Originally posted by no1marauderNo theory is "100% accurate" in its predictions (especially not a probabilistic theory like QM). All it means to say that QM is an "accurate" theory is that all known observations/experiments have yielded results within the bounds of tolerable error. For instance, all it means to say that the theory "An unbiased coin tossed will land heads 50% of the time" is accurate is that, if you conduct a large number of experiments, heads will come up around 50% (plus or minus delta) of the time. It's very unlikely it will come up exactly 50%.
Take the snotty BS and shove it up your a**; Quantum MECHANICS is 100% accurate in its predictions which is more than one can say about the "Law" of Gravity since it apparently has no effect in the subatomic world. I know what a theory is and while Quantum THEORY is a theory, Quantum MECHANICS are a set of mathematical formulas used to describe the pro ...[text shortened]... my post above to Chingking, so if we could stop with the semantic squabbling it would be useful.
As a matter of fact, QM does make some predictions which have are blatantly violated in Nature - the size of the cosmological constant, for instant.
Anyhow, since you wish to stop "semantic squabbling", I'll stop posting on the matter.
Originally posted by chinking58Chinking58: "I still find ridiculous, the idea that you are trying to equate physical laws (most of which have absolute predictive value) with the natural law--the one referring to human behavior."
Originally posted by no1marauder
[b] Again a "Christian" with a total lack of knowledge of science. What a surprise. Come back when you have studied some actual science and understand why quantum mechanics is considered the most powerful predictive law science presently has. You might find it "ridiculous", but that's your problem.
...[text shortened]... g so predictive, but if I could see some examples of this idea applied, I may understand better.[/b]
!!! It is indeed ridiculous. It is one of the marauder's notorious inadequate analogies or means to confuse the matter at hand.
Originally posted by ivanhoePlease try (once) to make a substantive comment, Ivanhoe. Last I checked human behavior is part of the physical world and is subject to physical laws.
Chinking58: "I still find ridiculous, the idea that you are trying to equate physical laws (most of which have absolute predictive value) with the natural law--the one referring to human behavior."
!!! It is indeed ridiculous. It is one of the marauder's notorious inadequate analogies or means to confuse the matter at hand.
Originally posted by no1marauderI wonder to which Natural Law your personal behaviour is subject to, marauder ..... looking at the way you deal with your opponents here.
Please try (once) to make a substantive comment, Ivanhoe. Last I checked human behavior is part of the physical world and is subject to physical laws.
....... are you sure we are talking about the same Universal Natural Law here ?
Edit: By the way, pointing to the Fallacy of the false analogy, to which you seem to have a subscription, is rather "substantial", don't you agree, Snookums ?
Originally posted by ivanhoehuman behavior created natural law and not the other way around. and please don't say it's God inspired unless you're prepared to explain the mechanism that God used to give it , sight unseen, to all early man. Explain,not just postulate or quote somebody else's speculation. try to add something instead of being the pope's pit bull.
Chinking58: "I still find ridiculous, the idea that you are trying to equate physical laws (most of which have absolute predictive value) with the natural law--the one referring to human behavior."
!!! It is indeed ridiculous. It is one of the marauder's notorious inadequate analogies or means to confuse the matter at hand.
Originally posted by ivanhoeI'll ignore the first part of your post which is simply a continuation of your tiresome, ridiculous personal vendetta.
I wonder to which Natural Law your personal behaviour is subject to, marauder ..... looking at the way you deal with your opponents here.
....... are you sure we are talking about the same Universal Natural Law here ?
Edit: By the way, pointing to the Fallacy of the false analogy, to which you seem to have a subscription, is rather "substantial", don't you agree, Snookums ?
If you would care to point out why my analogy was flawed (not FALSE; an analogy cannot be false), you would be making a substantive contribution. Since you did not, then your post was insubstantial, Dearie.
Originally posted by no1marauderhas he ever made a substantial post?
I'll ignore the first part of your post which is simply a continuation of your tiresome, ridiculous personal vendetta.
If you would care to point out why my analogy was flawed (not FALSE; an analogy cannot be false), you would be making a substantive contribution. Since you did not, then your post was insubstantial, Dearie.
Just to establish what we are talking about: (from the Roman-Catholic view)
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6U.HTM
I. The Natural Moral Law
1954 Man participates in the wisdom and goodness of the Creator who gives him mastery over his acts and the ability to govern himself with a view to the true and the good.
The natural law expresses the original moral sense which enables man to discern by reason the good and the evil, the truth and the lie:
The natural law is written and engraved in the soul of each and every man, because it is human reason ordaining him to do good and forbidding him to sin . . . But this command of human reason would not have the force of law if it were not the voice and interpreter of a higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be submitted.5
1955 The "divine and natural" law6 shows man the way to follow so as to practice the good and attain his end. the natural law states the first and essential precepts which govern the moral life. It hinges upon the desire for God and submission to him, who is the source and judge of all that is good, as well as upon the sense that the other is one's equal. Its principal precepts are expressed in the Decalogue. This law is called "natural," not in reference to the nature of irrational beings, but because reason which decrees it properly belongs to human nature:
Where then are these rules written, if not in the book of that light we call the truth? In it is written every just law; from it the law passes into the heart of the man who does justice, not that it migrates into it, but that it places its imprint on it, like a seal on a ring that passes onto wax, without leaving the ring.7
The natural law is nothing other than the light of understanding placed in us by God; through it we know what we must do and what we must avoid. God has given this light or law at the creation.8
1956 The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties:
For there is a true law: right reason. It is in conformity with nature, is diffused among all men, and is immutable and eternal; its orders summon to duty; its prohibitions turn away from offense .... To replace it with a contrary law is a sacrilege; failure to apply even one of its provisions is forbidden; no one can abrogate it entirely.9
1957 Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles.
