A pro-life atheist

BMS

Well-known member
As sensible as saying that an adult is a corpse at its alive stage.
The corpse of a person or the corpse of a foetus? No Temujin, the adult is the stage of the development of the person or human being, when the human being or person dies it is a corpse. You are confusing the state of the person with the person themsleves, and you do that to convince yourself, or at least to take your mind away from the reality of pro-choice abortion killing that person.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Not an oak tree at all.
So according to you, an acorn has nothing to do with an oak tree. Of course it does, the acorn is the oak tree at its seed stage. We know its not a pine tree at seed stage and we know its not a bus at chassis stage, but you havent been able to explain how an acorn, which is an oak tree at its seed stage of development, isnt an oak tree at its seed stage of development, or indeed what the hell you think it is if not.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
So according to you, an acorn has nothing to do with an oak tree.
...and here we go again, leading off with yet another falsehood that resembles nothing I've said.

Stop telling me what you imagine I believe. Stick to what I say.

Of course it does, the acorn is the oak tree at its seed stage.
The acorn is not an oak tree.

We know its not a pine tree at seed stage and we know its not a bus at chassis stage
Since you are the only one who has brought up this nonsense, it's entirely up to you.

but you havent been able to explain how an acorn, which is an oak tree at its seed stage of development, isnt an oak tree at its seed stage of development, or indeed what the hell you think it is if not.
False again. I have repeatedly explained what it is; an acorn which, if all goes well, will one day become an oak tree.
 

BMS

Well-known member
...and here we go again, leading off with yet another falsehood that resembles nothing I've said.
Ok so the oak tree does begin its life with a seed from the oak tree, and develops into a mature oak tree. That isnt false. What you said is false.
 

BMS

Well-known member
False again. I have repeatedly explained what it is; an acorn which, if all goes well, will one day become an oak tree.
No, you only get to tell me what is going on in your head. I know what I know. Your response is FALSE. You have not convinced me of your denial and lunacy because I believe the evidence I have presented.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Ok so the oak tree does begin its life with a seed from the oak tree, and develops into a mature oak tree. That isnt false. What you said is false.
Nothing I said was false. The acorn is not an oak tree.
No, you only get to tell me what is going on in your head. I know what I know. Your response is FALSE. You have not convinced me of your denial and lunacy because I believe the evidence I have presented.
You're not even making sense. It is patently true that an acorn will, if all goes well, one day become an oak tree.

You have presented no evidence.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
The truth of that statement is demonstrated every time a foetus is allowed to be born.
No, it's not demonstrated at any time.
There was a time when you were a foetus in your mother's womb. Weren't you a person then?
That is entirely the issue. It is claimed that from the stage where it is two cells, the fetus is a person. No evidence has been given in support of that claim. I was definitely not a person when I was two cells.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
The acorn is not an oak tree.
In appearance, no. In essence, yes.

In other words--an acorn looks very different from an oak tree, but it is not difference in essence from an oak tree. It is the oak tree---in acorn/seed form.

I think you "enlightened science" types tend to conflate appearances with essences. You seem to wrongly assume that if something appears differently from its fully grown counterpart, that must mean it is somehow different in type or essence from its fully grown counterpart.

An acorn is not difference in kind from a fully grown oak tree, though it does look very different from a fully grown oak tree. If an acorn is not, in essence, an oak tree, what is it? A pig? A maple tree? A flower? A scientist? What is it?
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
In appearance, no. In essence, yes.

In other words--an acorn looks very different from an oak tree, but it is not difference in essence from an oak tree. It is the oak tree---in acorn/seed form.

I think you "enlightened science" types tend to conflate appearances with essences. You seem to wrongly assume that if something appears differently from its fully grown counterpart, that must means it is somehow different in type or essence from its fully grown counterpart.
What on earth do you mean by them being not different "in essence"? What does that actually mean in relation to an acorn and an oak tree? What is the 'essence' of an oak tree?
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Essences are what make the thing what it is. Without essence, the thing would not be what it is. Essences ground a things nature.
Then the 'essence' of an acorn is 'acorn'. The 'essence' of oak tree is 'oak tree'. Not the same thing.

You are just trying to substitute another word to claim that they're the same thing. They're not.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
Then the 'essence' of an acorn is 'acorn'. The 'essence' of oak tree is 'oak tree'. Not the same thing.
If the acorn is not in essence an oak tree--in acorn form--what is it? In other words--in answering the question "What is an acorn" telling me "It is an acorn" doesn't tell me anything. WHAT is an acorn? What is it's essence?

If it is not an oak in essence, then why does an oak tree grow, and not something else?
You are just trying to substitute another word to claim that they're the same thing. They're not.
Fine. What are they?

You are the asserting that an acorn is not an oak in essence. What is it then?
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
If the acorn is not in essence an oak tree--in acorn form--what is it? In other words--in answering the question "What is an acorn" telling me "It is an acorn" doesn't tell me anything. WHAT is an acorn? What is it's essence?
It's essence is acorn. You are trying to make 'essence' mean something it doesn't.
If it is not an oak in essence, then why does an oak tree grow, and not something else?
'Essence' does not mean 'what this will some day turn into'.
Fine. What are they?
They're different. One is a tree; one is a seed.
You are the asserting that an acorn is not an oak in essence. What is it then?
It's an acorn. I'm not sure how many times this needs to be said to you.

