Why does the Universe exist?

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

I don't need to prove anything to morons like you!

Atta boy! Ya are human!

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Again, the Spaghetti Monster is "nature." All the past happened, because of nature.

And if nature is conscious or intelligent then that is Intelligent Design. You are now promoting pantheism. Intelligence is recognized by observing how it puts things in order. Nature and Biology are in some sort of order thus implying intelligence.

Quote:

Those who lived 2000 years ago, didn't even know there were other lands, races and cultures. Anthropologists have determined that Homo sapiens originated in South Africa, not the Holy Land. Holy Land - Wikipedia

So lets stop talking about the bible and talk about your pantheistic spaghetti monster. It sure appears that nature is somewhat smart anyway.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

The problem goes way longer than Evolution vs Creationism...you have to believe in Free Will while I don't see any reason to believe it because it is a self contradictory concept, as it both requires and dismisses Determinism.

It is not self contradictory if you believe that Objective and Subjective Idealism can both be valid philosophical points of view of the one universe but are being observed from different points of view.

From The Objective Idealistic point of view of the universe is Deterministic if the Intelligence observing from this point of has a more encompassing point of view of how everything in the universe interacted, is interacting and will interact in the future. That would be God's point of view or a god's point of view, or a pantheistic view from some universal intelligence if that intelligence is able to predict everyone's choices in the future even if they have free will.

From the subjective Idealistic point of view it is not deterministic if the intelligence observing from this point of view is part of the universe and is not capable of understanding all the past and present interactions nor be able to predict all future interactions in the universe.

So, basically you can believe those two points of view are valid, if you believe there is a God/god with a more objective point of view than your own while understanding/accepting at the same time you are not that God/god.

Quote:

You don't get any better with randomness...Same goes for Good and Evil, I believe there are stupid people and less stupid more cooperative people nothing else. Your "God" is dumb when he refers to Sinners and Saints...It gets even worse when we think about Heaven or Hell places where the food chain or energy distribution wouldn't work properly....how is it? The Lion and the Lamb shell walk together in my father's kingdom...oh man the all thing is just beyond childish, it is not even funny. How come full-grown adults believe this stuff is completely mysterious to me.

Because those people believe the "Omnipetent God" delivered messages through prophets explaining how and why He did it. (Islam, Judaism, and Christianity). And, then some of them also believe he stepped into the universe as the man Jesus Christ and finished delivering the message while completing the process of restoring the entire universe back to perfection and providing an way to also restore each individual human being's universe (their body) at the same time with His death on the cross.

Might seem stupid to you but I would do the same for my kids if I could. Wouldn't you?

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Nature doesn't have a conscience. It is what it is.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Think about this, "Jesus Christ is a man." He is essentially a human with all the biology of a homo sapiens. Does he eat, sleep, and toilet? Does he need the same biological necessities of air to breath and live? Does he age? Does he have a brain and a heart like Homo sapiens? Is he everywhere all at once to listen to all the prayers? How many ears does he have, or can he digest all the prayers all at once and understand each one? Humans have created thousands of gods. Many appeared in different countries at different times/periods - years, centuries. Are we humans evolved from the primates? Is this world over 4.5 billion years old? Are humans objective or subjective animals? The evolution of man: https://www.allaboutscience.org/evolution-of-man.htm. The life of planet earth: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/space/solar-system/earth/. Lists of deities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_deities. How to be right with the god of the Bible: https://www.wikihow.com/Be-Right-with-the-God-of-the-Bible Are you beginning to see the discrepancies of gods/deities?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Nature doesn't have a conscience. It is what it is.

There are a lot of scientists that would disagree with that. Besides you are part of nature and you have a conscience. Or are you supernatural?

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Humans have created thousands of gods.

Humans have recognized thousands of gods and a God. Humans cannot create gods or God or even anything living. Humans just name things they observe. I haven't heard of a human claiming to have created anything you suggest.

Why do you keep making that misstatement.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Who do you think creates anything on this planet that doesn't exist naturally? You may take as long as you wish to think this over.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Well I don't think matter occurs naturally. Do you? If so why ? I think humans just name matter and manipulate it.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Yes, nature and naturally. Planet earth just happens to have the right environment to support life forms. http://www.answers.com/Q/How_did_life_form_on_Earth

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Did you read that article.? It says they have no idea how life started. From your article it appears that a safe assumption is intelligence is required to initiate life. If that is true the same intelligence that initiated the first lifeform also built the system so that caused it to evolve.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

I read the article and Id like to defend CI's interpretation. I think you are so caught up with "It has to be intelligence driven or Im going home"
NOWHERE does it even hint as to your belief system. Ultimately we dont know which way life started but It mentions what we know about several initial systems which we can reproduce in a lab or in nature (The iron-sulfur hypothesis of which Im a big fan for now because it follows Bob Hazens own findings in the arrival of more and more complex MINERALS within the big globe)

I always like to read counter discussions about existing theories , they often suggest new directions of research that aid us in the "big System understandings" HOWEVER, nowhere is that article in conflict with present science

AND its popularly written so old science geeks like me dont get lost in club house jibber jabber.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

I always like to read counter discussions about existing theories, they often suggest new directions to research that aid us in the big system understandings however no where is that article and conflict with present science.

