Gene Frenkle

I'm 99.9% sure this was sarcastic. If not, it should have been. Of course you Ron Paul pie-in-the-sky zealots see something absurd like this, pop half a chubby and jump right on board. Unbelievable!

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I think it could be argued that the public has a right to know such things.

How !@#$ing paranoid are you people? The Russians will not be parachuting in to invade our high schools anytime soon. The British are not coming. Jesus

I don't know. The existence of all possibilities is one theory dealing with this concept and is kind of an extension of quantum physics. I am certainly no expert. Another theory does away with all possibilities and suggests a single, deterministic timeline, with all points existing in perpetuity. Nobody really knows of course. There's a podcast I listen to called Radiolab which I think is very good. They describe an experiment done in the 60's, before Libet I think, which questions free will as well. They describe it pretty well - better than I can. The whole episode deals with time and free will and is worth a listen if you have the time. The notes for the episode are here: http://www.radiolab.org/2007/jul/24/ The section relevant to our discussion starts at 37:25 or so. You can listen to the mp3 here: http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/audio4.wnyc.org/radiolab/radiolab030405.mp3 Edit: Looks like I can't simply post a link to an mp3 without embedding the media player. I'd suggest going to the show page and clicking the download link: http://www.radiolab.org/2007/jul/24/ I'm curious about how things work and unwilling to just accept what is commonly "known". Questioning is in our nature, and God should not be off-limits if you want to be honest with yourself. I find it interesting that so many people believe in something for which there is no empirical evidence. I especially want to know why they just believe because I think it will help me understand myself and those around me.

Or you could just side with Ockham and leave God out of it. Also, I'm not sure god can be omniscient in such a scenario, which poses a problem for many religions. Non of that, of course, either proves or disproves his existence. He's just not needed for this equation.

Do you think we can cover what's moral playing 20 questions? Does that question count? Does that one? Crap.

Maybe as a literary work or a long-running example of the telephone game. I agree. Right up until the part where God knows everthing... They were done in the 80's I think and people are still debating the methodology, as well as the meaning of the results. It's a good read with lots of videos available as I recall. You must have studied religions in school at some point? While this stuff does make my head spin, I still find it interesting. Maybe I'll check that out in all the free time I don't have... Well, that will make it difficult to answer your question. Is it ok to do anything not explicitly prohibited by the 10 commandments?

Sorry, too non-specific. Could you list the principles or rules of right conduct you're asking about please?

Much more interesting than the bible stuff... There is theory in physics that describes time - past, present and future - as eternal. Every slice of time that "ever was" or ever "will be" has always existed and will always exist. Our perception of time moving toward the future is simply how our brains interpret our interaction with the universe. This alone does not remove the possibility of free will. It's possible that all possibilities exist simultaneously and that our interaction with the universe collapses the wave of possibilities down to a definitive point. Who knows... In your example, I'd have to say that my foreknowledge of everything you have done, are doing or ever will do does in fact remove the possibility that you have free will, even given the out I cited above. Now, that's not to say that you wouldn't still think you have free will, but that's not technically the same thing at all. There's much debate on this topic and it's fascinating to think about. Not sure if you're aware of Benjamin Libet's experiments. They can be interpreted to mean that we have no free will, or not, as the following article proposes: http://bakerrambles.hubpages.com/hub/Do-We-Truly-have-Free-Will-The-Experiment-by-Benjamin-Libet It's kind of an unsettling topic for many people, but in my view, even if we don't have free will, we'll still think we do, so what does it really matter? Please define moral.

Now that's funny!

lol

I'm amused, not offended.

I'm convinced

I'm thinking he has no logical retort, thus the ad hominem reply...

I'd say an atheist or agnostic who leads a decent, moral life is a better human being than a Christian who does so to gain an eternal reward.

Some people think they will float up into the sky when they die.

So the problem is that the guy didn't believe in god and that god is mysterious? Nice argument. If you want to believe, feel free to do so, but there's not need to justify it using fluffy BS and nonsensical arguments. Recognize belief for what it is and just believe. Ya, it doesn't matter much to me, but the argument is interesting. These questions are something we're not allowed to talk about?

How can free will exist if god is omniscient?

Anyone with an ounce of empathy has been thinking a lot about the children lately.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? - Epicurus [341-270 B.C.]

That's the paranoia talking. It's irrational - worrying about things that have nearly a zero percent chance of happening. Do you worry every time you get into a car? On a plane? Walk across the street? Eat food? The sensational fantasies running through your head make you think there's a rational reason for making these types of weapons available to the public. Recognize it for what it is.

The likelihood of it happening anywhere increases as the number of guns increases. The odds of any individual finding himself in the situation described are so long it's ridiculous.

Of course I would. Is that even a real question? I'm not some sort of conscientious objector, but rather someone who thinks that many types of weapons should not be available to the general public. I think the general public is stupid, irresponsible, irrational, untrustworthy and sometimes needs to be protected from itself. Do you believe that in this type of adrenaline-fueled situation I would be able to calm my nerves, react quickly enough and take out the psycho who's been planning this for weeks? Do you believe, given the EXTREME unlikelihood of this situation presenting itself, that this is a rational thing I should be spending time thinking or worrying about? Do you believe that paranoia will destroy ya?

Lol obsess much? OC is that you?

Yes I'm a very emotional person...