Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Admin on Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:33 pm

"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY? What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

Admin
Admin

Posts : 8
Join date : 2017-08-09

View user profile http://challenge3.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Mrs. Martin on Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:54 pm

WooHoo!! It is an absolutely unbelievable world that I conquered a post to this forum!!

I hope everyone enjoys the discussions from home!!!

Mrs. Martin

Posts : 3
Join date : 2017-08-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by LivsTanski on Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:20 pm

Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

Firstly, I am so exited to be able to participate in these discussions again!!!! My peers always post every thought provoking material. Very Happy

I do not agree with the statement made above. I do not conclude that any explanation to any question is "easily believable" because easy is a subjective term. Personally, it is easy for me to jump a horse over a 3 foot obstacle, something that several of my peers, save one, would find difficult. It is easy for me to sit and study for 6+ hours a day, a task that other people find challenging. Personally I find algebra very difficult, where as a part of the population finds it quite "easy". My argument can be summed up to this, The statement above can not be made based on the fact that easy is a subjective term and there is not a definitive standard for the word "easy".


avatar
LivsTanski

Posts : 17
Join date : 2017-08-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

@realdonaldtrump's reply

Post by @realdonaldtrump on Wed Aug 16, 2017 10:08 am

Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?
Same as Olivia, it's good to have this discussion board rolling again. It's gonna be yuuugggeee Very Happy

As far as my answer, let's tackle the question backwards, because that's how I do basically everything.

I think an easily believable explanation is one that is "simple". I believe this because of the context. This guy is making an introductory segment for his video on how great the world we live in is, and how it got here. If I'm remembering the context right, it sounds like he was basically trying to come up with some catchy phrasing for a pretty straightforward idea. A paraphrased, Trump version would read like this:

"There won't be a simple explanation for a bigly complex world"

Using that abridged version, yes, I would agree with the statement. I'd say that the more complex a subject becomes, the more complex of an explanation it requires. Think of it like a sliding scale. Something easy, like throwing a ball, requires a simple explanation. Something hard, like explaining how a car engine works, with the transmission, crankshaft, battery, etc., would require a more detailed/complex explanation. While not exact, the general rule is that the more complex something is, the more complex the explanation has to be.

Looking at our world today, I'd say it's pretty complex, and thus requires a more complex explanation.


Last edited by @realdonaldtrump on Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:01 am; edited 3 times in total

_________________
-45th President of the United States

"Despite the constant negative press, covfefe"
avatar
@realdonaldtrump

Posts : 14
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 71
Location : 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Replying to LivsTanski

Post by @realdonaldtrump on Wed Aug 16, 2017 10:19 am

LivsTanski wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

Firstly, I am so exited to be able to participate in these discussions again!!!! My peers always post every thought provoking material. Very Happy

        I do not agree with the statement made above. I do not conclude that any explanation to any question is "easily believable" because easy is a subjective term. Personally, it is easy for me to jump a horse over a 3 foot obstacle, something that several of my peers, save one, would find difficult. It is easy for me to sit and study for 6+ hours a day, a task that other people find challenging. Personally I find algebra very difficult, where as a part of the population finds it quite "easy". My argument can be summed up to this, The statement above can not be made based on the fact that easy is a subjective term and there is not a definitive standard for the word "easy".


I really like how much you thought through this Olivia! I'm still going to have to respectfully disagree, however.

My main question would be: Do you think any abstract concept is definable in any way?

I think it's better put in an example. I'd say that justice is also pretty tough to define. After all, if you steal a car, what should your perfect punishment be? What about if you stole a truck? Or a bus? And what if there were valuables inside? But you didn't know about them? It'd be very hard to have a precise, definable punishment for this crime. However, if I did steal a bus with a valuable computer on it, I would still go through the court system and be punished to the best of my ability, because even though it may not be perfect, there is still a good educated rationale for a certain punishment. It may not be the perfect idea of justice, but it's pretty close.

So, would seeking to punish me be ok, even though we know our justice may not be perfect?

I guess I'm thinking along Plato's theory of ideas. He states that while the perfect concept of "justice", or "easy", may be difficult to focus in on, we can still have a pretty good, rough idea. After all, those perfect concepts do come from our Creator God.

A more applicable way to ask the question pertaining to this topic is: Do you think there's any general understanding/definition/connotation of "easy" that can be used to answer this question?


Last edited by @realdonaldtrump on Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:02 am; edited 1 time in total

_________________
-45th President of the United States

"Despite the constant negative press, covfefe"
avatar
@realdonaldtrump

Posts : 14
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 71
Location : 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Rednecks response ta the quesshun

Post by Redneck_philosopher on Wed Aug 16, 2017 10:33 am

Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

First off, ay am also glay we are a-doin' this here discussion board again! ay done had fun last year ayn' ay am a-hopin' this here year will be just as great!

