Ce site requiert JavaScript pour fonctionner.
Veuillez activer JavaScript dans votre navigateur.
Thème Classic
Thème Thottbot
Why Your Religion?
Retourner à l'index
Publication par
Orranis
You state that it's possible for something to 'just be,' yet the formation of what created the big bang could not 'just be.'Isn't that already contradictory; after all, the Big Bang just sorta happened, no one knows what caused it, and I doubt we ever will; and there's multiple theories about it; either something old reached the end of it's life and the Big Bang was it starting over, or the hundred + creation myths out there that speak of how everything came to be.
I'll use Norse for an example. Where did Niflheim/Muspelheim come from? All creation myths have something that "just is." Why can't the big bang, "just be?" I'm not saying that's the answer, I'm saying that if you can argue God 'just is' than you can say the same of the big bang. You state that it's possible for something to 'just be,' yet the formation of what created the big bang could not 'just be.'Isn't that already contradictory; after all, the Big Bang just sorta happened, no one knows what caused it, and I doubt we ever will; and there's multiple theories about it; either something old reached the end of it's life and the Big Bang was it starting over, or the hundred + creation myths out there that speak of how everything came to be.
Isn't the current theory that the big bang started the universe over again, from a rapid contraction -> rapid expansion? And that our universe will continue to follow that?
It raises a reasonable question for scientists though. Irrespective of what our universe is, is there a 'start of time'?
Theoretically, time was created during the big bang.
100% heads is remarkable because it has a different result to the other million combinations of heads and tails. 38.4839% and 17% and 99.8742% all have the same end result - no life.
Life isn't the only variable. They have so many things we don't have. Also, whose to say they don't? Given our adaptability, life could have evolved in different conditions, as long as it was given enough time to survive a couple generations in that situation.
Publication par
Skreeran
It doesn't matter how low the probability of life forming is. No matter how low it is, only an outcome resulting in life forming can result in us talking about life forming.
Whether the other possible outcomes of the universe--due to different starting conditions or whatever--are infinite, high or low, it must be capable of forming life, because here we are. If any of the other outcomes would have happened, it would not have mattered, because we would not have been here to observe them.
Publication par
Adamsm
You state that it's possible for something to 'just be,' yet the formation of what created the big bang could not 'just be.'Isn't that already contradictory; after all, the Big Bang just sorta happened, no one knows what caused it, and I doubt we ever will; and there's multiple theories about it; either something old reached the end of it's life and the Big Bang was it starting over, or the hundred + creation myths out there that speak of how everything came to be.
I'll use Norse for an example. Where did Niflheim/Muspelheim come from? All creation myths have something that "just is." Why can't the big bang, "just be?" I'm not saying that's the answer, I'm saying that if you can argue God 'just is' than you can say the same of the big bang. Very few creation myths have a 'just is' concept, almost all of them say where the first God/Goddess appeared from, and true a lot of them are the standard 'formed from the Nothingness that existed before life', which is similar to the Big Bang, but they don't just end there, there is almost always a tale of how they forged and ordered the universe.
Publication par
Squishalot
Life isn't the only variable. They have so many things we don't have. Also, whose to say they don't? Given our adaptability, life could have evolved in different conditions, as long as it was given enough time to survive a couple generations in that situation.
If I'm not mistaken, calculations about the probability of life evolving consider that into the equation.
Theoretically, time was created during the big bang.
This line of argument only serves to suggest that God can exist, because he can 'just be'. The biggest argument against God is that he cannot 'just be'.
It doesn't matter how low the probability of life forming is. No matter how low it is, only at outcome resulting in life forming can result in us talking about life forming.
Whether the other possible outcomes of the universe--due to different starting conditions or whatever--are infinite, high or low, it must be capable of forming life, because here we are. If any of the other outcomes would have happened, it would not have mattered, because we would not have been here to observe them.
