The Instigator
ebuc
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Coveny
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

The Cosmic Hierarchy: "U"niverse/"G"od

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Coveny
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/29/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 827 times Debate No: 102289
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)

 

ebuc

Pro

That the following is the most rational, logical common sense, correct, comprehensive, w-holistic cosmic scenario, in a hierarchal/outline/list/layout format.

Slash marks indicate two words are synonyms. Quotations in title used as identifiers to distinguis and clarify different definitions of words/terms with same spellling and same goes for capital letters used within a sentence for words/terms with same spelling.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Cosmic Hierarchy: "U"niverse/"G"od

1} spirit-2{ spirit-of-intentsion }, metaphyscial-1, mind/intellect/concept ex concepts of Universe, Mind, Space, God, Dogs, Cats etc....

---line-of-demarcation-----

2} metaphysical-2, macro-micro-infinite non-occupied space,

3} finite, occupied space Universe/Uni-V-erse/God

....3a} spirit-2, fermions, bosons and any aggregate collection thereof ex biologicals, minerals, viruses, planets, clusters of galaxies etc.

....3b} spirit-3, metaphysical-3, ultra-micro gravity, that I believe is associated with positive geodesic shape ( ) of space, as found specifically in a torus

....4c}spirit-4, metaphysical-4, ultra-micro dark energy, that , I believe is associated with negative, geodesic shape )( of space as found in torus.
------------------------------------------------

This above is cosmic primary three-ness ergo a trinity set.

"U"niverse > Universe > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse them-verse

I borrow the 'you, we, them' concepts from Bucky Fullers book Synergetics 1 and 2.

"U"niverse is most w-holistic set and pleas take note of the quotations and italics to distinguish this use of word universe from the other two or three spellings, as "U" specifically includsive of #1, metaphysical-1 that is in italics also and this is what the "U" is used to express.

Universe is finite set, ie even if we are to include any alledged multi-verse secnarios, they fall into the one finite Universe catagory ie all local universe's are connected minimally by gravity if not also dark energy.

The word/term universe is used to distinguish our personal sphere-of-influence and as the local universe we observe, in any multi-verse scenarios.

Uni-V-erse is used as synonym for Universe, because of my specific numerical and geometric explorations--- Space ( ) Time ^v - Space )( --- that, I have assigned to every particle of Universe, that, collectively aggregate as the one, finite Universe.

I can elaborate more if sincere interest and rational, logical common sense is the goal of any who want to engage further into the specifics of my layout, as stated.

ebuc

Coveny

Con


The mind is the physical object that holds our consciousness. There is no proof of a soul or a spirit, and throwing a bunch of words out there to try and sound smart doesn’t change that. When you take away the fluff your hierarchy is just theism wrapped in mysticism. None of it is logical, rational, or common sense. It’s just an old trick with an new wrapper.



Logic, rational, and common sense says we are born, we die, and basically have no impact on the universe. We were nothing before, and we become nothing after. Time and time again, various religions of the world make false claims about the universe, and time and time again science has shown them to be what they are… superstition. Humans have a long history of trying to make magic exist.



The hierarchy of the universe something like this:



1 – Physics (how reality behaves)


These have the authority across the universe


2 - Nation (ability to force desires globally)


These have the authority at a national level


3 – Culture (ability to force desires on geographic areas)


These have authority at a local/group level


4 – Consciousness (ability to force your best interest)


These have authority at a personal level



Or to put another way Self > group > nation > universe.



In some cases, aspects of the culture have expanded to encompass the whole nation merging the two somewhat, but culture does not fully drive the nation, even at that point.



There should be more points listing animals other than humans who are still actually on the food chain/hierarchy, but as this debate is focusing humans I’m just displaying the top of the hierarchy.