All kidding aside ( meaning I want to make sure y'all are able to read this, tahm ta use my good engleysh Very Happy ) When I first saw this quote, it reminded me of some of the ones last year that required context in order to be understood correctly. I believe the context is how we got here on this earth and what is our place in it. At least that is what I was able to derive from Mr. Alvin and the chipmunks. But taking that into account I would at first say I agree. But since easily and impossible are vague terms. Its hard to say exactly. But it is undeniable that this world is getting more and more complex. Daily life is more complex, and the events that happen in the world. Which then leads to more complex spiritual battles with temptation with the development of technology and what not.. And after looking more into this, despite the vague terms. I still say I agree with this quote. Complicated things require a more detailed explanation and a deeper understanding in a way. Ay agree with this here quote ayy lot. Ay hope that this here done made sense ta y'all! Very Happy
avatar
Redneck_philosopher

Posts : 8
Join date : 2017-08-14
Location : 'mercia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Evan_T on Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:10 pm

To some extent, I disagree. The idea that there is a God who created this "impossible to believe world" is very believable to me. In fact, it seems to be the most likely explanation. However, because everyone is different, others may not find it so believable, making the quote true (in that situation). And so there is no definite answer to the statement.

Evan_T

Posts : 19
Join date : 2017-08-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

egrabrick's response

Post by egrabrick on Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:11 pm

Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?




I would have to agree with the quote. Pretty much everyone believes this world had to come from somewhere, but different people have different opinions on where it came from. One common explanation for how we got here is evolution, however, I find evolution very hard to believe in. Regardless of how much time the universe has existed for, I just can't believe such an amazing thing came from chance. And even if I believed in evolution, it still doesn't explain how how the first matter formed. Nor does it explain how information came from matter. I would definitely say evolution is not easily believable. One of the other most common explanations for how we got here is that God spoke the world into creation. Even though I find this idea much more believable than the hypothesis of evolution, it still takes faith. There is no explanation for where the universe came from that does not take a substantial amount of faith.

egrabrick

Posts : 15
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Evan_T on Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:30 pm

@realdonaldtrump wrote:
LivsTanski wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

Firstly, I am so exited to be able to participate in these discussions again!!!! My peers always post every thought provoking material. Very Happy

        I do not agree with the statement made above. I do not conclude that any explanation to any question is "easily believable" because easy is a subjective term. Personally, it is easy for me to jump a horse over a 3 foot obstacle, something that several of my peers, save one, would find difficult. It is easy for me to sit and study for 6+ hours a day, a task that other people find challenging. Personally I find algebra very difficult, where as a part of the population finds it quite "easy". My argument can be summed up to this, The statement above can not be made based on the fact that easy is a subjective term and there is not a definitive standard for the word "easy".


I really like how much you thought through this Olivia! I'm still going to have to respectfully disagree, however.

My main question would be: Do you think any abstract concept is definable in any way?

I think it's better put in an example. I'd say that justice is also pretty tough to define. After all, if you steal a car, what should your perfect punishment be? What about if you stole a truck? Or a bus? And what if there were valuables inside? But you didn't know about them? It'd be very hard to have a precise, definable punishment for this crime. However, if I did steal a bus with a valuable computer on it, I would still go through the court system and be punished to the best of my ability, because even though it may not be perfect, there is still a good educated rationale for a certain punishment. It may not be the perfect idea of justice, but it's pretty close.

So, would seeking to punish me be ok, even though we know our justice may not be perfect?

I guess I'm thinking along Plato's theory of ideas. He states that while the perfect concept of "justice", or "easy", may be difficult to focus in on, we can still have a pretty good, rough idea. After all, those perfect concepts do come from our Creator God.

A more applicable way to ask the question pertaining to this topic is: Do you think there's any general understanding/definition/connotation of "easy" that can be used to answer this question?


Hi Donald. I understand what you are saying, but there is a problem in your argument. You are right in saying that it is difficult for us to grasp perfect ideas of concepts such as justice, because we are broken and finite. However, that only stands for definitions of objective concepts. In the context of the quote, easy can also be understood as an experience, and experiences are subject(ive) to each person's own mind. For example, I can have the experience of math being easy, or the experience of it being hard. Whether math is hard or easy is a question that can be posed to everyone, and everyone will have different answers but still be telling the truth. So yes, there is an absolute definition of easy. You may find something pretty close to it in the dictionary. But there is still a level of subjectivity because 'easy' can be experienced. In fact, it could be, by definition, subjective. (Think of this as being a small pocket of acceptable subjectivity within an ocean of objectivity. Really, you could argue that everything is objective because of the existence of an objective God, but that would still allow what you could call "relative subjectivity" such as this). This idea could rectify both your's and Olivia's arguments.

Evan_T

Posts : 19
Join date : 2017-08-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

egrabrick's response to @realdonaldtrump

Post by egrabrick on Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:32 pm

@realdonaldtrump wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?
Same as Olivia, it's good to have this discussion board rolling again. It's gonna be yuuugggeee Very Happy

As far as my answer, let's tackle the question backwards, because that's how I do basically everything.

