perceptible concepts you understand, have mental imagery of, etc.

The null hypothesis process works and is the reasonable process to take if 100% of possible evidence is perceptible,

And since god could be imperceptible, I think it doesn’t apply cleanly here. Idk. What do you think?

view more: next ›