Hierarchy is about what has authority over what. When we apply that to a universal level, one individual has no authority what so ever. Less than 5% of humans will be remembered a 100 years after their death, and that’s just at the local level. The vast majority of humans, when put on a cosmic level, are insignificant and sit at the very bottom of any chart that deals with authority. (if they deserve to be included on the chart at all)



To put another way, the universe doesn’t care about your nation, nation doesn’t care about your culture, culture doesn’t care about you, but you must care about your culture, and your culture must care about your nation, and your nation must care about the universe. All these have authority over you, and you have no authority over them.


Debate Round No. 1
ebuc

Pro

Convey, metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts have no mass, no weight, no color, no temperature, no frequency, no amplitude, no charge, no speed, no spin, no inside-outing, no orbit, no torque, no motion of any kind ergo energyless and does not occupy space, rather is only concept of space etc. I made that clear in #1 line of text.

Physical/energy occupies space, has mass, weight, charge, spin, orbit, and in some case's frequency, amplitude, spin, torque, and eternally in motion. This partially made clear in #3, and 3a.

I stated nothing about soul your mention of it is irrelevant. Spirit is in majny dictionarys and has two primary aspects of defnition metaphysical{ see merriam webster--- "
  1. 3 : disposition of mind or outlook especially when vigorous or animated in high spirits and 4: : the immaterial intelligent or sentient part of a person" --
ergo metaphysicak-1, spirit of intentions as I made clear in #1.

The other is physical and again, I quote merriam-webster dictioanry,
  1. 7 : a lively or brisk quality in a person or a person's actions and
    1. 12 : an alcoholic solution of a volatile substance spirit of camphor

Next part of you comments are truly fluff as the do not address specifics of my comments as stated. Your the one who lacks rational, logical common sense.


The rest of argument is more of the same irrelevancies that do not address my comments as stated.


Ex my hierarchy has nothing to with "authority" of this over that. You obvious do not know what a hierachy/outline/list is. The true flaky fluff is coming from you. You need to use a dictionary for many of the words you use before you come back, otherwise most of your comments are irrelevant, irrational and lack common sense in regards to my cosmic hierarchy, as presented clearly.


Ex of your lack of relevant, rational, logical common sense in regards to my given cosmic hiearchy is as follows;

1} you show #"1" as physics. Incorrect for cosmic hierarchy beause we live in finite, occupied space Universe, ergo what embraces the finite, occupied space Universe is nonoccupied space ergo no physical/energy ergo no physics. You lack even basic common sense in these regards of beginning with top of hierarchy which is the greatest whole and that is no physics.

Then you switch from physical as #1 of your hierarchy to "self" being the first instead of physics "self > group > nation > universe"

That approach is called a bottom to top hierarchy, however, it is incorrect in that gravity and dark energy are at the bottom of hierarchy since they are the smallest entites or particles{ presumtion of quanta } of Universe.

You need to copy and paste my whole initial arguement in to your next reply here and address those specific words/terms, lines of text, concepts that you believe are invalid and address them specifically as stated. You have not even begun to have a fair, relevant, rational, logical common sense argument that actually addresses my comments as stated.

No offense Convey but your way of you league of detbate and argument, in these regards. Off on so many irrelevant topics to what I've states is in error and waste of intellectual time. imho

ebuc

Coveny

Con


The mind/intellect reside in the brain which has all those things. Without a brain you cannot have abstract concepts, the concepts only exist because of the language, labels, and ideas created within the brain.



For the spirit to have a place in the hierarchy of the universe you must prove two things.


1 – That the spirit exists


2 – That the spirit exerts authority over something



I refute that having a definition for something equates to its existence on the point of spirit. To support my point here is a link to the definition of medusa in Merriam-Webster which I think we can both agree doesn't exist.


https://www.merriam-webster.com...



If you do prove the spirit exists you still need to show that it has authority over something or it is not part of a hierarchy. As you have contested by definition of hierarchy I will present the definition I’m using and provide you a link. “A system in which members of an organization or society are ranked according to relative status or authority.”


https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...



