Now, let us together analyze the false, nonsensical, and self-defeating concept of infinite regress.

However, if anyone does not know that first and foremost, experience is the foundation in one way or another of all concepts in our mind, even false, nonsensical, self-defeating concepts, which I will now also call unnatural concepts, as distinct to and from what I call natural concepts.

Natural concepts are founded on objects in the reality realm that exist independent of our mind, like things in nature.

And what are unnatural concepts, unnatural as sodomy is unnatural sex?

Unnatural concepts are invalid concepts of the kinds which are perversions of natural concepts; so, whereas natural concepts are founded on our experience of objects in the realm of reality existing independent of our mind, unnatural concepts are departures from objects in the realm of reality existing independent of our mind, but our mind can and does access them.

Examples of unnatural concepts? Infinite regress, and also in the domain of anatomy and physiology and cuss language, when someone calls another one an a-hole face.


Okay, here we go, to analyze the false, nonsensical, and self-defeating concept of infinite regress.

We have the experience of taking a step forward, the opposite of that is taking a step backward, the word for that borrowed from Latin is regress.

That word represents the concept of taking a step backward, which in turn is founded upon the experience of taking a step backward.

That is a completely valid and natural concept.

Now, the next term to analyze is infinite which is an invalid unnatural concept.

That is a word obtained by adding the negative prefix in to the word finite which is an adjective referring to end, limit, and all the synonyms of the two words, end, limit.

So, infinite means no end, no limit.

Now, add them together the word infinite and the word regress, you have the term infinite regress.

Next, search for an infinite regress instance in objective reality, can you find one?

Has anyone human ever produced something that is endowed with infinite regress, i.e. moving backward on and on and on, step by step without ending and without limit and without stopping?

So, no one has ever experienced any object corresponding to the concept of infinite regress, and on one has every produced an object that is a concrete example object corresponding to the concept of infinite regress.

How then has mankind ever come to the concept of infinite regress? Simple, by adding a prefix in to the adjective finite and adding then the resulting adjective word infinite to the word regress; there we now have a term like infinite regress in our vocabulary.

But no one has ever experienced any object in nature or in the totality of being like an infinite regress.

And that is why I call infinite regress a false, nonsensical, self-defeating, and summing up, an unnatural concept.

And humans bringing in the term infinite regress to challenge the existence of God, in concept as the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning, they are into lying, cheating, and stealing in regard to the knowledge of truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas with mankind.


What about infinity in mathematics?

Mathematicians are liars when they talk infinity, they are into a career of lies when they bring in infinity in their professional work.

Now, think about that, mathematicians are liars in the matter of infinity.



Happy thinking and writing!
We will clear up more things when you bring in your contributions or objections to my thinking here on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

What about God, isn't He infinite? Definitely, and He is the only exception, that is why He is God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.


Again, Happy thinking and writing!

Uhhhhh... so sodomy isn't found in nature?

So saying that you're an "a-hold face" isn't natural? Well, I'd actually agree. I've never heard anyone say that and it sounds very unnatural.

So... it's unnatural like sticking a ***** into a **** or a **** inside the ***** of a ***** while *****ing a *****?

Quapropter bono christiano, sive mathematici, sive quilibet impie divinantium... cavendi sunt, ne consortio daemoniorum irretiant.

Oh. So God is definitely infinite even though there's nothing infinite. I see where this is going.

Infinite regress can't be self-defeating. This is a logical impossibility. It is quite clear that you don't know the meaning of infinite regress, self-defeating or both.

Susmario:

Are you open to the possibility that existence could be explained with out god?

Well. first thanks everyone for your presence here.


Now, let you people here teach me.

Tell me how you can explain existence without God.

I am waiting.

I stuck my finger in my nose and didn't find God. He's not there.

Not that you would understand this anyway, but shifting the burden of proof doesn't actually make for a successful argument.

If I could explain existence to you without god, would you still claim god exists?

not being able to explain existence ( whatever that would mean ) does not automatically mean that theres a god, and that he did it.

Thats just an argument from ignorance, or incredulity

Said explanation would mean that we have found the reason why anything exists at all, compared to the contrary (nothing).

First, since you talk about God can be dispensed with in your explanation of existence, define God and define existence, and how you come to know that there is existence.

Otherwise you might not know what you are talking about, and readers are not going to be taken up by your ignorance, witless-ness and stupidity, wasting time to figure out what you are talking about.

God: In concept as the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Existence: The default status of things in the world is existence.

What if the universe wan't created by god? Are you open to considering that?
That there could be an explanation, maybe in a trillion years, that is able to explain why there is existence without there being a god.

I'm not claiming to have the answer like yourself. Would you be able to admit that you are not sure?

Being able to talk about God does not preclude the possibility that you might not know what you are talking about, and that you're peddling in ignorance, witless-ness, and stupidity, wasting time pretending to understand something that you know nothing about.

Please, Aaron and everyone else of your ilk, the task at hand is for you to teach me how you explain existence without God.

Now, you keep on and on talking without first stating clearly your concept of God and your concept of existence, and how you come to know existence.


First things first:

1. Present your concept of God.
2. Present your concept of existence.
3. Tell readers and me how you come to know existence.


Otherwise you are talking as ignorant and witless and stupid mechanical words regurgitators, in regard to what you are talking about, because you don't present first: the answers to the three items above.

