How could pornography possibly exist longer than human society? What do you define as human society?
.garc said:kurt vonnegut said:
And it is llogical for an all powerful being who needs nothing to create a race of beings to do as he pleases upon threat of eternal torture?
Eternal punishment is logical.
dermdoc said:
You might want to ask that question of the families of the Las Vegas victims.
Dr. Watson said:dermdoc said:
You might want to ask that question of the families of the Las Vegas victims.
Even then, we are talking about eternal, agonizing torment. Torment literally without end. No matter what happens on Earth, it's temporal. It ends. There is a finality. The idea that any action in a temporal reality is worth unending agonizing punishment is hard to imagine. To say that nonviolent, decent people who did not harm their fellow man deserve such punishment because they didn't believe in God or Jesus means you have to toss out any idea of a just God in favor of an emotional creature with raw power.
garc said:Dr. Watson said:dermdoc said:
You might want to ask that question of the families of the Las Vegas victims.
Even then, we are talking about eternal, agonizing torment. Torment literally without end. No matter what happens on Earth, it's temporal. It ends. There is a finality. The idea that any action in a temporal reality is worth unending agonizing punishment is hard to imagine. To say that nonviolent, decent people who did not harm their fellow man deserve such punishment because they didn't believe in God or Jesus means you have to toss out any idea of a just God in favor of an emotional creature with raw power.
That's not logical. You are talking in terms of time. Time is simply a concept created by man based on change of state that is constant and predictable. From whose perspective are the acts committed on earth "temporary"? What does temporary even mean?
So if you were god, how would you punish a person like Hitler, who most people, liberals and conservatives alike, agree was the most evil person of the last century. He had 6 million innocent Jews killed. He stole their wealth. He broke up families. He kept them in slums in atrocious living conditions until they were gassed. The war he started led to millions more dying and suffering. Would you sum up the suffering by each person and make him suffer for that long, in terms of your time? What about the deaths? What about the pain of loved ones? What about the aggregate pain suffered by the world as a whole? How do you account for all that?
The idea of "eternal" punishment, which is simply existing in an unchanging, unpleasant state, is logical. If the person is in a tormented state, and then changes to a state where they no longer have consciousness, it's as if the punishment never occurred from that person's perspective. If you were to go back to the same state you were in before you existed, from your perspective, nothing happened to you, good or bad. The only reason we know that evil occurred in the past is because we have memories and a way to preserve the acts for future humans to interpret.
Good Bull Jones 17 said:
How could pornography possibly exist longer than human society? What do you define as human society?
Dr. Watson said:garc said:Dr. Watson said:dermdoc said:
You might want to ask that question of the families of the Las Vegas victims.
Even then, we are talking about eternal, agonizing torment. Torment literally without end. No matter what happens on Earth, it's temporal. It ends. There is a finality. The idea that any action in a temporal reality is worth unending agonizing punishment is hard to imagine. To say that nonviolent, decent people who did not harm their fellow man deserve such punishment because they didn't believe in God or Jesus means you have to toss out any idea of a just God in favor of an emotional creature with raw power.
That's not logical. You are talking in terms of time. Time is simply a concept created by man based on change of state that is constant and predictable. From whose perspective are the acts committed on earth "temporary"? What does temporary even mean?
So if you were god, how would you punish a person like Hitler, who most people, liberals and conservatives alike, agree was the most evil person of the last century. He had 6 million innocent Jews killed. He stole their wealth. He broke up families. He kept them in slums in atrocious living conditions until they were gassed. The war he started led to millions more dying and suffering. Would you sum up the suffering by each person and make him suffer for that long, in terms of your time? What about the deaths? What about the pain of loved ones? What about the aggregate pain suffered by the world as a whole? How do you account for all that?
The idea of "eternal" punishment, which is simply existing in an unchanging, unpleasant state, is logical. If the person is in a tormented state, and then changes to a state where they no longer have consciousness, it's as if the punishment never occurred from that person's perspective. If you were to go back to the same state you were in before you existed, from your perspective, nothing happened to you, good or bad. The only reason we know that evil occurred in the past is because we have memories and a way to preserve the acts for future humans to interpret.
Time is not "simply a concept invented by man." Our perception of time and our relationship to it is constructed in certain ways, but our reality occurs within spacetime. Temporality is in the very fabric of the physical universe. What you're talking about is not logical, it's emotional. You see it as unjust if an evil person is destroyed rather than serving unending, eternal torture. Why? Because then they wouldn't know they were bad? That's not logical. That's vindictive.
Let's say your version of the afterlife is correct. And let's assume the Holocaust victims are in Heaven despite the vast majority being non-Christians or homosexual and the like - you know, things that arguably would lead them to being sent to Hell according to certain strands of Christian theology.
Hitler dies. Assuming he didn't turn his heart over to Jesus at the last moment after killing millions and earning his get-out-of-jail-free card, he goes to Hell. Now, what does torturing him for all time accomplish? The victims are still dead. They are in Heaven. Their wounds have been healed and they are with God. Torturing Hitler doesn't help them. Torturing Hitler doesn't help the living. No one can see it. No one knows what's being done. It might bring a sense of schadenfreude to folks who imagine his torments, but it's just imagination. The torture in Hell doesn't change what happened in the past. It doesn't change the reality of the Holocaust. The torture is only for Hitler. Now, some punishment of him makes perfect sense. Let's say a million years per life lost. That's A LOT of torture for a guy like Hitler. But it's not eternal. It's not unending. In the end, the only folks who know what happened to Hitler are Hitler, God, and maybe Gary, the demon with the molten lava pinchers, and Diane, the demon of HR. So the destruction of Hitler wouldn't erase his crimes or the punishment that occurred. It wouldn't change anything. It would just mark moving forward and not giving attention to a terrible person. That's logical.
