My recent Atheist take on philosophy

[I am Weasel]

Perfection cannot exist. This is one of my essential truths.

Therefore an omnipotent God cannot exist.

Also, I can never be perfect.

I don't have time to add any more, I will later today. Comment, add or argue please.

[---Beany---]

How do you know that life isn't exactly how god wanted it?

If life has imperfections then perhaps

God wanted those imperfections for a reason, and so his master plan is still perfect.

[I am Weasel]

quote:Originally posted by ---Beany---:

How do you know that life isn't exactly how god wanted it?

If life has imperfections then perhaps

God wanted those imperfections for a reason, and so his master plan is still perfect.

My idea requires an Atheist view, just as Descartes' requires a belief in God. If you believe the opposite, the idea doesn't work, just like any other idea of the sort.

[Craftian]

What is the basis for your belief that perfection is impossible?

Also, what is your definition of perfection?

[redemption]

Isnt 'perfection' a definition in and of its self?

*grumbles about flood control*

[I am Weasel]

quote:Isnt 'perfection' a definition in and of its self?

Indeed it is.

quote:What is the basis for your belief that perfection is impossible?

Whatever it is that you may call perfect will almost always have flaws, and can always be improved upon, whether it has any definite flaws or not. My ideas are derived from either physical proof or deduction, based on proof. Since perfection, as far as we know, has never existed, that backs up my theory that it cannot.

[This message has been edited by I am Weasel (edited 08-14-2003).]

[Direckshun]

1. Descartes' rationalism is not the only Christian philosophy. And it does not hold a belief in God as a prerequisite. Descartes' rationalism seeks to prove God.

2. Perfection does not define itself. Though you may believe it is an obvious term, this does not mean it is self-definable. It isn't. You still need to provide a definition before you harbor my agreement.

3. To use an obvious, overused example, can you prove to me that a perfect circle can be improved upon? Because if you can't, this proves your theory wrong that "everything can be improved upon." This would suggest the idea that perfection is, in fact, possible.

[Fuck]

Cause and effect... action/reaction, paves the way for fate to be possible. If everything in nature reacted to actions the way it were supposed to, then everything would already literally be perfect, as insane as it sounds.

From human perspective, we could never define it because we do not even fully understand the workings of what we see around us, and ourselves... Perfect to the majority of us is not the same as perfect would be to nature.

[I am Weasel]

quote:Originally posted by Direckshun:

1. Descartes' rationalism is not the only Christian philosophy. And it does not hold a belief in God as a prerequisite. Descartes' rationalism seeks to prove God.

2. Perfection does not define itself. Though you may believe it is an obvious term, this does not mean it is self-definable. It isn't. You still need to provide a definition before you harbor my agreement.

3. To use an obvious, overused example, can you prove to me that a perfect circle can be improved upon? Because if you can't, this proves your theory wrong that "everything can be improved upon." This would suggest the idea that perfection is, in fact, possible.

1. I understand that there are many other theist philosophies, and Descartes sought to prove the existence of God, but such a thing cannot be done to a stalwart Atheist. The belief in God is not a prerequisite, but willingness to accept that there is a God without definitive proof is.

2. Perfection cannot be improved upon, it is flawless and not deficient in any way. That is my definition.

3. Show me a perfect circle, then I'll get back to you on that one.

[I am Weasel]

quote:Originally posted by Fuck:

Cause and effect... action/reaction, paves the way for fate to be possible. If everything in nature reacted to actions the way it were supposed to, then everything would already literally be perfect, as insane as it sounds.

From human perspective, we could never define it because we do not even fully understand the workings of what we see around us, and ourselves... Perfect to the majority of us is not the same as perfect would be to nature.

At last, someone backs me up.