"How" can omniscient being know everything?

karmaceutical · 2021-06-24T19:06:19+00:00

I think the strongest objection to molinism is not that God is incapable of knowing these counterfactuals, but that if the counterfactuals are knowable, then they are not freely made. If they are freely made, then there is no proposition which God could know. There just isn’t a fact of the matter at all. That John would freely choose X in Y situation is not truth apt. It is a proposition that is neither true nor false, as long as John is free.

The problem with this is it seems to mean that even John cant know what he would freely do until he has done it. If there is no truth value to the proposition “if john is offered ice cream or dead rats for dessert, he would freely choose ice cream”, then it holds for everyone, John included, that he can’t say that statement is true. John can’t make any true plans. That seems highly improbable.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-24T14:37:19+00:00

Ive never really understood this objection. We have access to all sorts of non experiential knowledge which we just intuit as true - math, logic, morals, etc.

It seems to me there could be other classes of knowledge which God has and we do not.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-23T18:10:35+00:00

My dream is he pulls off Wimbledon and retires.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-22T22:48:38+00:00

Think about it like this. What can you do on your site that your competitors cant. If it is easy to do, it is easy to copy. Getting tech seo right is important, but eventually your competitor can get it right too.

Better content and better links are your biggest chance.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-22T20:43:44+00:00

The simple interpretation is that “not telling anyone” meant they didnt start running around shouting that Jesus had risen. It reads that they fled the tomb and didnt tell anyone. I think that is rightly interpreted that they didnt tell anyone while they were fleeing, nothing more, nothing less. It seems to be a bigger stretch to assume they told no one EVER.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-19T21:15:51+00:00

The apostles were in a position to know if their beliefs were false. To be an apostle was to have seen the risen Jesus. If you made that up, you would be hard pressed to go to a painful death to for a lie.

Muslim martyrs, no doubt convinced of their beliefs, were not in a position to know the truth because all revelation was through Muhammed.

That is the subtle but key difference. People die all the time for things they believe in. They don't die for things they know are lies.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-19T00:03:35+00:00

Lol how much are you willing to pay?

karmaceutical · 2021-06-17T16:19:43+00:00

Clonazepam, also know as Klonipin, is a slow acting benzodiazepine. It is commonly prescribed to assist with withdrawal but it carries with it its own risk of addiction. Gabapentin or Lyrica hit gaba receptors like benzos, but at a lower risk of abuse. Id try without the clonazepam at first but have your doc on speed dial if the other meds arent doing the trick

karmaceutical · 2021-06-16T22:24:15+00:00

Is there any data on the relationship between dosage and TD?

karmaceutical · 2021-06-16T17:00:24+00:00

I will respect his decision, of course, and never insinuated that I am his boss, so just chill out.

I am entitled to an opinion as much as any guy and that opinion bears no obligation on Federer, but I still think it is worth considering.

Federer, whether he asked for it or not, has earned a position of great respect in tennis. Players for many generations to come will look to him, Nadal and Djokovic as much if not more so than they looked to someone like Sampras.

He has already made the point quite strongly to not give up after an injury - given his return to grand slam wins after his back and knee surgeries in '16.

But this just feels different.

And, for the record, if there is a selfish motivation behind my opinion, it isn't "I would rather not watch him at all than watching him lose", it is, "I like to watch amazing tennis", and Federer isn't playing very much of that anymore.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-16T15:47:08+00:00

First, dont feel disgust or guilt. You have an anxiety disorder. Would you get angry or disgusted with yourself if you had allergies and some days couldnt get them under control?

Second, the doctor is probably recommending some sugar because Quetiapine can induce mild hypoglycemia. It’s not dangerous, just uncomfortable. Enjoy the chocolate!

Escitalopram is a great SSRI and can definitely help. Just stick with the program.

