Re: Animated Series

On 24/03/2024 14:17, someone37 wrote:

In reply to "someone37" who wrote the following:
 

In reply to "someone37" who wrote the following:
>

Hi,
>
I have just managed to finish making a 9 part animated series, which
discusses
religious issues as well as discussing more philosophical and science
related
issues.
>
And the reason I think it is relevant to this group, is that an option that
might not be so often explored is that while God exists, there may be issues
with more traditional understandings. And the philosophical support for a
belief
in God, can help shape whether evolution ought to be thought of as by design
rather than random.
>
Here's the link for the video series:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGlmuzlMofn040paBFUSSNtPsOnusw4Bj
>
I'd start at the beginning, but some might rather just skip to number 4.
Obviously the series is quite long, but I'd be surprised if people didn't
learn
anything in each of the videos 2-6.
>
[by the way the "Moderation and Posting to Talk.Origins" link seems to be
broken
on the talk.origins.org welcome page.]
>
>
--
----------------------------------------- --- -- -
Posted with NewsLeecher v7.0 Final
Free Newsreader @ http://www.newsleecher.com/
------------------------------- ----- ---- -- -

>
I'll give an example of an argument which is featured in video 4. Belief, and
how it can relate to this talk.origins group. It isn't one of the main
arguments, more just a side issue.
>
It is that while you (presumably) can tell from your experience that at least
part of reality experiences (you), and can therefore deduce that your
experience
influences you, there isn't a way to compute whether reality is experienced or
not. The reason is that any computation can be done with an arrangement of
NAND
gates (they are functionally complete) is because a claim that it could would
be
tantamount to suggesting that NAND gates could only be arranged in a certain
way
if the reality was one in which things experienced. But that would seem to be
a
problem for an account which suggested that the chemicals arranged themselves
into some replicating cell which could evolve though mutation, and that we are
some resulting biological machine whose brain can compute that part of reality
experiences.
>
>
--
----------------------------------------- --- -- -
Posted with NewsLeecher v7.0 Final
Free Newsreader @ http://www.newsleecher.com/
------------------------------- ----- ---- -- -

 That argument can be found in "4. Belief", as well as other issues for atheists
that hold the physicalist outlook. For those that would be interested in
watching those isues, you could just follow this link (which skips the first 7
minutes of "4. Belief"): https://vimeo.com/921153137#t=7m
And some potential comebacks to that video are handled in "5. Issues with
belief?" for those of you interested (including Descartes argument for a
physical, Problem of Evil, Free Will issues (including Relativity, and
experiments such as Libet type experiments etc.)).
  Wish you all well, and as a wise man might say:
  "Follow the loving selfless path".
 https://vimeo.com/showcase/the-lottery-issue
 

Why would God model a butterfly to make people think a butterfly was there when it wasn't? Why not just make both butterflies and people with eyes to see them?