Atheist "Guru" HRG argues for the Multiverse. I put up the thread that says multiverse is not backed by emprical evdience that is a contradiction to the atheist credo "don't believe things without empirical evidence." Harris says "to believe things with very little empirical evidence shows something is wrong with your mind." HRG argues that our universe serves as a sample of the multiverse so we can know the MV would be life bearing.
I argue the problem is that's not empirical evidence of the multiverse. Before you can assert that our universe is a sample fof the MV you must first prove there is a MV and prove it not with math or theory but with actual empirical evidence! Overwise you are believing stuff without empricial evidence. Of course they mainly try to get out by using theoretical evidence to correlate to the idea of empirical. I can do that with God arguments.
I charge this tactic of trying to assume we live in a sample of the MV then using that prove that the MV exits is circular reasoning.
Originally Posted by Metacrock View Post
that's just rationalization. I didn't experience myself I experienced something way beyond me. Me and millions of others and it's not indifferent.
HRG:you are speaking drivel. that's a term with very little real stable meaning. Assuming you mean some irrational blick that has no objective content then such a state cannot be transformational and therefore mystical experience is proved by hundreds studies not to be a "mere alternative state." That's a chimera. The concepts of the same reality. you can't decide them up they are conceptualizing the same thing. the experiences are proved to the same.There is no objective evidence that you did not just experience an alternative state of consciousness.
HRG:get it through your head right now, stop your childish prattle and face the facts: ALL THE WAY.M SCALE IS OBJECTIVE IT IS AN OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENT. I'VE TOLD YOU THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN THERE'S NO WAY IT CAN BE AN ACCENT. IT'S GOT CROSS CULTURAL VERIFICATION IN DOZEN CULTURES. THE FINDINGS ARE CONSISTENT.By what objective measuring device ? And the interpretations of this kind of experience are certainly different.
It passes the rational test of being an objective replicable representative means of measuring an experience for matching criteria pertaining to that experience.
(due to the "M scale" which is a means of testing mystical experience)
that does not make it proof. that is begging the question.
HRGOK. I'll spell it out slowly for you:I'LL SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU! You can't prove that without circular reasoning.1. If the MV concept is instantiated in reality, then our local universe is a part of the MV (by definition).
2. Our local universe makes life possible (observation)
you are using the assertion that we are part of it to prove that it exists based upon data form us. if we are only the universe there is then we are not part of it and you have not proved anything. YOU ARE TRYING TO USE THE THING IN QUESTION TO PROVE THE QUESTION AND ITS CIRCULAR REASONING!!!!
OF COURSE THAT'S THE DEFINITION OF CIRCULAR.
Conclusion:YOU HAVE NO EMPIRICAL PROOF THAT IT IS. SO YOU CAN'T CLAIM US AS EMPIRICAL PROOF BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW THAT WE ARE PART OF IT.If the MV concept is instantiated in reality, then part of the MV makes life possible.