[Ham] No, Craig. The question "why?" demands a reason and, like Arlo, you insist on a historical answer which gives you only the "how" or "when" of a process rather than its cause.
[Arlo] While this is a ton of distortion, I'll answer it here by saying that any "metaphysical" answer that runs counter to, or makes no sense from, a historical perspective is as empty as it is meaningless. [Ham] It's like answering "Why does the TV work?" by saying that it works because you've plugged it into the power outlet and turned it on. [Arlo] As opposed to your answer which is "it works because Essence wants it to work". While you ridicule the electricity answer, it actually makes sense, and has far more explanatory value. And understanding the "process" of electricity is how we came to build TVs. If the Lone Genius Edison has simply thought "well, electricity works because it is a manifestation of the will of Essence", we'd have no TVs. You, on the other hand, also seem to be saying, "oh, nevermind that pesky history, yes yes it makes my claims absurd, but just ignore it, it doesn't matter, move along..." Sorry, that's not only a cop-out, it demonstrates that your "metaphysics" is simply "Theism" wrapped in big words. "Don't question the will of Essence... just believe..." Sorry, but no. [Ham] but no scientist can tell us WHY it occurred. [Arlo] What reason do you need? It simply "did". No reason, no plan, no "need to create beings to worship itself" (which, I add, is a pretty lame-ass reason to create the cosmos, that god needs a therapist, not a cosmos of madly adoring beings). Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