1958 The natural law is immutable and permanent throughout the variations of history;10 it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. the rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles, it cannot be destroyed or removed from the heart of man. It always rises again in the life of individuals and societies:
Theft is surely punished by your law, O Lord, and by the law that is written in the human heart, the law that iniquity itself does not efface.11
1959 The natural law, the Creator's very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature.
1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known "by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error."12 The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 Leo XIII, Libertas praestantissimum, 597.
6 GS 89 # 1.
7 St. Augustine, De Trin. 14, 15, 21: PL 42,1052.
8 St. Thomas Aquinas, Dec. praec. I.
9 Cicero, Rep. III, 22, 33.
10 Cf. GS 10.
11 St. Augustine, Conf. 2, 4, 9: PL 32, 678.
12 Pius XII, Humani generis: DS 3876; cf. Dei Filius 2: DS 3005.
Originally posted by frogstompFrogstomp: "human behavior created natural law and not the other way around."
human behavior created natural law and not the other way around. and please don't say it's God inspired unless you're prepared to explain the mechanism that God used to give it , sight unseen, to all early man. Explain,not just postulate or quote somebody else's speculation. try to add something instead of being the pope's pit bull.
Since you are not prepared to accept anything I say I guess it is time to talk to your Master's Voice about this statement. It is non-sense.
Originally posted by ivanhoeIt is also the position of the Roman Catholic Church, is it not, that the Church is the only human agency that can properly interpret the Natural Law? Not individual human reason, but the leadership of the RCC?
Just to establish what we are talking about: (from the Roman-Catholic view)
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6U.HTM
I. The Natural Moral Law
1954 Man participates in the wisdom and goodness of the Creator who gives him mastery over his acts and the ability to govern himself with a view to the true and the good.
The natural law expresses t ...[text shortened]... Conf. 2, 4, 9: PL 32, 678.
12 Pius XII, Humani generis: DS 3876; cf. Dei Filius 2: DS 3005.
Originally posted by ivanhoeI agree with Ivanhoe; that is poorly phrased. Human behavior is subject to the Natural Law and in that behavior we see evidence of the Natural Law, but human behavior did not create the Natural Law anymore than humans created the Law of Gravity.
Frogstomp: "human behavior created natural law and not the other way around."
Since you are not prepared to accept anything I say I guess it is time to talk to your Master's Voice about this statement. It is non-sense.
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1: "an analogy cannot be false"
I'll ignore the first part of your post which is simply a continuation of your tiresome, ridiculous personal vendetta.
If you would care to point out why my analogy was flawed (not FALSE; an analogy cannot be false), you would be making a substantive contribution. Since you did not, then your post was insubstantial, Dearie.
Here we go:
Just one link, there are of course many many more which disprove your non-sense, marauder.
http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/falsean.htm
False Analogy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition:
In an analogy, two objects (or events), A and B are shown to
be similar. Then it is argued that since A has property P, so
also B must have property P. An analogy fails when the two
objects, A and B, are different in a way which affects whether
they both have property P.
Examples:
(i) Employees are like nails. Just as nails must be hit in the
head in order to make them work, so must employees.
(ii) Government is like business, so just as business must be
sensitive primarily to the bottom line, so also must
government. (But the objectives of government and business
are completely different, so probably they will have to meet
different criteria.)
Proof:
Identify the two objects or events being compared and the
property which both are said to possess. Show that the two
objects are different in a way which will affect whether they
both have that property.
References:
Barker: 192, Cedarblom and Paulsen: 257, Davis: 84
Originally posted by no1marauderMarauder: "I agree with Ivanhoe; that is poorly phrased."
I agree with Ivanhoe; that is poorly phrased. Human behavior is subject to the Natural Law and in that behavior we see evidence of the Natural Law, but human behavior did not create the Natural Law anymore than humans created the Law of Gravity.
Ha ha ha ..... I love eufemisms ...... poorly phrased, I must remember that one.
Originally posted by ivanhoeI don't agree with their title: "False" means "not true" and an analogy is not meant to have a particular truth value. In the body they use the term "fails" which is more technically accurate. An analogy can be useful or non-useful, but it cannot be "true" or "false".
No1: "an analogy cannot be false"
Here we go:
Just one link, there are of course many many more which disprove your non-sense, marauder.
http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/falsean.htm
False Analogy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition:
In an analogy, two objects (or events), A and B ...[text shortened]... hey
both have that property.
References:
Barker: 192, Cedarblom and Paulsen: 257, Davis: 84
Originally posted by no1marauderMarauder: "It is also the position of the Roman Catholic Church, is it not, that the Church is the only human agency that can properly interpret the Natural Law?
It is also the position of the Roman Catholic Church, is it not, that the Church is the only human agency that can properly interpret the Natural Law? Not individual human reason, but the leadership of the RCC?
That is poorly phrased, marauder.
From the Roman Catholic Cathechism:
1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known "by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error."
All sins, but in particular the sin of Pride can cause serious and fatal distortions in the interpretation of the Natural Law.