You have not proven that there is anything past the physical, until you do the physics is the top of the hierarchy. As a bit of a nitpicking point physics does not imply that finite. Mass and matter could be infinite. In every direction, we see physics and it encompass billions year old light. We have not found an end or an edge to the universe in any direction, ergo it could be infinite.



I made a mistake with the "greater than" rather than the "less than" sorry about that. Should have been "self < group < nation < universe". Humans are at the bottom of that hierarchy not physics. I stated it with humans on bottom two other ways in R1, so I would think that you would see it as a typo rather than attributing it to my argument but you didn't. How's the saying go, turn about is fair play?



You need to prove that your god exists … err sorry spirit. Till you do, the rest of your fluffy is irrelevant.



Ok I’m not normally a grammar nazi but you misspelled my name while insulting me so I’m going to bring it up. This sentence is barely a coherent thought “No offense Convey but your way of you league of detbate and argument, in these regards.”. My assumption is you were trying to say “No offense Coveny but your way out of your league in regards to this debate/argument”. So, I think that a “waste of your intellectual time” really is a big deal because there isn't much there to waste… just say’n.


Debate Round No. 2
ebuc

Pro

..C--"The mind/intellect reside in the brain which has all those things. Without a brain you cannot have abstract concepts, the concepts only exist because of the language, labels, and ideas created within the brain."...

----------------------------------------------

EB--Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concept are not 3D things of occupied space that reside here, there or anywhere.

Animals other than humans have consciousness yet little to no access to abstract, metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts.

Here again I suggest you read some dictionry terms before you next argument.

Ex 3.

intellect or understanding, as distinguished from the faculties of feeling and willing; intelligence.

.."C---For the spirit to have a place in the hierarchy of the universe you must prove two things.

1 – That the spirit exists

2 – That the spirit exerts authority over something"...
---------------------------------
I gave you four definitions of spirit, and definitions for two of those, again, you lack ability to directly addres my givens regarding spirit or anything else in the hieracrhy directly as stated.


.."C---I refute that having a definition for something equates to its existence on the point of spirit. To support my point here is a link to the definition of medusa in Merriam-Webster which I think we can both agree doesn't exist.

https://www.merriam-webster.com...;

-----------------------------------------------------------------
I have no idea what a medusa is because it is not stated in my cosmic hiearchy. Again you cannot address my comments as stated with any rational, logical common sense to invalidate them. Y0ou need use a dictionary much, much more regarding what Ive stated and not what you fasley project.

"C--If you do prove the spirit exists you still need to show that it has authority over something or it is not part of a hierarchy. As you have contested by definition of hierarchy I will present the definition I’m using and provide you a link. “A system in which members of an organization or society are ranked according to relative status or authority.”

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com......

------------------------------------------------------------

Heirarchal/outline/lists come in many varieties. Your use of word authority is misleading to my use of menu top - to - bottom sub-menus. Again, your need to address my comments as stated, not as you false project them

https://en.wikipedia.org...(list)

.."C--You have not proven that there is anything past the physical, until you do the physics is the top of the hierarchy. As a bit of a nitpicking point physics does not imply that finite. Mass and matter could be infinite. In every direction, we see physics and it encompass billions year old light. We have not found an end or an edge to the universe in any direction, ergo it could be infinite.

------------------------------------------------

Again, you do not address specifics comments as stated Abstract metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts do not occupy a space or location, and have no energy, mass, color etc.......You do not address the clearly stated diffferrrence betwee metaphysical-1, 2, 3 and 4 that Ive laid out with much clarity in my hierarchal/outline/list.

We have no evidence that our finite, occupied space Universe is infinite. So again your not only inn error, you offer no rational, logical common sense to refute my givens as stated.

.."C---I made a mistake with the "greater than" rather than the "less than" sorry about that. Should have been "self < group < nation < universe". Humans are at the bottom of that hierarchy not physics. I stated it with humans on bottom two other ways in R1, so I would think that you would see it as a typo rather than attributing it to my argument but you didn't. How's the saying go, turn about is fair play?