You are missing the third item, MakingMoves - see the line in bold below.
Otherwise, dear MakingMoves, you almost redeem yourself from malingering as an ignorant, witless, stupid wastrel here.



Happy thinking and writing!

The task at hand is for you to explain your position using meaningful language. My task is simply to point out the many flaws in your presentation.

We've been over this. Finger in nose. Nose exists. I can even adopt your concept of God and this doesn't change.

I'll just restate your positions:

1. In concept as the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
2. Nose-picker extraordinaire
3. You told me that by picking my nose, I can know existence.

Now, please tell me what any of this has to do with anything. This is the second time that I've responded directly to your demand for a response. Your previous response was to ignore what I wrote and accuse me of not replying.

Indeed, you are nothing but a worthless liar, valued at less than the excrement from your own rear end. I estimate the value of your words and argument to be of a similar quality.

ironic

God: In concept as the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Existence: The default status of things in the world is existence.

How I've come to know existence: Being born and living my life.

What if the universe wan't created by god? Are you open to considering that?
That there could be an explanation, maybe in a trillion years, that is able to explain why there is existence without there being a god.

I'm not claiming to have the answer like yourself. Would you be able to admit that you are not sure?

Dear everyone here, please before you ask a conditional question, answer it yourself according to your best command of truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

You must come to your own personal and original answer to your own conditional questions, otherwise you are ignorant, witless, and stupid; and I am not going into endless nonsense talk with ignorant, witless, stupid fools.

Thanks everyone for your presence here.


Now, it is my certainty that there exists God in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

I have already explained and proven my certainty in all my writing here.

I ask the wastrels here to declare what conclusion they are working here to arrive at, and present it here.

So far they do not as I remember tell me what conclusion they are working to arrive at.


You know, what these wastrels are doing here is to avoid altogether any commitment to anything at all, which they have to explain and prove that it is a certainty with them.

They are like creatures of darkness, they dare not take any step for fear that they could set off something that will turn on the light that is available to their heart and mind, if only they are not slaves to their fear of light.

So they continue on and on and on hoping that they will entrap me in their ignorant, witless, stupid darkness talk.

Why are you so angry? Is it because you are failing to convince others on your belief in god? Why do you even care what we really believe? I'd recommend considering enjoying the process of getting your beliefs challenged, instead of fighting it.

Welcoming being wronged tends to lead you in a better direction. Closer to truth or new thoughts you have not encountered yet. A new path of the mind for you to experience/explore.

Personal growth should be your main agenda in this thread, not just winning an argument. The desire to win instead of improve in these types of discussions tends to say a lot about who you really are.

I can't convince you to change your stance either, but I'm enjoying this process. If you don't want to participate in this debate anymore (hence why you may be angry), just stop. Otherwise keep trying to change our minds without insulting others.

My previous post is in bold:

God: In concept as the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Existence: The default status of things in the world is existence.

How I've come to know existence: Being born and living my life.

What if the universe wan't created by god? Are you open to considering that?
That there could be an explanation, maybe in a trillion years, that is able to explain why there is existence without there being a god.
I'm open to considering anything that helps me improve what I care about. If you care about the truth of existence, or a potential afterlife, considering alternative views to those ideas may help you acquire new perspectives and knowledge. If being wrong hurts so bad, don't open yourself up to debates like this because you could possibly be wrong.

I'm not claiming to have the answer like yourself. Would you be able to admit that you are not sure?

I would be able to admit that I am not sure. I don't have an answer to why there is existence. I currently try to understand things based on cause and effect. Using this method with the creation of existence leads to infinite regress.

Clearly my belief of causation needs to be challenged. If I acquire knowledge that allows me to make sense of existence based on cause and effect that would be great. What I really want, is a perspective shift. I want to understand things without cause and effect.

I have no idea what that could be, but I'd sure like to find it. .

It's very interesting that when I've come up with my own statements and you choose not to respond to them because they are ignorant, witless, and stupid. But if I accept your answers, you don't want to talk about them either. So do you have anything new to offer at all?

Now, for all of you who concur with me on the following sentences:

1. God in concept is first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

2. Existence is the default status of things in the totality of being.

3. Mankind comes to know existence by common experience of everything like the nose in man's face, the balls hanging from his lower torso, the nipples in his upper torso, and the fart exiting from his a-hole.


As you concur with me on the three items above, you already see the irrefutable explanation and the proof I have presented in this thread: for the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

I congratulate you most sincerely and heartily.

Now, go forth happy and be ready when asked to tell everyone who cares to listen to you this affirmation:

I declare that it is evident from thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas, that God exists, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with beginning.

Happy thinking and writing, to explain and prove the existence of God with thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.


And beware of humans who are wastrels, who labor but in vain to keep themselves in darkness, and seeking to sow confusion with their ignorance, witless-ness, stupidity, and lies, as to fool mankind, cheating and stealing from you the certainty of the existence of God.

Susmario:

I'd greatly appreciate you responding to my last post. I'm interested in your thoughts on the subject. I have a good feeling that this will lead somewhere.

I can concur with three statements above and still do not get to the conclusion. Where are the truth, facts, logic, and history of ideas?

Your presentation is like Aristotle concluding that there are five elements: earth, air, fire, water, and aether.

Interesting hypothesis :P