I think an easily believable explanation is one that is "simple". I believe this because of the context. This guy is making an introductory segment for his video on how great the world we live in is, and how it got here. If I'm remembering the context right, it sounds like he was basically trying to come up with some catchy phrasing for a pretty straightforward idea. A paraphrased, Trump version would read like this:

"There won't be a simple explanation for a bigly complex world"

Using that abridged version, yes, I would agree with the statement. I'd say that the more complex a subject becomes, the more complex of an explanation it requires. Think of it like a sliding scale. Something easy, like throwing a ball, requires a simple explanation. Something hard, like explaining how a car engine works, with the transmission, crankshaft, battery, etc., would require a more detailed/complex explanation. While not exact, the general rule is that the more complex something is, the more complex the explanation has to be.

Looking at our world today, I'd say it's pretty complex, and thus requires a more complex explanation.


Personally, I don't think "easily believable" and "simple" mean the same thing. In my opinion, the idea that a Supreme Being created the universe simply by talking is a very simple idea, but I don't think it's necessarily easy to believe. It takes quite a bit of faith to believe that there is a Supreme Being, and that he can create anything by simply talking. I would say that our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it.

egrabrick

Posts : 15
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Replying to Evan_T

Post by @realdonaldtrump on Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:53 pm

Evan_T wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
LivsTanski wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

Firstly, I am so exited to be able to participate in these discussions again!!!! My peers always post every thought provoking material. Very Happy

        I do not agree with the statement made above. I do not conclude that any explanation to any question is "easily believable" because easy is a subjective term. Personally, it is easy for me to jump a horse over a 3 foot obstacle, something that several of my peers, save one, would find difficult. It is easy for me to sit and study for 6+ hours a day, a task that other people find challenging. Personally I find algebra very difficult, where as a part of the population finds it quite "easy". My argument can be summed up to this, The statement above can not be made based on the fact that easy is a subjective term and there is not a definitive standard for the word "easy".


I really like how much you thought through this Olivia! I'm still going to have to respectfully disagree, however.

My main question would be: Do you think any abstract concept is definable in any way?

I think it's better put in an example. I'd say that justice is also pretty tough to define. After all, if you steal a car, what should your perfect punishment be? What about if you stole a truck? Or a bus? And what if there were valuables inside? But you didn't know about them? It'd be very hard to have a precise, definable punishment for this crime. However, if I did steal a bus with a valuable computer on it, I would still go through the court system and be punished to the best of my ability, because even though it may not be perfect, there is still a good educated rationale for a certain punishment. It may not be the perfect idea of justice, but it's pretty close.

So, would seeking to punish me be ok, even though we know our justice may not be perfect?

I guess I'm thinking along Plato's theory of ideas. He states that while the perfect concept of "justice", or "easy", may be difficult to focus in on, we can still have a pretty good, rough idea. After all, those perfect concepts do come from our Creator God.

A more applicable way to ask the question pertaining to this topic is: Do you think there's any general understanding/definition/connotation of "easy" that can be used to answer this question?


Hi Donald. I understand what you are saying, but there is a problem in your argument. You are right in saying that it is difficult for us to grasp perfect ideas of concepts such as justice, because we are broken and finite. However, that only stands for definitions of objective concepts. In the context of the quote, easy can also be understood as an experience, and experiences are subject(ive) to each person's own mind. For example, I can have the experience of math being easy, or the experience of it being hard. Whether math is hard or easy is a question that can be posed to everyone, and everyone will have different answers but still be telling the truth. So yes, there is an absolute definition of easy. You may find something pretty close to it in the dictionary. But there is still a level of subjectivity because 'easy' can be experienced. In fact, it could be, by definition, subjective. (Think of this as being a small pocket of acceptable subjectivity within an ocean of objectivity. Really, you could argue that everything is objective because of the existence of an objective God, but that would still allow what you could call "relative subjectivity" such as this). This idea could rectify both your's and Olivia's arguments.
Very interesting point Evan. I definitely agree. Something being "easy" is certainly different to different people, in an experiential sense. In that regard, I'd agree with you 100%.

Still, in going back to the context, I don't necessarily think that was what the question was asking per se. As I mentioned, the general rule seems to be that as a thing gets more complex, so does its explanation. This question seems to be implying that, because we live in a complex world, a complex explanation will be required. The point I was driving at was that, in general, we all know roughly when something is easy or when something is hard, when something is simple or when something is complex.

To put it simpler, regardless of whether most of us think the idea of God creating the universe is easy to believe, I'm sure if we all think about it for long enough we come to understand how incredibly complex the act of Creation was. In seven days, one being, acting through three persons (just try to wrap your head around that part and tell me it's easy Very Happy ), functioning on a completely different level than anything we know, created in seven days all that we see on this earth, just through words! While that is easier to believe for me than evolution/big-bang/materialism, it doesn't change the fact that it is incredibly complex. I think that is what the question was driving at, and it's something I'd agree with.