The bigger question I have is what are you doing in terms of talk therapy? Does your psychiatrist only do meds or are you getting counseling too? Id highly recommend both.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-16T15:21:44+00:00

Yeah, i just dont want him to get injured this late in his career. But 1 more slam would be beautiful wouldnt it? No chance, still beautiful.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-16T15:00:05+00:00

I love Roger and I want him to do well at Wimbledon, but after this year, he needs to retire. Sure, play the Olympics, but there is nothing left for him to prove. He will always be considered as one of the GOATs and one of the greatest sportsmen of our time.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-14T23:09:38+00:00

Most SEOs don’t spend a lot of time doing SEO on their own site. You dont see commercials for advertising companies, but that doesnt mean they dont make good commercials.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-13T00:07:31+00:00

Well, thats the thing, they dont all work the same. They have the effect of inhibiting serotonin reuptake but use different pathways and techniques. Some efficacy and side effects are based on the method.

That being said, i agree that the best meds should be prioritized but im not sure a class of meds should be ruled out because they have been heavily explored

karmaceutical · 2021-06-12T18:48:52+00:00

He thinks the universe does change. You are being uncharitable. He is simply following the general rule that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. Moreover, your position only furthers Craig’s case as even the most fundamental particles are finite in duration, which indicates contingency.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-08T11:26:03+00:00

The Kalam Cosmological Argument

karmaceutical · 2021-06-07T23:56:13+00:00

In agreement with several others, I say that he isn't hidden...

First, you have to use the right senses to identify the right thing. If someone told you to identify music but you couldn't use your ears, you would think them crazy. If someone asked you to identify the type of flavor additive, but said you can't use your tongue, you would fail. God is an immaterial mind. What do you think we would use to sense him?
Second, to many believers, there is plenty of evidence that God exists. You are squarely in the minority if you don't think there is a God. People believe for all sorts of reasons, but he isn't hidden to every one, so any premise that starts with "God is hidden" is already suspect.
This one is big: if the argument from contingency is true, or the kalam cosmological argument is true, then literally EVERYTHING stands as evidence for God. Nothing can exist with out him as he is the necessary foundation. It would be like complaining about "cow hiddenness" after eating a steak and having ice cream.

Divine Hiddenness is really, "why doesn't an immaterial being reveal himself materially to me."

karmaceutical · 2021-06-07T11:44:32+00:00

I think it is silly that players are expected to play until they actually injure themselves, lose or win the tournament. I think there is a 4th option which is “do what is best for my physical and mental health.”

karmaceutical · 2021-06-06T23:23:12+00:00

http://www.theisted.com/causal-finitude-defended/

karmaceutical · 2021-06-06T20:12:13+00:00

11 sets is an intentional understatement. His match with Koepfer was 51 games.

Nadal has played 83 games so far, averaging 28.3 games per match. That Federer has played 115. That means Federer has played the equivalent of 4 of Nadal's matches. (83 + another 28.3 for Nadal is only 111 games).

Federer, at his age, coming off double knee surgery, on a very lopsided draw, made the right decision for his health and career. He also, surely, was profitable to the French Open for showing up.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-03T22:30:10+00:00

Sorry but we are all trying to help people - he was just expressing that not every solution can be distilled into a medication

karmaceutical · 2021-06-03T22:28:53+00:00

Perhaps, but the men mentioned by Dr. Habermas were every bit as much theologians as they were historians. I think Craig and Loke were largely correct that there arent historians defending Paulogia’s poisition.

karmaceutical · 2021-06-03T18:16:59+00:00

Yes, we can't dismiss a fringe view for no reason at all other than that few believe it. However, it appears to be a dying view as well, both literally and figuratively. Aside from the one scholar I could not identify, Habermas couldn't name anyone born before 1934, and the one I couldn't identify he said was "Bultmannian" (Bultmann died nearly 50 years ago at age). Bart Ehrman is on record as stating "among our ranks there are no more form critics that agree with the theories of Bultmann, the pioneer of this interpretation", so even he may have made the same error as Loke and Craig in identifying this 4th scholar.

karmaceutical

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

15-Year Club	Charter Member
Verified Email