All you are doing is trying to come up with some word according to which an acorn and an oak tree are the same thing. It won't work. They're not the same by essence, nature, kind or anything else. They are different things. An acorn may, if all goes well, grow into an oak tree. It is not an oak tree.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
It's essence is acorn. You are trying to make 'essence' mean something it doesn't.

'Essence' does not mean 'what this will some day turn into'.
Absolutely correct. The acorn will become an oak tree, but the oak tree is not different in substance from the acorn. Everything that the oak tree IS as an Oak Tree is in the acorn.

An acorn is just an oak tree that has not yet begun the process of development. An acorn is what an oak tree looks like when it is a seed.
They're different. One is a tree; one is a seed.
Of course they are different; but not in essence. An oak tree is just the acorn in its developed state. An acorn is an oak tree in its undeveloped state; seed form. An acorn is what an oak tree looks like at that stage. An oak tree is what an acorn looks like at that state.

Acorn, sapling, young tree, fully grown tree, those are just terms that refer to the tree in different stages of development.
It's an acorn. I'm not sure how many times this needs to be said to you.
And what IS an acorn? A seed. And what seed is it? A pig? A flower? A maple? No. OAK.
All you are doing is trying to come up with some word according to which an acorn and an oak tree are the same thing.
They are not the same thing--if by that you refer to appearances and stages of development. Just like a toddler and an adult are different in appearance, but the same in essence. Just like a foetus and an infant are the same in essence but different in appearance and development.

It won't work. They're not the same by essence, nature, kind or anything else.

If and acorn is different in essence from an oak tree, when does the acorn become oak? What is it before it becomes oak?

They are different things. An acorn may, if all goes well, grow into an oak tree. It is not an oak tree.

Then what is it? A pig?

When does--whatever it is become something different--that is--when does it become oak?
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Absolutely correct. The acorn will become an oak tree, but the oak tree is not different in substance from the acorn. Everything that the oak tree IS as an Oak Tree is in the acorn.
Well...except for water, and sunlight and bark and leaves...
An acorn is just an oak tree that has not yet begun the process of development. An acorn is what an oak tree looks like when it is a seed.
You're just begging the question. An acorn is not an oak tree.
Of course they are different; but not in essence. An oak tree is just the acorn in its developed state. An acorn is an oak tree in its undeveloped state; seed form. An acorn is what an oak tree looks like at that stage. An oak tree is what an acorn looks like at that state.
Still begging the question. An acorn is not an oak tree.
Acorn, sapling, young tree, fully grown tree, those are just terms that refer to the tree in different stages of development.
Nope. You're just repeating the same unsupported claims that BMS likes to make.
And what IS an acorn? A seed.
Thanks. NOT a tree.
And what seed is it? A pig? A flower? A maple? No. OAK.
Which makes it a seed, not an oak tree.
They are not the same thing--if by that you refer to appearances and stages of development. Just like a toddler and an adult are different in appearance, but the same in essence. Just like a foetus and an infant are the same in essence but different in appearance and development.
No, they are not the same thing. They are manifestly different.
If and acorn is different in essence from an oak tree, when does the acorn become oak? What is it before it becomes oak?
It's an acorn. How many times do you need to be told this? A seed is not the thing that eventually grows from it.
Then what is it? A pig?
Asked and answered.
When does--whatever it is become something different--that is--when does it become oak?
Pointless question, really. When does a child become an adolescent? When does an adolescent become an adult? There are changes that obviously happen without having a single point you can pick and say "That's where the change happens".
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
Well...except for water, and sunlight and bark and leaves...
Those are all attributes. You are confusing physical attributes with essence.
You're just begging the question. An acorn is not an oak tree.
But is is oak in essence. I am not asserting it is a fully developed tree, I am asserting that it is oak in essence.
Pointless question, really. When does a child become an adolescent? When does an adolescent become an adult? There are changes that obviously happen without having a single point you can pick and say "That's where the change happens".
Very good. You cannot point to when a child becomes and adolescent, but the child and the adolescent---are the same person. The adolescent is the same as the child--just more developed.

The oak tree is the same in essence as the acorn--just more developed.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
"Essence" is neither qualifiable nor quantifiable. It's a deepity, allowing the user to impute whatever meaning they deem fit.

The only "essence" shared by an acorn and an oak tree is the fact that both are made up of electrons, protons and neutrons - and thus, the two are the same "in essence". Of course, apples, cat poop and a Ford F-150 are also made of the same three constituent parts - which means they too are an oak tree "in essence".
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
"Essence" is neither qualifiable nor quantifiable. It's a deepity, allowing the user to impute whatever meaning they deem fit.
Ah you enlightened scientific types--always wanting to quantify everything.

Love is not quantifiable either. Not everything can be quantified by material standards.

Essence is an abstraction; not something you can put under a microscope.
The only "essence" shared by an acorn and an oak tree is the fact that both are made up of electrons, protons and neutrons - and thus, the two are the same "in essence". Of course, apples, cat poop and a Ford F-150 are also made of the same three constituent parts - which means they too are an oak tree "in essence".
Once again, you enlightened scientific types wanting to reduce all of reality down to electrons, protons, and how they are arranged etc.

Such narrow minds.

How many protons and neutrons are in your idea of protons and neutrons? Quantify that for me please.
 
Top