At least to me, I believe this question is asking for simple vs. complex, not subjectivity in easy vs. hard.

As far as your point on subjectivity balancing with objectivity, however, I completely agree. No contradictions in two seemingly contradictory ideas is pretty amazing!


p.s. In the future, I'd ask that you address me as "Mr. President."

_________________
-45th President of the United States

"Despite the constant negative press, covfefe"
avatar
@realdonaldtrump

Posts : 14
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 71
Location : 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Responding to egrabrick

Post by @realdonaldtrump on Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:59 pm

egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?
Same as Olivia, it's good to have this discussion board rolling again. It's gonna be yuuugggeee Very Happy

As far as my answer, let's tackle the question backwards, because that's how I do basically everything.

I think an easily believable explanation is one that is "simple". I believe this because of the context. This guy is making an introductory segment for his video on how great the world we live in is, and how it got here. If I'm remembering the context right, it sounds like he was basically trying to come up with some catchy phrasing for a pretty straightforward idea. A paraphrased, Trump version would read like this:

"There won't be a simple explanation for a bigly complex world"

Using that abridged version, yes, I would agree with the statement. I'd say that the more complex a subject becomes, the more complex of an explanation it requires. Think of it like a sliding scale. Something easy, like throwing a ball, requires a simple explanation. Something hard, like explaining how a car engine works, with the transmission, crankshaft, battery, etc., would require a more detailed/complex explanation. While not exact, the general rule is that the more complex something is, the more complex the explanation has to be.

Looking at our world today, I'd say it's pretty complex, and thus requires a more complex explanation.


Personally, I don't think "easily believable" and "simple" mean the same thing. In my opinion, the idea that a Supreme Being created the universe simply by talking is a very simple idea, but I don't think it's necessarily easy to believe. It takes quite a bit of faith to believe that there is a Supreme Being, and that he can create anything by simply talking. I would say that our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it.
Thanks for responding Elijah!

If something isn't easy to believe, then my question would be: How is it simple? To me, simple things are no-brainers. Anything that isn't easy to believe isn't really simple, because some part of our brain doesn't believe it to be right or true or in line with our experience. Something difficult to believe requires some hard thinking to justify on our parts.

I would also ask: Is God creating the universe just with a spoken word a simple idea? I'd venture to say no, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Last thing: I'm a little confused at your position. In your original post you said you agree with the quote, meaning that you don't believe there's an easy explanation for a hard to believe world. Yet you ended your response by saying that "...our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it." Could you clear this up for future reference?

_________________
-45th President of the United States

"Despite the constant negative press, covfefe"
avatar
@realdonaldtrump

Posts : 14
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 71
Location : 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by egrabrick on Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 pm

@realdonaldtrump wrote:
egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?
Same as Olivia, it's good to have this discussion board rolling again. It's gonna be yuuugggeee Very Happy

As far as my answer, let's tackle the question backwards, because that's how I do basically everything.

I think an easily believable explanation is one that is "simple". I believe this because of the context. This guy is making an introductory segment for his video on how great the world we live in is, and how it got here. If I'm remembering the context right, it sounds like he was basically trying to come up with some catchy phrasing for a pretty straightforward idea. A paraphrased, Trump version would read like this:

"There won't be a simple explanation for a bigly complex world"

Using that abridged version, yes, I would agree with the statement. I'd say that the more complex a subject becomes, the more complex of an explanation it requires. Think of it like a sliding scale. Something easy, like throwing a ball, requires a simple explanation. Something hard, like explaining how a car engine works, with the transmission, crankshaft, battery, etc., would require a more detailed/complex explanation. While not exact, the general rule is that the more complex something is, the more complex the explanation has to be.

Looking at our world today, I'd say it's pretty complex, and thus requires a more complex explanation.


Personally, I don't think "easily believable" and "simple" mean the same thing. In my opinion, the idea that a Supreme Being created the universe simply by talking is a very simple idea, but I don't think it's necessarily easy to believe. It takes quite a bit of faith to believe that there is a Supreme Being, and that he can create anything by simply talking. I would say that our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it.
Thanks for responding Elijah!

If something isn't easy to believe, then my question would be: How is it simple? To me, simple things are no-brainers. Anything that isn't easy to believe isn't really simple, because some part of our brain doesn't believe it to be right or true or in line with our experience. Something difficult to believe requires some hard thinking to justify on our parts.

I would also ask: Is God creating the universe just with a spoken word a simple idea? I'd venture to say no, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Last thing: I'm a little confused at your position. In your original post you said you agree with the quote, meaning that you don't believe there's an easy explanation for a hard to believe world. Yet you ended your response by saying that "...our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it." Could you clear this up for future reference?


