Comments on: A Thomistic Cosmological Argument http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/ Your Thoughts, Everyone's Wisdom Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:14:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: artist studio ,gallery, paintings,Indian art, abstract, expressionistic,art http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-10574 artist studio ,gallery, paintings,Indian art, abstract, expressionistic,art Sun, 27 Nov 2011 19:48:42 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-10574 <strong>artist studio ,gallery, paintings,Indian art, abstract, expressionistic,art...</strong> [...]A Thomistic Cosmological Argument | Urban Philosophy[...]... artist studio ,gallery, paintings,Indian art, abstract, expressionistic,art…

[...]A Thomistic Cosmological Argument | Urban Philosophy[...]…

]]> By: Fishpasta http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-1528 Fishpasta Wed, 02 Jun 2010 20:10:10 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-1528 >>>>Neon, I don't believe it matters. Everyone should agree, I think, that immaterial minds exist in some possible worlds.<<<<<br><br>Lol wut?<br><br>Emergentists be damned. >>>>Neon, I don't believe it matters. Everyone should agree, I think, that immaterial minds exist in some possible worlds.<<<<

Lol wut?

Emergentists be damned.

]]> By: Fishpasta http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-1515 Fishpasta Wed, 02 Jun 2010 15:10:10 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-1515 >>>>Neon, I don't believe it matters. Everyone should agree, I think, that immaterial minds exist in some possible worlds.<<<<<br><br>Lol wut?<br><br>Emergentists be damned. >>>>Neon, I don't believe it matters. Everyone should agree, I think, that immaterial minds exist in some possible worlds.<<<<

Lol wut?

Emergentists be damned.

]]> By: isaacf http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-1394 isaacf Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:52:23 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-1394 I don't that think that anywhere I am positing a concept like immaterial matter but rather immaterial substance, which may effect the direction we'd like to take the discussion next. I don't that think that anywhere I am positing a concept like immaterial matter but rather immaterial substance, which may effect the direction we'd like to take the discussion next.

]]> By: isaacf http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-10337 isaacf Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:52:00 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-10337 I don't that think that anywhere I am positing a concept like immaterial matter but rather immaterial substance, which may effect the direction we'd like to take the discussion next. I don't that think that anywhere I am positing a concept like immaterial matter but rather immaterial substance, which may effect the direction we'd like to take the discussion next.

]]> By: isaacf http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-1393 isaacf Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:50:04 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-1393 And just as you say I am presupposing dualism, are you not also presupposing property dualism? And just as you say I am presupposing dualism, are you not also presupposing property dualism?

]]> By: isaacf http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-10336 isaacf Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:50:00 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-10336 And just as you say I am presupposing dualism, are you not also presupposing property dualism? And just as you say I am presupposing dualism, are you not also presupposing property dualism?

]]> By: noen http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-1389 noen Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:10:56 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-1389 Huny, there are no actual infinities. If in the course of arguing you get an infinite regress that's how you know you've made an error. Also, it's difficult to know how you are replying to because you don't thread your replies. Huny, there are no actual infinities. If in the course of arguing you get an infinite regress that's how you know you've made an error.

Also, it's difficult to know how you are replying to because you don't thread your replies.

]]> By: noen http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-10335 noen Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:10:00 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-10335 Huny, there are no actual infinities. If in the course of arguing you get an infinite regress that's how you know you've made an error. Also, it's difficult to know how you are replying to because you don't thread your replies. Huny, there are no actual infinities. If in the course of arguing you get an infinite regress that's how you know you've made an error.

Also, it's difficult to know how you are replying to because you don't thread your replies.

]]> By: noen http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/thomistic-cosmological-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-1386 noen Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:56:49 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=1454#comment-1386 The concept of "immaterial material" is self contradictory and therefore incoherent. Mathematical statements are not immaterial, they are symbolic. Higher level descriptions of things like tables and chairs are just that and do not require a separate ontology in order to account for them. The concept of "immaterial material" is self contradictory and therefore incoherent. Mathematical statements are not immaterial, they are symbolic. Higher level descriptions of things like tables and chairs are just that and do not require a separate ontology in order to account for them.

]]>