The totality of naturalism (all that is /
all that ever was / all that ever will be)
(Top Posts - Philosophy (General) - 081203)

I have no evidence that there is a naturalistic con-
tinuance and have not offered that as a probability,
but have, instead, offered that as a naturalistic
possibility, for infinity is a very long time, and no
one, without knowledge of all that is / all that ever
was / all that ever will be, can logically and reason-
ably comment that within the arena of all that, recur-
rence or transference is naturalistically impossible
(or so unlikely as to be infinitely practically a zero

Speaking of a naturalistic continuum or transfer-
ence, it would be of interest if someone in the audi-
ence (especially, someone skilled in the area of
quantum science) would bring up details regarding
this matter (or, uh, lack of matter).

Many of the mistakes in naturalistic perceptions
entail the limits imposed by theistic mindsets on
the thinking processes of children who, regardless
of what their theology and interests become over
time, grow up thinking within the box of theistic

Most children are taught that this life is all there
is if they don't believe in supernatural beings and
places (or, they are taught eternal torment is the
result if they don't believe in supernatural beings
and places).

They're trained to limit their naturalistic perceptions
to this life, this time, this place. Many who give up
the myths of the bible and who reject most bible
doctrine, still cling to thinking of naturalism as within
a finite box. That, in my view, is a perception unsup-
ported by the evidence, and is within the minds of
most as a leftover remnant of the way in which most
are raised within a supernaturalistic paradigm.

If one sets aside all the supernaturalism as untrue,
as mythical, as a "make believe" assignment to the
unknown having no merit whatsoever, then one may
contemplate (dare I say it? OK, here goes) taking
a *leap of faith* and *believing* that literally *all*
(that's right, all that is / all that ever was / all that
ever will be) is naturalistic and infinite.

- - -

To clarify, that bespeaks of a naturalistic totality
of all that is / all that ever was / all that ever will be,
but does not necessarily assert that any entity
within all of that has any characteristic of recur-
rence or transference.

However, within a naturalistic infinity, there exists
the possibility of individual entities with character-
istics of recurrence or transference. As such, indi-
vidual entities in possession of such naturalistic
characteristics could be said to have potential
for a naturally occurring perpetuity of an as yet
unspecified (and unproven) nature.

- - -

Now, having taken that *leap of faith*, what does
that leave one with?

As stated, infinity is a very long time ... and stating
something (anything) will *never* happen twice can
only be supported *if*

1) there is evidence that the naturalistic domain
we exist in is either unique (one time only) or
1-dimensional (i.e., not part of a multi-dimen-
sional universe construct consisting of 2 or
more, perhaps an infinite number of mated
universes with naturalistic interactions not yet
discerned), or

2) there is evidence that the laws of the cosmos
(the physics of the totality of all that is / all that
ever was / all that ever will be) prohibit recurrence
or transference by the very nature of said laws.

All of this is bounded by scientific methodology,
and until it is demonstrated that it is true, it is
merely a possibility within the constraints of
naturalism (i.e., no supernaturalism and no vio-
lations of the laws of physics are entailed). It is
falsifiable to the extent that knowledge of all that
is / all that ever was / all that ever will be includes
the physics on what, exactly, would prohibit natur-
alistic recurrence or transference in an infinitely
naturalistic cosmos.

- - -

Naturalistic infinity ...

   Infinity is a very long time, after all ...

      Isn't it wiser to reach from the known (the
      natural) to the unknown (as a natural but as
      of yet, incompletely understood area)

      -than it is-

      to fantasize about the unknown (via ancient
      myths of supernatural entities / places) in an
      effort to pretend the unknown (the supernatural)
      interacts with the known (the natural) ?

- - -