Good points! I decided to look up the definition of "simple" in the dictionary. Very Happy I found a couple different definitions...

1) not hard to understand or solve.
2) not complex or fancy.

If we go by the first definition, that simple means not hard to understand, I would completely agree with you. However, if we use the second definition, I would disagree with you, and say that the idea that God created the universe by speaking is simple. He didn't do anything complex or fancy. Basically, I would say that the way God created the world is not very complex, but it can be hard to believe.

egrabrick

Posts : 15
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Replying to egrabrick

Post by @realdonaldtrump on Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:34 pm

egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?
Same as Olivia, it's good to have this discussion board rolling again. It's gonna be yuuugggeee Very Happy

As far as my answer, let's tackle the question backwards, because that's how I do basically everything.

I think an easily believable explanation is one that is "simple". I believe this because of the context. This guy is making an introductory segment for his video on how great the world we live in is, and how it got here. If I'm remembering the context right, it sounds like he was basically trying to come up with some catchy phrasing for a pretty straightforward idea. A paraphrased, Trump version would read like this:

"There won't be a simple explanation for a bigly complex world"

Using that abridged version, yes, I would agree with the statement. I'd say that the more complex a subject becomes, the more complex of an explanation it requires. Think of it like a sliding scale. Something easy, like throwing a ball, requires a simple explanation. Something hard, like explaining how a car engine works, with the transmission, crankshaft, battery, etc., would require a more detailed/complex explanation. While not exact, the general rule is that the more complex something is, the more complex the explanation has to be.

Looking at our world today, I'd say it's pretty complex, and thus requires a more complex explanation.


Personally, I don't think "easily believable" and "simple" mean the same thing. In my opinion, the idea that a Supreme Being created the universe simply by talking is a very simple idea, but I don't think it's necessarily easy to believe. It takes quite a bit of faith to believe that there is a Supreme Being, and that he can create anything by simply talking. I would say that our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it.
Thanks for responding Elijah!

If something isn't easy to believe, then my question would be: How is it simple? To me, simple things are no-brainers. Anything that isn't easy to believe isn't really simple, because some part of our brain doesn't believe it to be right or true or in line with our experience. Something difficult to believe requires some hard thinking to justify on our parts.

I would also ask: Is God creating the universe just with a spoken word a simple idea? I'd venture to say no, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Last thing: I'm a little confused at your position. In your original post you said you agree with the quote, meaning that you don't believe there's an easy explanation for a hard to believe world. Yet you ended your response by saying that "...our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it." Could you clear this up for future reference?


Good points! I decided to look up the definition of "simple" in the dictionary. Very Happy I found a couple different definitions...

1) not hard to understand or solve.
2) not complex or fancy.

If we go by the first definition, that simple means not hard to understand, I would completely agree with you. However, if we use the second definition, I would disagree with you, and say that the idea that God created the universe by speaking is simple. He didn't do anything complex or fancy. Basically, I would say that the way God created the world is not very complex, but it can be hard to believe.
Well, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. To me, there's nothing simple about a singular being, manifested in three persons (like I was talking about with Evan, just that part right there will blow your mind), functioning in basically a different reality, creating not just matter, but an entire, complex, and intelligent world from nothing, just by talking! However, I understand that at this point, it's really up to your personal opinion. I simply view Creation as a flat out miracle of God, which doesn't seem simple.

The only other thing I have to say: Is there any reason to prefer one definition over the other? In my mind they seem about the same and depend on context, but I figured I'd ask you Very Happy

_________________
-45th President of the United States

"Despite the constant negative press, covfefe"
avatar
@realdonaldtrump

Posts : 14
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 71
Location : 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Evan_T on Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:06 pm

@realdonaldtrump wrote:
egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?
Same as Olivia, it's good to have this discussion board rolling again. It's gonna be yuuugggeee Very Happy

As far as my answer, let's tackle the question backwards, because that's how I do basically everything.

I think an easily believable explanation is one that is "simple". I believe this because of the context. This guy is making an introductory segment for his video on how great the world we live in is, and how it got here. If I'm remembering the context right, it sounds like he was basically trying to come up with some catchy phrasing for a pretty straightforward idea. A paraphrased, Trump version would read like this:

"There won't be a simple explanation for a bigly complex world"

Using that abridged version, yes, I would agree with the statement. I'd say that the more complex a subject becomes, the more complex of an explanation it requires. Think of it like a sliding scale. Something easy, like throwing a ball, requires a simple explanation. Something hard, like explaining how a car engine works, with the transmission, crankshaft, battery, etc., would require a more detailed/complex explanation. While not exact, the general rule is that the more complex something is, the more complex the explanation has to be.

Looking at our world today, I'd say it's pretty complex, and thus requires a more complex explanation.