It does matter. To suggest otherwise would be to say that it doesn't matter how likely it is to win the lottery, that you've won is all that matters, so we're not allowed to investigate whether you've rigged it.
What you're saying is that I can roll a die, and just because it lands as a 6, the other outcomes don't matter, because it landed as a 6. I'd say that even if my character dies as a result, the other possible outcomes still matter to me.
Publication par
Orranis
You state that it's possible for something to 'just be,' yet the formation of what created the big bang could not 'just be.'Isn't that already contradictory; after all, the Big Bang just sorta happened, no one knows what caused it, and I doubt we ever will; and there's multiple theories about it; either something old reached the end of it's life and the Big Bang was it starting over, or the hundred + creation myths out there that speak of how everything came to be.
I'll use Norse for an example. Where did Niflheim/Muspelheim come from? All creation myths have something that "just is." Why can't the big bang, "just be?" I'm not saying that's the answer, I'm saying that if you can argue God 'just is' than you can say the same of the big bang. Very few creation myths have a 'just is' concept, almost all of them say where the first God/Goddess appeared from, and true a lot of them are the standard 'formed from the Nothingness that existed before life', which is similar to the Big Bang, but they don't just end there, there is almost always a tale of how they forged and ordered the universe.
Take Greek. They came 'out of Chaos.' Where did said chaos come from? How can someone be created by nothing, yet nothing cannot create a big bang?
Publication par
Adamsm
Take Greek. They came 'out of Chaos.' Where did said chaos come from? How can someone be created by nothing, yet nothing cannot create a big bang?
The Chaos was already there; it's just another name for 'Nothing' after all.
Publication par
Orranis
Take Greek. They came 'out of Chaos.' Where did said chaos come from? How can someone be created by nothing, yet nothing cannot create a big bang?
The Chaos was already there; it's just another name for 'Nothing' after all.
How is something born of nothing? If something can be born of nothing, why must it be sentient?
Publication par
Adamsm
Take Greek. They came 'out of Chaos.' Where did said chaos come from? How can someone be created by nothing, yet nothing cannot create a big bang?
The Chaos was already there; it's just another name for 'Nothing' after all.
How is something born of nothing? If something can be born of nothing, why must it be sentient?
Why not? Instead of asking me to answer, why don't you? I mean really, I'm sorry you don't have the same belief that others do, but still, science hasn't disproved that God exists or doesn't after all.
Publication par
Skreeran
It doesn't matter how low the probability of life forming is. No matter how low it is, only at outcome resulting in life forming can result in us talking about life forming.
Whether the other possible outcomes of the universe--due to different starting conditions or whatever--are infinite, high or low, it must be capable of forming life, because here we are. If any of the other outcomes would have happened, it would not have mattered, because we would not have been here to observe them.It does matter. To suggest otherwise would be to say that it doesn't matter how likely it is to win the lottery, that you've won is all that matters, so we're not allowed to investigate whether you've rigged it.
What you're saying is that I can roll a die, and just because it lands as a 6, the other outcomes don't matter, because it landed as a 6. I'd say that even if my character dies as a result, the other possible outcomes still matter to me.No, that's not what I'm saying.
If there is the tiniest chance of life forming, then applied over an infinite number of outcomes (in this case, the number of possible outcomes of the universe's starting conditions, and the various different starting conditions it may have had), it will form. No matter how small the chance of it forming, someone who says "Hmm... My being here is incredibly improbable..." will
always
exist in one of the outcomes where life formed. Yes, it's improbable, but it's no miracle that he exists in one of the outcomes where life formed. It's just common sense.
And, forgive me for saying so, but you seem to be doing a lot more arguing
for
religion than against it, when you're a supposed agnostic.
Publication par
Squishalot
I argue for the side that has the most resistance. Because it's all simply an intellectual debate to me, I don't get incredibly hyped up over much.
If there is the tiniest chance of life forming, then applied over an
infinite number of outcomes
(in this case, the number of possible outcomes of the universe's starting conditions, and the various different starting conditions it may have had), it will form.
Read my reply to Orranis. There aren't an infinite number of outcomes. There is a finite universe. There is the key flaw in your statement in your argument.
No matter how small the chance of it forming, someone who says "Hmm... My being here is incredibly improbable..." will always exist in one of the outcomes where life formed. Yes, it's improbable, but it's no miracle that he exists in one of the outcomes where life formed. It's just common sense.
But someone isn't saying "Hmm...
My being here
is incredibly improbable". Scientists are saying "
the evolution of life
is incredibly improbable". Again, it's like looking back through your combat logs, and saying "despite having 539 defence, I got critted twice in a row... it's highly improbable that it happened to occur on the biggest attacks that got me killed". Well, you did get killed, there's no doubt about that. But the fact that it improbably occurred, resulting in an unanticipated scenario of you getting killed, suggests that it might have been rigged.
If the universe was truly infinite, then anything that is possible has, is, or will happen. Including the existance of a God, technically. Because the evolution of a God-like creature isn't out of the realms of possibility.
Edit: If you want to see me arguing with religion, go read the "Questions for a Catholic" thread. Or in fact, my "
The Easter Spirit - bringing discussion back to Randomness
" thread.
Publication par
Skreeran
Perhaps not infinite, but sufficiently vast that even an incredibly small chance of life forming ends up becoming likely. On top of that, we are guaranteed to see formed life, because we must be alive to see it.
Publication par
Squishalot
Perhaps not infinite, but sufficiently vast that even an incredibly small chance of life forming ends up becoming likely. On top of that, we are guaranteed to see formed life, because we must be alive to see it.
Two points here:
1) The probability of life forming, as calculated by scientists, takes into consideration the size of the universe, and still puts it at a remarkably small number.
2) We may be guaranteed to see formed life. But that says nothing about the existance of a God, which could easily have created said formed life also. It changes nothing about the probability of an event occuring, from the perspective *prior* to it occuring, which is the only one that represents a legitimate argument against God.
No offense, but your arguments based on a probabilistic basis are incredibly flawed. That's not to say that the Christian arguments aren't flawed, either. My point is that you cannot logically discard either argument, because
there is no proof to suggest that you can
.
Publication par
Orranis
Take Greek. They came 'out of Chaos.' Where did said chaos come from? How can someone be created by nothing, yet nothing cannot create a big bang?
The Chaos was already there; it's just another name for 'Nothing' after all.
How is something born of nothing? If something can be born of nothing, why must it be sentient?
Why not? Instead of asking me to answer, why don't you? I mean really, I'm sorry you don't have the same belief that others do, but still, science hasn't disproved that God exists or doesn't after all.
You're missing my whole point. It's that you can't argue "Well something had to make the universe!" because I could just as easily say "But why doesn't that apply to God?"
Publication par
Skreeran
Perhaps not infinite, but sufficiently vast that even an incredibly small chance of life forming ends up becoming likely. On top of that, we are guaranteed to see formed life, because we must be alive to see it.
Two points here:
1) The probability of life forming, as calculated by scientists, takes into consideration the size of the universe, and still puts it at a remarkably small number.
2) We may be guaranteed to see formed life. But that says nothing about the existance of a God, which could easily have created said formed life also. It changes nothing about the probability of an event occuring, from the perspective *prior* to it occuring, which is the only one that represents a legitimate argument against God.
No offense, but your arguments based on a probabilistic basis are incredibly flawed. That's not to say that the Christian arguments aren't flawed, either. My point is that you cannot logically discard either argument, because
there is no proof to suggest that you can
.First of all, I would very much like to see these scientific calculations you speak of. The vast, vast majority of scientists support evolutionary theory. We also have evidence of abiogenesis (for example: see the
Miller-Urey Experiment
). We also know that earth-like planets can form. Explain to me how it is so unlikely that life could form naturally in a 14 billion year old universe with approximately 7×10e22 stars?
In addition, to go back to your rigged lottery analogy, by all means, examine if its rigged. However, if you cannot provide any evidence that it is rigged, and can only point to the unlikelihood of my winning it, I'll just still to my belief that I just won the lottery.
Publication par
Adamsm
Take Greek. They came 'out of Chaos.' Where did said chaos come from? How can someone be created by nothing, yet nothing cannot create a big bang?
The Chaos was already there; it's just another name for 'Nothing' after all.
How is something born of nothing? If something can be born of nothing, why must it be sentient?
Why not? Instead of asking me to answer, why don't you? I mean really, I'm sorry you don't have the same belief that others do, but still, science hasn't disproved that God exists or doesn't after all.
You're missing my whole point. It's that you can't argue "Well something had to make the universe!" because I could just as easily say "But why doesn't that apply to God?"
Because it can..... your missing the point Face, not me; it's all about belief when it comes to God/the Creator whatever you want to call it. If you ask me, most atheists have no idea what they are missing by 'not believing' and to me personally, you miss out on a huge part of life itself. The simple truth of it is; there is no one true truth about anything.
Publication par
Skreeran
I'm rather not deceive myself for the purposes of "not missing out," thanks.
Publication par
Adamsm
I'm rather not deceive myself for the purposes of "not missing out," thanks.
Heh, you don't deceive yourself, faith is at the core of any human.
Publication par
Orranis
Take Greek. They came 'out of Chaos.' Where did said chaos come from? How can someone be created by nothing, yet nothing cannot create a big bang?
The Chaos was already there; it's just another name for 'Nothing' after all.
How is something born of nothing? If something can be born of nothing, why must it be sentient?
Why not? Instead of asking me to answer, why don't you? I mean really, I'm sorry you don't have the same belief that others do, but still, science hasn't disproved that God exists or doesn't after all.
You're missing my whole point. It's that you can't argue "Well something had to make the universe!" because I could just as easily say "But why doesn't that apply to God?"
Because it can..... your missing the point Face, not me; it's all about belief when it comes to God/the Creator whatever you want to call it. If you ask me, most atheists have no idea what they are missing by 'not believing' and to me personally, you miss out on a huge part of life itself. The simple truth of it is; there is no one true truth about anything.
I think that's a rather common misconception, more deserved for the ethics thread. The only thing that matters is being content with your life, whether or not it has a God. In fact, believing that some high up dude was watching every mistake I made and judging me on it, would probably make me less happy.
Publication par
Squishalot
First of all, I would very much like to see these scientific calculations you speak of. The vast, vast majority of scientists support evolutionary theory.
Firstly - that there is a low probability of life forming doesn't prove nor disprove evolutionary or creation theories. And if you don't understand that point, you might as well give up on anything that I'm saying, because you've missed it completely.
Anyway, for the math:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation
It appears that my beliefs that the numbers are insignificantly small are somewhat offtrack. However, using the 'pesimisstic numbers' in the Wiki article, the chances that the galaxy will produce another intelligent lifeform is 0.0000065. But having said that, there is significant bias in this model in the first place - it relies on other solar systems generally being like our own.
But either way, facts of the matter are:
a) We have seen no evidence of any other life out there in the universe, despite the Drake equation suggesting otherwise.
b) No matter what the probability of life occuring on other planets is, that neither proves, nor disproves, the existance of a God. Think in WoW terms - the Titans (creators of Azeroth) have worked on multiple worlds. Typical that humans are self-centered enough to think that they're the one and only beloved ones of God.
Publication par
Adamsm
I think that's a rather common misconception, more deserved for the ethics thread. The only thing that matters is being content with your life, whether or not it has a God. In fact, believing that some high up dude was watching every mistake I made and judging me on it, would probably make me less happy.
Except they don't judge you till your dead......
Répondre
Ce sujet est verrouillé. Vous ne pouvez pas y répondre.