I think it's in perfect agreement with current science. I just don't think current science is in agreement with reality. I think consciousness and intelligence is a necessary ingredient to establish the order we observe In nature. If it is a necessary ingredients that makes it a philosophical counter interpretation ( and you stated you like counter discussions and I think they are a requirement of good science) of science. This is a counter discussion that needs to be happening.

The details on whether this consciousness has the characteristics of a person or not, or any moral values or not, will bleed over into Philosophy ethics and eventually religion. The fear of the bleed over should not stop the discussion. Because if I'm going to believe something about religion I sure want to base it on silent so that I can know that it is true. I hope you feel the same way about your philosophy.

2 Replies

@brianjakub,

ahhh, another BJ assertion from the heart . Your sincerity is appreciated but not accepted as fact. Same thing, If yer gonna keep making assertions you need some hard evidence

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

brianjakub wrote:

I think it's in perfect agreement with current science. I just don't think current science is in agreement with reality. I think consciousness and intelligence is a necessary ingredient to establish the order we observe In nature. If it is a necessary ingredients that makes it a philosophical counter interpretation ( and you stated you like counter discussions and I think they are a requirement of good science) of science. This is a counter discussion that needs to be happening.

I don't have an argument with any of that, and I believe most scientists (including farmerman ) would readily agree that current scientific understanding is not yet able to perfectly describe all in nature. However enormous progress has indeed been made through repeated observations, and the development, testing and revisions of theories with which to describe it. We do know the earth is ~ 4.5 billion years old, and have developed theories that describe the evolution of the surface land areas and oceans of the planet that have stood the test of repeated observation, analysis and consistency with the known laws of physics.

You wrote;

Quote:

"I think consciousness and intelligence is a necessary ingredient to establish the order we observe in nature"

I believe you are correct, but can't prove it by any test or observation. However consider the rather beautiful description of that natural order offered by science in the relatively simple known laws of physics and the ten or so basic observed physical constants in these laws. They themselves may be the manifestation of that intelligence. Direct intervention on a human time scale is not required.

For example, Darwin offered his model of evolution ( survival of the fittest) based on scientific observations of birds and reptiles in the Galapagos islands (and other places). A great deal of progress has been made in Physics since then, and we now know that - even at the levels of molecules and cells - the laws of Physics are sufficient to explain the evolution of observed species - how they got that way and survived to reproduce. The complexity we observe around us in nature and human behavior can truly evolve from a handful of basic laws, relationships and physical constants of proportionality. That is an amazing fact, but it has stood the test of repeated challenge and confirmation.

How it all started and what it was that established these laws is a question that science cannot answer. However that is not a defect or refutation of the science that has given us so much understanding.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Well stated, George. I would also say that as subjective animals, we see many of the same things in different ways. That's proven by the difference we see in politics and religion, the two major influences in most people's lives.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

That's true, but is interesting to note the common elements ( all, of course, expressed in uniquely different ways) present in all of the many different cultures in the world. For example the story of the Tower of Babel in the Abrahamic Bible ( which expressed the futility of human efforts to control everything in a vast design) was also essentially present in the Sumerian epic Gilgamesh, which preceded it by a thousand years, and in addition an analogous theme is also expressed in the Buddhist and Confucian writings that arose across South Asia at about the same time.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

That Tower of Babel story being mentioned in three different religions would suggest that all 3 Religions are coming from one true religion.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Not "one true religion." I like this quote on god and faith. Losty Wrote:
It's free if you steal the carrot
"It is an insult to God to believe in God. For on the one hand it is to suppose that he has perpetrated acts of incalculable cruelty. On the other, it is to suppose that he has perversely given his human creatures an instrument - their intellect - which must inevitably lead them, if they are dispassionate and honest, to deny his existence. It is tempting to conclude that if he exists, it is the atheists and agnostics that he loves best, among those with any pretensions to education. For they are the ones who have taken him most seriously." - Galen Strawson

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Yes, nature and naturally. Planet earth just happens to have the right environment to support life forms.

True enough, but the origin the universe that delivered that outcome was started is a question that science cannot answer.

1 Reply

Why does the Universe exist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know