On 24 Aug, 17:03, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> Considering that the future is still a blank in the continuum,
> couldn't I paint the picture that I want to appear fixed within the
> past? We can change the past by creating the past in the future. I
> can decide today what I want my past to be by deciding what I am going
> to do this afternoon, which by tonight will be the past. When I click
> send, this post will become the past, but of course I can change it
> before I click.
>
You start with a false premiss. The future is not not a blank in
the continuum. There is nothing missing from it whatsoever. The rest
of what you say are conclusions drawn from a false premiss. We must
unlearn this 'blank future' if we are to evolve to our next stage.
> On Aug 24, 10:37 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 24 Aug, 15:53, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > 2009/8/24 Pat <[email protected]>
>
> > > > One of the main arguments against God is that atheists see no
> > > > evidence that the universe is teleological, i.e., that it is heading
> > > > in a particular direction with goals at the end. They overlook the
> > > > FACT that we exist in a space-time continuum. The continuum contains
> > > > ALL the past, present and future; that is, the ends are already
> > > > defined (as is all the middle). If the ends are already defined, then
> > > > the universe is, most definitely teleological, and the stumbling block
> > > > (of no teleology) crumbles into dust before the weight of one stone
> > > > (Einstein).
>
> > > Assuming a continuum, why do you think a future there contained is
> > > anything
> > > other than a perfectly indeterminate, fluctuating, and malleable one?
>
> > > Ian
>
> > That's easy!! Because I would expect it to be like every other
> > part of the continuum. I.e., as fixed as is the past. Now, if you
> > and I can somehow figure out how to change the past (NOT just writing
> > an historical yet false account), then I'll be more open to a mutable
> > future. I can't see ANY basis for thinking that the continuum works
> > differently in some parts than it does in others; it's a continuum--
> > the rules for it always apply. On the opposite side of that question:
> > what makes you think that there would be a difference between the way
> > the future works and the way the past works? I can see absolutely no
> > basis for it; but, of course, I can't see everything. ;-)- Hide quoted
> > text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
