Okay, let's start from the beginnning.
Do you think that 'something' created the Universe, something that you don't understand?
Do you beileve in evolution? Why or why not?
- Thread starter Xanikk999
- Start date
Okay, let's start from the beginnning.
Do you think that 'something' created the Universe, something that you don't understand?
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
El_Machinae said:
I wouldn't say I think that, no. I don't actively deny it, either, though.
Not making fun of you ... but empathizing with your victims. My conversations with you have been valuable, but you really do ask a disproportionate number of questions (roughly 4:1 for me, now).
Do you think that you understand what created the universe?
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Until you actually look in his box, he both thinks that he does, and thinks that he doesnt, equally.El_Machinae said:
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
El_Machinae said:
Well, since I don't have many concepts of my own (though more than I should like
), I primarily discuss things based other people's concepts. In order to do this, I need them to define their terms. It can be surprising how differently people define the "same" thing. For example, since BE's around and you may be thinking of his thread specifically, his definition of "PC" doesn't seem very similar to many others. Beyond that, people just seem to assume various "facts". I question them. Since I don't know very much, I need to ask others if I'm to learn anything, I think.EDIT: I suppose I could simply tell people I think they're assuming things, but I tend to presume that they know what they're talking about, which seems better than outright presuming that they're making assumptions. Take your post below. I could have just said that you're assuming the universe was created, but I'd rather know why you think that than just accuse you. If there's a more skillful method than asking questions, I am unaware.
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
El_Machinae said:
What makes you think the universe was created?
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Your tough love makes me strong Bassybaby!punkbass2000 said:
Perfection
The Great Head.
Never claimed toEl_Machinae said:
But you can't tell me exactly what momentum tEl_Machinae said:
hat photon will have when it hits my eye.
Who cares? That's not even the issue!
I'm just saying that the photon either will or won't hit my eye when it leaves the star. However, we cannot measure (when it leaves the star) whether the photon would have or not. That means that more information is available the longer a photon exists, meaning there is infinite information regarding that photon.
That's what I'm saying, there's more information 'out there' than we can calculate or predict (ever). Doesn't that mean there is infinite information?
Regardless, even if there isn't infinite information, there's still a LOT that science can ask/answer.
And my main point (we're arguing whether the universe is infinitely complex, which isn't needed) is that something, something we don't understand, created the universe as an internally consistent creation.
The religious people call this somethign 'God' and assume that it has attributes that answer the question 'why'. You've already stated that science cannot answer the 'why', so as long as their religion doesn't answer the 'how', the 'how' is still available to science to investigate.
I'm refuting your statement "The god idea is merely an intellectual equivalent of throwing your hands up and giving up."
Do you think that science can ever answer the question "what caused the Big Bang?" Believing in a Creator does not limit your ability (or interest) in asking "how", just like believing in science does not limit your ability to ask "why". edit: in fact, if you believe that the universe began at t=0, you're washing your hands of any investigation that tries to show otherwise.
It is internally consistent to think that the universe has a creator, especially for those of us (including you) who think it has a beginning.
PBass: because I think the universe had a beginning.
I'm just saying that the photon either will or won't hit my eye when it leaves the star. However, we cannot measure (when it leaves the star) whether the photon would have or not. That means that more information is available the longer a photon exists, meaning there is infinite information regarding that photon.
That's what I'm saying, there's more information 'out there' than we can calculate or predict (ever). Doesn't that mean there is infinite information?
Regardless, even if there isn't infinite information, there's still a LOT that science can ask/answer.
And my main point (we're arguing whether the universe is infinitely complex, which isn't needed) is that something, something we don't understand, created the universe as an internally consistent creation.
The religious people call this somethign 'God' and assume that it has attributes that answer the question 'why'. You've already stated that science cannot answer the 'why', so as long as their religion doesn't answer the 'how', the 'how' is still available to science to investigate.
I'm refuting your statement "The god idea is merely an intellectual equivalent of throwing your hands up and giving up."
Do you think that science can ever answer the question "what caused the Big Bang?" Believing in a Creator does not limit your ability (or interest) in asking "how", just like believing in science does not limit your ability to ask "why". edit: in fact, if you believe that the universe began at t=0, you're washing your hands of any investigation that tries to show otherwise.
It is internally consistent to think that the universe has a creator, especially for those of us (including you) who think it has a beginning.
PBass: because I think the universe had a beginning.
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
El_Machinae said:
Well, that's fine. I just don't see how you can conclude: "You have to admit that 'something' created the Universe, something that you don't understand" based on your own personal beliefs.
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
Bozo Erectus said:Your tough love makes me strong Bassybaby!
If I believe that the universe was created, and I do not believe that I know how or why it was created, then I have to realize that I do not understand the creation of the universe (the cause)
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
Sorry, I misunderstood you then. I thought you were claiming that people in general have to admit that 'something' created the universe.
Well, that 'thing' that I don't understand about the creation of the universe is the 'something' that created the universe.
If you think the universe had a beginning, do you think it was created?
If you think the universe had a beginning, do you think it was created?
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
I don't think the universe had a beginning. I don't even believe in the concept of "beginning", really.
Do you believe that you exist?
Why do you exist?
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
Perfection said:
You don't believe because you don't believe? I find that equally poor thinking.
Just like we are asserting that someone started everything without any real justification, you are asserting the negetive of that assumption without much reason. We think it was necessary for someone to start it all, you don't believe so. How is your thinking any superior to ours?
Inflation Theory and the ekpyrotic universe model helps answer some of those questions, although they really just change the question rather than finding a complete answer.
Perfection
The Great Head.
No, it means that you can extract a finite amount of information about it when it hits something. It doesn't mean there's infinite information (but what infinite information has to do with the subject, though is lost on me)El_Machinae said:
Being more than something finite doesn't make something infinite. But again, I ask relevance.El_Machinae said:
I disagree. There is no neccesity for something to create the universe. The universe can alone be.El_Machinae said:
Why is subjective. Why must you make a postive claim of existance to answer a subjective question?El_Machinae said:
That's taken out of context, I'm not refering to god as a whole but VRWCagent's idea of god creating life directly rather than through chemical processes.El_Machinae said:
It may under certain models, in others such a cause is not neededEl_Machinae said:
Not by de facto no. However, such conceptions of god seem to me of little relevance. Plus they still assert the existance of an unevidenced entityEl_Machinae said:
Scientific ideas are given veractiy by continual failed attempts at disproof.El_Machinae said:
It's also internally consistent to say that the universe just is. You get the same experimental results and less philosophical BS.El_Machinae said:
Similar threads
- Poll
