Your tooth fairy not mine

@ghost-of-a-duke said
In times of tribulation
when the world seems lost and fickle,
I make myself a sandwich,
find comfort in some pickle.

Anon

I recall our nostalgic single game of chess, sir. I got a taste of your way with words, besides a whipping on the board. When my knight went down, no more daylight for me to see my way to victory. It was not a match, just a beating around the bush, for me.

What kind of sandwich? I use Kosher pickle juice to relieve my nightly cramps, when the pickles are all gone.

@pettytalk said
I recall our nostalgic single game of chess, sir. I got a taste of your way with words, besides a whipping on the board. When my knight went down, no more daylight for me to see my way to victory. It was not a match, just a beating around the bush, for me.

What kind of sandwich? I use Kosher pickle juice to relieve my nightly cramps, when the pickles are all gone.

The perfect sandwich involves a whiskey marmalade.

@kellyjay said
Any time a coder writes code directing the flow of information or current it is a human using thought and reasoning to direct the processes, go A if this is true, go B if that is true. This is not something that simply arose out of purely undirected material processes, it takes a mind. When we see the product of a mind's activity it is quite different than an undirected mindless one, it is amazing you reject that out of hand when you simply don't want it to be true.

You confuse reasons and causes. You do it all the time and you’re doing it in this remark too. What you misidentify as “immaterial causes” are mostly reasons, but it is important not to confuse them or conflate them, as you often do.

Example: one can say a car crashed because the brakes failed. That “because” is a cause. A material cause. Or one can say the car crashed because the driver was not paying attention. That is a wholly different “because”. That is not an “immaterial cause”, as you mistakenly think. It is a reason. The two must not be confused. The difference is made manifest when the issue of culpability arises. If the crash caused injuries or damages, the driver is culpable if he was playing chess on his smart phone at the time and took his hands off the wheel and his eyes off the road, but not culpable if he tried to stop and pressed the brake pedal but a hydraulic line to the brakes failed.

Now, when you say “God did it” explains both the origin of the universe (as a first cause) and the origin of life (as the first cause), you are mistaking reasons for causes. It’s an elementary logical fallacy, called “category mistake” (google that). It’s equivalent to saying “the car crashed because the brakes weren’t paying attention.”

God does not make things happen. God is not a cause, material or otherwise, of molecules moving around or DNA or anything else. God does not explain HOW anything happens or ever did happen.

God is mankind’s wherefore, not his whence. God was how bronze-age people expressed a reason why (not how) mankind is here and gave him a reason to treat other people in a certain way (thou shalt not … and all the rest of it). It’s nothing to do with causes, material or otherwise. It’s about giving people reasons for acting in a certain way. (‘Because’ if you don’t, you’re going to hell. That is a “threat because” not a “material cause because” like the brakes failing.)

It’s amazing that you believe in magical causes simply because you want them to come true. That is an example of “because” which is neither causal nor reasonable. It’s wishful thinking.

@moonbus said
You confuse reasons and causes. You do it all the time and you’re doing it in this remark too. What you misidentify as “immaterial causes” are mostly reasons, but it is important not to confuse them or conflate them, as you often do.

Example: one can say a car crashed because the brakes failed. That “because” is a cause. A material cause. Or one can say the car crashed be ...[text shortened]... true. That is an example of “because” which is neither causal nor reasonable. It’s wishful thinking.

The reason that a book is in my hand and not still on the table I picked it up, it is in my hand because I picked it up, I'm both the reason and the cause it is in my hand. Agency and the mechanical means are not in conflict with each other, you ignore one over the other.

-Removed-

And you have the audacity to make me out a waffle? I just put on an once of weight.

You haven't got down to the root cause. You are the lightweight, really, as you are merely floating on the reason, pressure. Geological pressure is a result of other causes which cause the pressure, which then, if high enough, and finding a path of least resistance, result in volcanic eruptions. I'll put it this way. Your brain lacks the necessary mass for profound reasoning, which causes me to doubt your ability to properly explain things to others, whom you believe to be in need of your superficial thoughts.

Volcanic eruptions are primarily triggered by geological pressure that builds up within the earth's crust, due to various geological activities. Here are the main causes: plate tectonics, hot spots, buoyancy of magma, pressure from exsolved gases in magma, and new magma injection into filled magma chamber.

You should also realize that a volcanic eruption is not limited to magma itself, as releases of gas only is still considered a volcanic eruption, if released from a volcano.
The root cause which is primarily responsible for the above causes, which can lead to a volcanic eruption, is one of God's invisible physical laws, gravity.

Gravity is indeed a key factor, a root cause in the formation and eruption of volcanoes. It drives the buoyancy of magma, pulls the molten rock towards the earth's center, and affects the distribution of pressure within the earth. Without gravity, the earth's structure would be different, and volcanic eruptions might not occur in the same way, or at all.

Maybe you should pick up a book, or two, yourself. You definitely have a good reason to do so....you are in need.