The set of "U"niverse > Universe > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse is additional tidbit and not specific part of my cosmic hieracju that is listed numerically.

The top of my hierachys is the word "U"niverse and is invokes a concept of the greatest wholistic concept or scenario. The bottom of my hierarchy is darek energy and gravity. If an graviton exists it is presumed to have a quantum particle identified as a graiton and is ultra-micro is commonly understood by most scicentists

So much less is known about dark enery, however, same ideas apply and we presume and ultra-micro darkion{?} exists.

I offer know proofs only a rational, logical common sense cosmic hierarchy that you refuse to address the specific comment as stated because you have no rational, logical common sense or evidence to refute them.

.."C--You need to prove that your god exists … err sorry spirit. Till you do, the rest of your fluffy is irrelevant.".

------------------------------------

No, I do not prove anything. No not spirit, four distinct kinds of spirit that you do not address specifically as stated because you lack any rational, logical common sense much less any evidence to refute them, as stated.

You need to start with reading and addressing my commments as stated, and you need to use a dictionary as I did in my last argument to refute your clams regarding this or that of spirit. I gave two dictionary definitions that supported my spirit-1 and spirit-2.

You offered nothing that of andy rational, logical common sense that refutes givens as stated in hierarchy and back with dictionary defintions for them.

.."C--Ok I’m not normally a grammar nazi but you misspelled my name while insulting me so I’m going to bring it up. This sentence is barely a coherent thought “No offense Convey but your way of you league of detbate and argument, in these regards.”. My assumption is you were trying to say “No offense Coveny but your way out of your league in regards to this debate/argument”. So, I think that a “waste of your intellectual time” really is a big deal because there isn't much there to waste… just say’n.

Sorry if spelled your name incorrectly. Here above I just used C. So I hope you dont take offense for not having every letter of your name. Yes, I have poor grammar. No good excusess there. Often times I'm in hurry to get out door to work. That is the case currently. Got to go!

ebuc

Coveny

Con


Ok let’s take a step back here. Ebuc when someone, anyone, makes a statement the burden of proof is on them. For examples if I say unicorns rule the cosmos I have two prove that both unicorns exist and that they rule. You state “I do not prove anything” therefore you have failed the burden of proof for your claim, and lost the debate.



As addressing your hierarchy seems very important to you I’m going to address your fluff that you can’t prove exists.



Spirit is listed number 1. (the top) Here you take a physical object “mind”, a measurement of the mind “intellect”, and “concepts” and present them as if they are one thing, a spirit. Now I’m going to assume you were trying to say consciousness rather than mind as mind deals with the physical realm. You are correct the abstract concepts are not 3 dimensional, or in the physical world they are part of the imagination. Which is a byproduct of consciousness, which is a byproduct of having a brain. Your task in this debate was to prove that the brain and the spirit are separate entities. You have not done that as previously stated.



Metaphysical – non-occupied space was next. I really didn’t understand why you felt like unoccupied had higher rank than god or higher than consciousness (if you listed these backwards) but I assume this has something to do with how you romanticize the intangible. Metaphysical is all about abstract BS connections that can’t be proven. And to keep in line with that you say macro-micro-infinite non-occupied space rather than just saying voids. (which is what you would say if you aren’t trying to sound fluffy)



Finite occupied space Universe/god is last. Here you use god and universe as synonyms again but never prove god exists. It’s also interesting that you list god as finite, that goes against pantheism, so I guess you have some custom version, but I digress. You break down the physical world into three categories and label all of them spirit:



3a spirit –fermions, bosons and any aggregate collection thereof is listed first. This is just fluffy way to say Atoms. Not using any definition of the word spirit like ever.