Personally, I don't think "easily believable" and "simple" mean the same thing. In my opinion, the idea that a Supreme Being created the universe simply by talking is a very simple idea, but I don't think it's necessarily easy to believe. It takes quite a bit of faith to believe that there is a Supreme Being, and that he can create anything by simply talking. I would say that our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it.
Thanks for responding Elijah!

If something isn't easy to believe, then my question would be: How is it simple? To me, simple things are no-brainers. Anything that isn't easy to believe isn't really simple, because some part of our brain doesn't believe it to be right or true or in line with our experience. Something difficult to believe requires some hard thinking to justify on our parts.

I would also ask: Is God creating the universe just with a spoken word a simple idea? I'd venture to say no, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Last thing: I'm a little confused at your position. In your original post you said you agree with the quote, meaning that you don't believe there's an easy explanation for a hard to believe world. Yet you ended your response by saying that "...our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it." Could you clear this up for future reference?


Good points! I decided to look up the definition of "simple" in the dictionary. Very Happy I found a couple different definitions...

1) not hard to understand or solve.
2) not complex or fancy.

If we go by the first definition, that simple means not hard to understand, I would completely agree with you. However, if we use the second definition, I would disagree with you, and say that the idea that God created the universe by speaking is simple. He didn't do anything complex or fancy. Basically, I would say that the way God created the world is not very complex, but it can be hard to believe.
Well, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. To me, there's nothing simple about a singular being, manifested in three persons (like I was talking about with Evan, just that part right there will blow your mind), functioning in basically a different reality, creating not just matter, but an entire, complex, and intelligent world from nothing, just by talking! However, I understand that at this point, it's really up to your personal opinion. I simply view Creation as a flat out miracle of God, which doesn't seem simple.

The only other thing I have to say: Is there any reason to prefer one definition over the other? In my mind they seem about the same and depend on context, but I figured I'd ask you Very Happy

I think that you guys really don't disagree here - you just seem to be looking at the question from different angles. Mr. President, you seem to think that God is extremely complex, and that his act of Creation was an incredibly complex act. And it definitely was, from our standpoint. We are finite beings, and he is an infinite God, so we will never be able to fully understand Him or his acts. However, Elijah seems to be arguing that the act of God was simple because it was only a spoken word. Yes, because God did it, it was incredibly powerful. But, compared to any number of other ways he could have done it, it was relatively simple. (If I am putting words into your mouth, tell me). You can see here the importance of understand subjectivity and objectivity before tackling the question. Really, it all comes down to how you interpret the question.

Evan_T

Posts : 19
Join date : 2017-08-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

My question for Elijah

Post by Redneck_philosopher on Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:02 am

egrabrick wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?




I would have to agree with the quote. Pretty much everyone believes this world had to come from somewhere, but different people have different opinions on where it came from. One common explanation for how we got here is evolution, however, I find evolution very hard to believe in. Regardless of how much time the universe has existed for, I just can't believe such an amazing thing came from chance. And even if I believed in evolution, it still doesn't explain how how the first matter formed. Nor does it explain how information came from matter. I would definitely say evolution is not easily believable. One of the other most common explanations for how we got here is that God spoke the world into creation. Even though I find this idea much more believable than the hypothesis of evolution, it still takes faith. There is no explanation for where the universe came from that does not take a substantial amount of faith.

Good points Elijah! I was just curious though, as you said yourself you don't find evolution to be easily believable (with good reason), but I think that is the point of this question. You have to look at the context. I think the point of what he was saying here is that what is going to be easily believable is going to be different for everybody. Although we know the true explanation of why we are here and how, others who don't believe in God think they believe in the truth. So my question is, what is an easily believable explanation, when everybody has a different belief? I hope that makes sense. Let me know if it doesn't and I will clarify. Very Happy

_________________
Mighty darn good thoughts ay done had there
avatar
Redneck_philosopher

Posts : 8
Join date : 2017-08-14
Location : 'mercia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Responses to Evan_T and @realdonaldtrump

Post by egrabrick on Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:31 pm

Evan_T wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
egrabrick wrote:
@realdonaldtrump wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?
Same as Olivia, it's good to have this discussion board rolling again. It's gonna be yuuugggeee Very Happy

As far as my answer, let's tackle the question backwards, because that's how I do basically everything.

I think an easily believable explanation is one that is "simple". I believe this because of the context. This guy is making an introductory segment for his video on how great the world we live in is, and how it got here. If I'm remembering the context right, it sounds like he was basically trying to come up with some catchy phrasing for a pretty straightforward idea. A paraphrased, Trump version would read like this:

"There won't be a simple explanation for a bigly complex world"

Using that abridged version, yes, I would agree with the statement. I'd say that the more complex a subject becomes, the more complex of an explanation it requires. Think of it like a sliding scale. Something easy, like throwing a ball, requires a simple explanation. Something hard, like explaining how a car engine works, with the transmission, crankshaft, battery, etc., would require a more detailed/complex explanation. While not exact, the general rule is that the more complex something is, the more complex the explanation has to be.