@moonbus said
You confuse reasons and causes. You do it all the time and you’re doing it in this remark too. What you misidentify as “immaterial causes” are mostly reasons, but it is important not to confuse them or conflate them, as you often do.

Example: one can say a car crashed because the brakes failed. That “because” is a cause. A material cause. Or one can say the car crashed be ...[text shortened]... true. That is an example of “because” which is neither causal nor reasonable. It’s wishful thinking.

I also want to add to this discussion the immaterial would be the thoughts of the one that designed the breaks not the brakes themselves that started it all. Any injury due to choices (immaterial) to do something (actions) would be blamed on the immaterial choices of the one not paying attention to his/her driving.

@moonbus said
It’s amazing that you believe in magical causes simply because you want them to come true. That is an example of “because” which is neither causal nor reasonable. It’s wishful thinking.

We're off to see the Wizard
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
We hear he is a Whiz of a Wiz
If ever a Wiz there was
If ever, oh ever, a Wiz there was
The Wizard of Oz is one because
Because, because, because, because, because
Because of the wonderful things he does
We're off to see the wizard
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz!

"Because" is reasonable enough for getting a brain, courage, and a heart. And for getting back home to Kansas, most of all, because of all the wonderful things the wizard can cause. The because is the cause without a be, the causal in be-cause.

Moonbus, that's a good accidental analogy for cause and reason. But perhaps you needed to go further down the line. You went from a general brakes failure, down to one of the causes for braking failure, hydraulic line failure. You could have continued down that line, and mentioned that one of the causes for the hydraulic line failure. Perhaps the car brakes had been recently serviced with new brake pads, and after replacing the brake pads, the mechanic did not fully bleed the line of air, therefore leaving pockets of air, which caused insufficient pressure to slow, or stop the wheels from turning completely, to avoid the impact. Obviously there are various reasons to account for hydraulic line failures which can cause an accident.

Anyway, a decent start in your display of reasoning on causes and reason. Perhaps a little dated, since science has made giant strides with the technology on cars which come with an automatic pilot, or at least with some type of automatic accident avoidance system, and which are already in use on the streets. Not to mention all the sensors modern vehicles come equipped with these days...sensing tire pressure, oil level, temperature, low level fluids, leaks, battery level, and even reminders and warnings for servicing the vehicle.

Perhaps the analogy for the reason which cause an accident could have been conveyed using another factor, other than brakes. Maybe one using visibility, since it would involve the driver more than an unexpected, and unusual sudden brakes failure, seeing that you are attempting to make KellyJay see the confusion between reasons and causes. Visibility is a factor which involves reason more, as the driver is presented with situations which require the driver's reasoning abilities to be fully active.

A driver can be his own cause, because he has to consider the possible causes which make for unsafe driving conditions, and which can result in a possible dreaded accident. Such as man accidentally becoming a different kind of animal, an intelligent animal, through the process of an ignorant unreasoning, thoughtless, and uncaring evolutionary mother nature.

There are several road and visibility conditions which can cause car accidents. Too long to list here.

@pettytalk said
We're off to see the Wizard
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
We hear he is a Whiz of a Wiz
If ever a Wiz there was
If ever, oh ever, a Wiz there was
The Wizard of Oz is one because
Because, because, because, because, because
Because of the wonderful things he does
We're off to see the wizard
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz!

"Because" is reasonable enough for getting a brai ...[text shortened]... ere are several road and visibility conditions which can cause car accidents. Too long to list here.

Action taken by reasoning is at the start caused by the immaterial, unless you think our reasoning is like dominos, we simply have no choice our physical makeup makes us do the things we do, like dominos falling we are without choices we are simply dancing to our DNA. Who thought of the breaks, the car, and how to construct each of these and put them together, all of the work to build comes after the well-thought-out ideas, ideas whose very beginning we have no explanation for outside of it came to me.

You almost make me want to go back to my original avatar here.

-Removed-

That’s the point exactly. KJ, and Creationists generally, imagine reasons where there aren’t any.

@moonbus said
That’s the point exactly. KJ, and Creationists generally, imagine reasons where there aren’t any.

You are suggesting a causeless universe here for no reason. I suppose this is how you avoid the conversation, no reason to defend your reasoning if you don't have any reasons for your reasons. Do you at least acknowledge that our immaterial thoughts and desires do indeed cause actions to occur?

@kellyjay said
You are suggesting a causeless universe here for no reason. I suppose this is how you avoid the conversation, no reason to defend your reasoning if you don't have any reasons for your reasons. Do you at least acknowledge that our immaterial thoughts and desires do indeed cause actions to occur?

Why do you keep making the same logical blunder, although it has been explained so that even a chipmunk could understand it?

@moonbus said
Why do you keep making the same logical blunder, although it has been explained so that even a chipmunk could understand it?

If you would simply answer the questions instead of insulting me we could work this out, but if is not your end goal, you just want to insult, keep it up you are doing good. Have I belittled you?