3b - spirit-3, metaphysical-3, ultra-micro gravity, that I believe is associated with positive geodesic shape ( ) of space, as found specifically in a torus is listed next. This is some BS random thoughts you are trying to piece together with no basis in reality. Microgravity is just free fall in gravity that gives the illusion of no gravity. Ultra Microgravity is just fluff. Which you believe is associated with geodesic shapes. (think 100 side dice) But you believe those shapes to be positively charged found in donuts. I guess because geodesic didn’t sound cool enough by itself so you electrically charged it and made it an innertube. It’s not possible to be both geodesic and torus shaped, I think you got confused and forgot you said geodesic SHAPES, and a torus is not a geodesic shape. One is a smooth arc while the other is flat pieces that together create an arc. So invalid BS fluff again, and has nothing to do with the word spirit.



3C spirit-4, metaphysical-4, ultra-micro dark energy, that, I believe is associated with negative, geodesic shape )( of space as found in torus is listed last. Ok then we are back to the contradiction of geodesic and torus shaped. Why doesn’t sphere get some face time? There are other shapes out there than donut shaped! But let’s dissect your last bit of fluff. Ok we are to dark matter, but I guess that wasn’t cool enough by itself so you added ulta-micro. So, small dark energy is … spirit? Um no. And nothing to do with the word spirit. Dark energy is not synonymous with spirit even if it’s donut shaped. (you know because we all know dark energy only exists… in donut shape)



Now later own you quoted three of the definitions from merriam-webster on spirit as well, but you didn’t provide a link. Here is that link for reference.


https://www.merriam-webster.com...



3: temper or disposition of mind or outlook especially when vigorous or animated in high spirits


Response – This is not an entity this is synonym for energy. For example, In high spirits and in high energy. (although that isn’t a common phrase)



7: a lively or brisk quality in a person or a person's actions


Response - This is not an entity this is synonym for energy.




12: an alcoholic solution of a volatile substance spirit of camphor


Response - This is not an entity this is alcoholic. (I can only assume you posted this by mistake)




Look I know this stuff works great at taking money from stupid people. I’ve watch David Wolfe make billions peddling this type of crap, but don’t get on here and actually try to debate it’s merit like it’s not BS mysticism. Your religion is no better, and has no better proof than any of the other 3,000 or so that exist. You have faith in it, but it has ZERO to do with being rational, using logic, or having common sense. It requires you not be rational, not use logic, and not have common sense while you give a con man all your money.


Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Coveny 8 months ago
Coveny
I assume that's directed at me, and not about this website as I have posted anything in the science forums here, but you're gonna need to be a little bit more specific.
Posted by Goldtop 8 months ago
Goldtop
Quite spamming the Science forum a$$hole.
Posted by ebuc 1 year ago
ebuc
Skio please skipo away as you have not nor ever will have any rational, logical comon sense to offer me that is relevant or significant. Goodbye dude r6
Posted by skipsaweirdo 1 year ago
skipsaweirdo
Wow, you know how to not read. Exactly how does one explain the ridiculous ideas of another without copy/pasting what they claim and write and think? Your inability to make reasoned rejoinder seems even more obvious now.
Posted by skipsaweirdo 1 year ago
skipsaweirdo
Wow, you know how to not read. Exactly how does one explain the ridiculous ideas of another without copy/pasting what they claim and write and think? Your inability to make reasoned rejoinder seems even more obvious now.
Posted by ebuc 1 year ago
ebuc
Wow Skipo, you have ability to copy and paste. Congratulations dude. You just gained 0.001 on my scale of integrity involvment. Ebuc
Posted by skipsaweirdo 1 year ago
skipsaweirdo
Ebuc and his nonsensical attempt at exposing us to his rational, logical, common sense pathway reasoning.
finite, occupied space Universe/Uni-V-erse/God
This is gobbledygook

3, ultra-micro gravity, that I believe is associated with positive geodesic shape ( ) of space, as found specifically in a torus
This is just utter garbage. A torus exists in concept only in geometry as does a geodesic shape. It does not mean that these cannot be manufactured and become something one can touch or see but they are not analogous or similar or equivalent to gravity. Gravity is a force that exists in "the world or reality" and doesn't need to be manufactured because it describes what is a cause of an observation..I.e. Bodies being attracted to each other in space, on our planet etc....