Looking at our world today, I'd say it's pretty complex, and thus requires a more complex explanation.


Personally, I don't think "easily believable" and "simple" mean the same thing. In my opinion, the idea that a Supreme Being created the universe simply by talking is a very simple idea, but I don't think it's necessarily easy to believe. It takes quite a bit of faith to believe that there is a Supreme Being, and that he can create anything by simply talking. I would say that our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it.
Thanks for responding Elijah!

If something isn't easy to believe, then my question would be: How is it simple? To me, simple things are no-brainers. Anything that isn't easy to believe isn't really simple, because some part of our brain doesn't believe it to be right or true or in line with our experience. Something difficult to believe requires some hard thinking to justify on our parts.

I would also ask: Is God creating the universe just with a spoken word a simple idea? I'd venture to say no, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Last thing: I'm a little confused at your position. In your original post you said you agree with the quote, meaning that you don't believe there's an easy explanation for a hard to believe world. Yet you ended your response by saying that "...our world is very complex, yet there is a very simple explanation for it." Could you clear this up for future reference?


Good points! I decided to look up the definition of "simple" in the dictionary. Very Happy I found a couple different definitions...

1) not hard to understand or solve.
2) not complex or fancy.

If we go by the first definition, that simple means not hard to understand, I would completely agree with you. However, if we use the second definition, I would disagree with you, and say that the idea that God created the universe by speaking is simple. He didn't do anything complex or fancy. Basically, I would say that the way God created the world is not very complex, but it can be hard to believe.
Well, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. To me, there's nothing simple about a singular being, manifested in three persons (like I was talking about with Evan, just that part right there will blow your mind), functioning in basically a different reality, creating not just matter, but an entire, complex, and intelligent world from nothing, just by talking! However, I understand that at this point, it's really up to your personal opinion. I simply view Creation as a flat out miracle of God, which doesn't seem simple.

The only other thing I have to say: Is there any reason to prefer one definition over the other? In my mind they seem about the same and depend on context, but I figured I'd ask you Very Happy

I think that you guys really don't disagree here - you just seem to be looking at the question from different angles. Mr. President, you seem to think that God is extremely complex, and that his act of Creation was an incredibly complex act. And it definitely was, from our standpoint. We are finite beings, and he is an infinite God, so we will never be able to fully understand Him or his acts. However, Elijah seems to be arguing that the act of God was simple because it was only a spoken word. Yes, because God did it, it was incredibly powerful. But, compared to any number of other ways he could have done it, it was relatively simple. (If I am putting words into your mouth, tell me). You can see here the importance of understand subjectivity and objectivity before tackling the question. Really, it all comes down to how you interpret the question.

I've got quite a bit to respond to, so sorry if I miss something. Very Happy First, to respond to @realdonaldtrump, I don't know that there's really any reason to prefer one definition, but I think it's important that we're both using the same one. As I said in my last post, if we go with the first definition, I'd agree with you, but if we use the second, I'd disagree. Hopefully that helps clear it up!

Then, to respond to what Evan_T said, Great job summarizing! At least from my perspective, you seemed to summarize my opinion in a very clear and concise manner. Thanks! I agree with you that we don't really disagree, but rather are looking at it from different angles.

Thanks everyone for keeping this conversation going!!

egrabrick

Posts : 15
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by LivsTanski on Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:34 pm

@realdonaldtrump wrote:
LivsTanski wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

Firstly, I am so exited to be able to participate in these discussions again!!!! My peers always post every thought provoking material. Very Happy

        I do not agree with the statement made above. I do not conclude that any explanation to any question is "easily believable" because easy is a subjective term. Personally, it is easy for me to jump a horse over a 3 foot obstacle, something that several of my peers, save one, would find difficult. It is easy for me to sit and study for 6+ hours a day, a task that other people find challenging. Personally I find algebra very difficult, where as a part of the population finds it quite "easy". My argument can be summed up to this, The statement above can not be made based on the fact that easy is a subjective term and there is not a definitive standard for the word "easy".


I really like how much you thought through this Olivia! I'm still going to have to respectfully disagree, however.

My main question would be: Do you think any abstract concept is definable in any way?

I think it's better put in an example. I'd say that justice is also pretty tough to define. After all, if you steal a car, what should your perfect punishment be? What about if you stole a truck? Or a bus? And what if there were valuables inside? But you didn't know about them? It'd be very hard to have a precise, definable punishment for this crime. However, if I did steal a bus with a valuable computer on it, I would still go through the court system and be punished to the best of my ability, because even though it may not be perfect, there is still a good educated rationale for a certain punishment. It may not be the perfect idea of justice, but it's pretty close.

So, would seeking to punish me be ok, even though we know our justice may not be perfect?