Quote:
It is absolute a man made concept. The only reason "time" exists is because there are state changes that occur on a constant frequency. If we didn't "age", die, sleep, the sun did not revolve around the earth, etc... there would be no "time" as we define it.
Marco Esquandolas said:
This thread was supposed to be about a guy who sold dirty magazines. Wtf happened?
dargscisyhp said:Quote:
It is absolute a man made concept. The only reason "time" exists is because there are state changes that occur on a constant frequency. If we didn't "age", die, sleep, the sun did not revolve around the earth, etc... there would be no "time" as we define it.
And if we didn't walk, jump, run, the sun didn't revolve around the earth etc there would be no space as we define it. Good God man, with mere words on an internet forum you've destroyed the universe!
This is essentially meaningless word-vomit.
jkag89 said:
I would never have imagined a thread about the death of Hugh Hefner would lead to a discussion about the nature of time.
dargscisyhp said:
On what basis are you asserting that matter needs a spatial container to exist but not a temporal container, pray tell oh wise one. On what basis are you ignoring the fact that space and time are inextricably wound into one single structure?
AstroAg17 said:
That viewpoint is just objectively false. Whatever time is, we didn't create it by measuring it.
garc said:dargscisyhp said:
On what basis are you asserting that matter needs a spatial container to exist but not a temporal container, pray tell oh wise one. On what basis are you ignoring the fact that space and time are inextricably wound into one single structure?
I'm not asserting anything. I put container in quotes since you used the word space. Time does not transcend man. It was created by man to quantity changes in states of matter that occur in cycles. There is no structure that binds a human construct to anything. That's begging the question.
garc said:dargscisyhp said:
On what basis are you asserting that matter needs a spatial container to exist but not a temporal container, pray tell oh wise one. On what basis are you ignoring the fact that space and time are inextricably wound into one single structure?
I'm not asserting anything. I put container in quotes since you used the word space. Time does not transcend man. It was created by man to quantity changes in states of matter that occur in cycles. There is no structure that binds a human construct to anything. That's begging the question.
Dr. Watson said:garc said:dargscisyhp said:
On what basis are you asserting that matter needs a spatial container to exist but not a temporal container, pray tell oh wise one. On what basis are you ignoring the fact that space and time are inextricably wound into one single structure?
I'm not asserting anything. I put container in quotes since you used the word space. Time does not transcend man. It was created by man to quantity changes in states of matter that occur in cycles. There is no structure that binds a human construct to anything. That's begging the question.
I feel like I'm reading Foucault after he had a stroke.
garc said:Dr. Watson said:garc said:dargscisyhp said:
On what basis are you asserting that matter needs a spatial container to exist but not a temporal container, pray tell oh wise one. On what basis are you ignoring the fact that space and time are inextricably wound into one single structure?
I'm not asserting anything. I put container in quotes since you used the word space. Time does not transcend man. It was created by man to quantity changes in states of matter that occur in cycles. There is no structure that binds a human construct to anything. That's begging the question.
I feel like I'm reading Foucault after he had a stroke.
Pat yourselves on the back and hurl invective, if it works for you. Your simple appeal to emotion is not logical. It sounds like my youngest son "dad, that's not fair", as if he had the judgement and cognitive ability at that point to discern fairness.
EOTjkag89 said:
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a nonlinear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey ... stuff.
Another geocentrist?Quote:
The only reason "time" exists is because there are state changes that occur on a constant frequency. If we didn't "age", die, sleep, the sun did not revolve around the earth,
Dr. Watson said:garc said:Dr. Watson said:garc said:dargscisyhp said:
On what basis are you asserting that matter needs a spatial container to exist but not a temporal container, pray tell oh wise one. On what basis are you ignoring the fact that space and time are inextricably wound into one single structure?
I'm not asserting anything. I put container in quotes since you used the word space. Time does not transcend man. It was created by man to quantity changes in states of matter that occur in cycles. There is no structure that binds a human construct to anything. That's begging the question.
I feel like I'm reading Foucault after he had a stroke.
Pat yourselves on the back and hurl invective, if it works for you. Your simple appeal to emotion is not logical. It sounds like my youngest son "dad, that's not fair", as if he had the judgement and cognitive ability at that point to discern fairness.
Change is time. Time is change. Time is not a construct. How we measure time is arguably arbitrary, though logical, but the existence of time itself is not a human construct. Time is a dimension of reality tied to space, gravity, mass, and matter.
kurt vonnegut said:.garc said:kurt vonnegut said:
And it is llogical for an all powerful being who needs nothing to create a race of beings to do as he pleases upon threat of eternal torture?
Eternal punishment is logical.
First, I think perhaps it depends on your initial assumptions. If you assume that an all powerful God exists who enjoys dishing out eternal torture, then it's perfectly logical, I suppose. If this God of yours has a shred of love, mercy, or empathy, then I don't see how it's logical.
Secondly, I think it's illogical for any of us to toss around the word eternity as though we are able to understand or comprehend the word beyond its utility in mathematics.