4c}spirit-4, metaphysical-4, ultra-micro dark energy, that , I believe is associated with negative, geodesic shape )( of space as found in torus
More nonsense.....negative geodesic shape of space has absolutely no !meaning besides some delusion of profundity in ebuc own world....which I believe encompasses positive triangulation micro~negative boson particle helium derivative nuclear sunshine.
I kid....its meant to be funny...in my own world which is a delusional intentional habitual aspectivity of space~sectional time variation.
Posted by skipsaweirdo 1 year ago
skipsaweirdo
Ebuc and his nonsensical attempt at exposing us to his rational, logical, common sense pathway reasoning.
finite, occupied space Universe/Uni-V-erse/God
This is gobbledygook

3, ultra-micro gravity, that I believe is associated with positive geodesic shape ( ) of space, as found specifically in a torus
This is just utter garbage. A torus exists in concept only in geometry as does a geodesic shape. It does not mean that these cannot be manufactured and become something one can touch or see but they are not analogous or similar or equivalent to gravity. Gravity is a force that exists in "the world or reality" and doesn't need to be manufactured because it describes what is a cause of an observation..I.e. Bodies being attracted to each other in space, on our planet etc....

4c}spirit-4, metaphysical-4, ultra-micro dark energy, that , I believe is associated with negative, geodesic shape )( of space as found in torus
More nonsense.....negative geodesic shape of space has absolutely no !meaning besides some delusion of profundity in ebuc own world....which I believe encompasses positive triangulation micro~negative boson particle helium derivative nuclear sunshine.
I kid....its meant to be funny...in my own world which is a delusional intentional habitual aspectivity of space~sectional time variation.
Posted by ebuc 1 year ago
ebuc
TUL, first you say you understand the terms then you state that the word fermions needs to be explained. That is a contradiction. I havent got time for that.

My thoughts are clearly explained. You want me to spend how much time explaining every word for you.

Get your self a dictionary and use it. I cannot keep not lead you around by the hand for every word in my outline. I will give a tip that some one once gave me. Putting aside gravity and dark energy, for the moment, there only to kinds of particles of the whole finite Universe.

They are fermions and bosons and are in 3a as the first subcatagory of Universe. Simple to grasp not complex. They fall under the my definition of spirit-2. Simple not complex.

You have resolve your self to commiting yourself to words/terms that I have used and either accept them as Ive clearly laid them out, or you have to offer alternative words/terms that are more valid in their defining of Universe.

You have not done that. Ive done the work and clearly put it outline. You have done no rational, logical common sense alternatives to my givens nor invalidation of my givens as stated or put out effort to understand any words/terms or ask me for a definition of specific word/term.

You have to put out equal effort if you want to actually disscuss what is presentedd That is only fair.

ebuc
Posted by TheUnexaminedLife 1 year ago
TheUnexaminedLife
No, I was using a proverb as I think should be self-evident to anyone who knows the proverb 'we are on two different wavelengths'.

I understand the terms, I was only saying that if you want to engage in a discussion with someone you're going to have to explain exactly what you mean. 'Fermions' are not a word in the public lexicon; it is a specialist scientific word and thereby requires an explanation. It is your place to elucidate and develop your thoughts so they can be clearly understood by people who don't have a specialist mathematical or scientific background. Your formatting doesn't make this easy for me; I know you probably have some good ideas, but I don't know them and they need to be communicated effectively.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Outplayz 1 year ago
Outplayz
ebucCovenyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had better spelling - Pro please be more attentive next time to your work; it was hard to follow at some points due to spelling / grammar. Con used sources for you... that's that. I was just lost to what you were arguing while Con was clear where he stood. Make your platform easier to understand by not trying to "sound smart" as Con points out. I am Spiritual, and i believe in infinite possibilities. Your's may be awesome. Just go back to the drawing board and be more precise in laying down your platform. You need this L to become better.