I guess I'm thinking along Plato's theory of ideas. He states that while the perfect concept of "justice", or "easy", may be difficult to focus in on, we can still have a pretty good, rough idea. After all, those perfect concepts do come from our Creator God.

A more applicable way to ask the question pertaining to this topic is: Do you think there's any general understanding/definition/connotation of "easy" that can be used to answer this question?

Good Morning Mr. President!

I am going to be perfectly honest and say I am having trouble drawing the parallel between my argument and your refutation. I am making the claim that "easy" is subjective, but I will add that it can be defines as "something that requires a minimum amount of skill or effort" (This definition was created from the dictionary of Olivia Tanski, which I assure you is very credible Cool ) All joking aside, I do not understand how the vague definition of justice come into play with the definition of easy. You asked me if I thought any abstract concept is definable in anyway. I would answer yes, to an extent. Within our specific example of the word easy, I would argue that everyone has a their own degree of definition, but on a a base level it can be defined as something which requires minimum effort from the acting party. But again, if a nuclear scientist was asked "is there a an easily believable answer to an impossible to believe world" his answer would vary greatly from mine since his level of understanding in the field of science far surpasses mine. Does this make sense?
avatar
LivsTanski

Posts : 17
Join date : 2017-08-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Response to Redneck_philosopher

Post by egrabrick on Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:41 pm

Redneck_philosopher wrote:
egrabrick wrote:
Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?




I would have to agree with the quote. Pretty much everyone believes this world had to come from somewhere, but different people have different opinions on where it came from. One common explanation for how we got here is evolution, however, I find evolution very hard to believe in. Regardless of how much time the universe has existed for, I just can't believe such an amazing thing came from chance. And even if I believed in evolution, it still doesn't explain how how the first matter formed. Nor does it explain how information came from matter. I would definitely say evolution is not easily believable. One of the other most common explanations for how we got here is that God spoke the world into creation. Even though I find this idea much more believable than the hypothesis of evolution, it still takes faith. There is no explanation for where the universe came from that does not take a substantial amount of faith.

Good points Elijah! I was just curious though, as you said yourself you don't find evolution to be easily believable (with good reason), but I think that is the point of this question. You have to look at the context. I think the point of what he was saying here is that what is going to be easily believable is going to be different for everybody. Although we know the true explanation of why we are here and how, others who don't believe in God think they believe in the truth. So my question is, what is an easily believable explanation, when everybody has a different belief? I hope that makes sense. Let me know if it doesn't and I will clarify. Very Happy

I'm a little confused as to exactly what you were trying to say, but I'll do my best to respond. Personally, I think that if we saw the world being created, it would be easy to believe that it was created that way. Similarly, if we witnessed evolution happening today, or if we clearly saw God creating something by speaking, that would be an easily believe explanation. But the fact is, we didn't see the world being created, so any explanation will take a lot of speculation and/or faith. Hopefully that answers your question. Very Happy

egrabrick

Posts : 15
Join date : 2017-08-15
Age : 16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Maddie Uccello on Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:15 pm

Admin wrote:"There is not going to be an easily believable explanation for an impossible to believe world." Do you agree or disagree and WHY?  What would you consider "an easily believable explanation"?

The first thing I did was break down the sentence and take some of the "Fluff" out. lol
Ok, so I broke it down into this: There is not going to be an easy explanation for a world (like heaven or hell) that seems impossible to believe in. This sentence first of all is talking about two different things, but before I get into that I first defined the word "explanation".

Explanation- A statement or account that makes something clear.

This sentence is talking about knowing v.s. understanding, which are two completely different things.
I.E. Some may know every single thing about the Bible etc.. but will they truly understand and except Christ as their personal savior? Not necessarily. It's their choice in the end.

A question I asked myself after thinking a longggg while was, "Will knowledge ever be truly, and completely understood, and if so would God want it to be easily understood?"

I believe that the understanding shouldn't be easy,and if it seems easy, I would definitely question it why, because those who have the longer and tougher journey in understanding are truly blessed by God. They not only start to widen their ranges of knowledge and understanding through it, but they also build a strong and more powerful relationship with God.

We don't always know why, or how, or when or where, or if it will be easy, but the assurance is in the belief of a God who is good. Romans 5:3 "We rejoice in our sufferings (OUR TRIALS IN UNDERSTANDING), knowing that suffering produces endurance."
In conclusion, I disagree with the statement. Knowledge of a world like heaven or hell is easy to know of, but it is difficult to comprehend. I hope this makes sense. I tried. lol! Very Happy

Maddie Uccello

Posts : 4
Join date : 2017-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Forsaken_Secrects on Thu Aug 17, 2017 2:29 pm

I agree with this statement, the word of the bible is a great example. Genesis talks all about creation.

Forsaken_Secrects

Posts : 1
Join date : 2017-08-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Introduction: Notes from a Tilt-a-Whirl

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum