A Theology Question

Concart said:
Or possibly none at all, I completely agree But that's irrelevant. The universe supports the life forms that exist, because it cannot accommodate other life forms. It is not coincidence. It is the only possibility in this universe.

There was no life on earth for hundreds of millions of years.
Click to expand...
Survivors of mass casualty incidents often question “Why me? Why did I survive when others didn’t?” It’s a common question, but like life in our Universe, the answer is the same: it just happened that way. If our Universe couldn't’ support life we wouldn’t be here asking the question.

True. So how did that life begin? Magic? LOL.
 
Cypress said:
There are no mysteries or unanswered questions that would lead me to believe there is the remotest possibility of a pink leprechaun in my garage.

The mystery of creation, the mystery of the fine tuning of the universe
Click to expand...

This is an admirable point, but I like the "Fine tuning" concept. This is, if I am recalling correction, sort of the "anthropic principle" writ a bit broader. If the universe was not fine tuned for life then life wouldn't arise. If the universe was not fine tuned to balance the forces such that it could continue to exist after the big bang, it wouldn't. Just as a puddle that never forms on the ground wouldn't exist. When we look at a puddle do we assume the water was going to form that shape and it was a great event that allowed a perfectly formed hole to be available? Or do we simply assume that water filled the hole as it could?

I don't see a lot of "mystery" to the fine tuning of the universe. It either is or isn't.

Now as for the "mystery of creation", that's a fair enough question. Whence did it all come from? But that doesn't necessarily REQUIRE the belief of some guiding principle, anymoreso than the puddle filling with water.

, the unknown reason for why there are mathematical laws and rational organization might have scientific answers, but they might also point to an ultimate truth or higher organizing principle underlying reality that our primate brains cannot access, percieve, or correctly interpret. That really is the origin of religion, after all.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The need to explain what we see around us is, indeed, the origin of religion and the religious groups did as well as they could to explain things.

I also think you are wrong about the remotest possibility of a pink leprechaun in your garage. What if you came out into your garage and you found something in a place that it doesn't belong. It is a mystery since you have no memory of moving it. And there is EXACTLY as much evidence for the pink leprechaun being responsible for that move as there is some "intelligence" (aka "God") behind the universe.

The God of the Gaps theology is often dicey at best. And while I know YOU aren't invoking God per se, it still is the construct that is used by faith the shoe horn in God. Any time we see a "mystery" (something we don't know) we are allowed to say "I don't know" AND simultaneously say "I don't see why YOUR explanation is worthy of belief" to those who invoke "God". It is possible to be without knowledge of the answer but similarly to say "I fail to believe in your explanation".

I think that's the crux of this particular conversation.
 
Concart said:
We've done a reasonably good job in the US. Other countries should follow our model. It is the least dangerous path. Unlike Christians, I don't believe in genocide.
Click to expand...

Over 70% of the US is Christian. If you call that a success, what do you call a failure?

Your hatred of Christians is interesting. I’ve only seen this level of hate among Jihadists and gays. What is the source of your hatred for 70% of Americans?
 
Doc Dutch said:
Your belief in atheism appears as unshakable as the beliefs of Bible thumpers.
Click to expand...
Terry, Terry, Terry...now you've done it. You insisted on overtaxing your brain stem and now you've cognitively vomited all over JPP.

A lack of belief is not a belief, it's a lack of belief.
 
Doc Dutch said:
Or none at all. If the multiverse theory holds true, there would be Universes devoid of life and incapable of supporting it. There might be some where the natural laws prevent matter from existing. OTOH, there might be some where life sprouts spontaneously from everything.
Click to expand...

My problem with the multiverse is that it is pure conjecture and supposition.

What we know within the limits of observation is that this is the only universe, and the physical constants and mathmatical scaffolding in it seem curiously finely balanced and mathematically tuned to support the creation of matter, stars, planets, water, and prebiotic chemistry.

I do not know why that is. But I do not leap to a conclusion that it is a question science can definitively answer.
 
Cypress said:
My problem with the multiverse is that it is pure conjecture and supposition.

What we know within the limits of observation is that this is the only universe, and the physical constants and mathmatical scaffolding in it seem curiously finely balanced and mathematically tuned to support the creation of matter, stars, planets, water, and prebiotic chemistry.

I do not know why that is. But I do not leap to a conclusion that it is a question science can definitively answer.
Click to expand...

If I throw a thousand darts at a dartboard and one hits the bullseye it does not mean that I am very good a throwing darts. Same thing with "fine tuning". If the universe wasn't the same as it is now it simply wouldn't exist. It is not as if there is some necessity for our existence, just that we are.

Same with life. Life as we understand it exists here in this "Goldilocks zone", not because it MUST exist and this particularly wonderful planet was found for us to exist on, but rather that whatever chemistry IS life happens to be possible in these conditions.

The puddle is not shaped to the water, but the water to the puddle.
 
Cypress said:
My problem with the multiverse is that it is pure conjecture and supposition.

What we know within the limits of observation is that this is the only universe, and the physical constants and mathmatical scaffolding in it seem curiously finely balanced and mathematically tuned to support the creation of matter, stars, planets, water, and prebiotic chemistry.

I do not know why that is. But I do not leap to a conclusion that it is a question science can definitively answer.
Click to expand...
So was Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.

It took years to prove it. The multiverse theory would eliminate the need for a “God the Creator” since an infinite number of universes continually popping into existence would be part of some larger continuum.
 
Doc Dutch said:
So was Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.

It took years to prove it. The multiverse theory would eliminate the need for a “God the Creator” since an infinite number of universes continually popping into existence would be part of some larger continuum.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's good science to say we know something is true, no we just need someone to go out and find evidence.

That's exactly how bad scientists fall into the confirmation bias trap.


I would love the multiverse to be true. But I am also going to put the brakes on elevating it to a tier one quality hypothesis
 
Cypress said:
I don't think it's good science to say we know something is true, no we just need someone to go out and find evidence.

That's exactly how bad scientists fall into the confirmation bias trap.


I would love the multiverse to be true. But I am also going to put the brakes on elevating it to a tier one quality hypothesis
Click to expand...
Agreed. That’s why it’s a theory, as yet unproved.
 
Frank Apisa said:
The default position on question like "Are there any gods?"...or "Are there no gods?" SHOULD BE: I do not know.
Click to expand...
This is just stupid Frank Apisa misdirection and nothing more.

The question "What do you know about the existence of gods?" is not the same question as "What do you believe about the existence of gods?". These two separate questions have separate answers. There is no such thing as a "default position" on the "What do you believe?" questions.
 
Quincunx said:
If I throw a thousand darts at a dartboard and one hits the bullseye it does not mean that I am very good a throwing darts. Same thing with "fine tuning". If the universe wasn't the same as it is now it simply wouldn't exist. It is not as if there is some necessity for our existence, just that we are.

Same with life. Life as we understand it exists here in this "Goldilocks zone", not because it MUST exist and this particularly wonderful planet was found for us to exist on, but rather that whatever chemistry IS life happens to be possible in these conditions.

The puddle is not shaped to the water, but the water to the puddle.
Click to expand...

What mysteries or unanswered questions about life and the universe require me to invoke the possibility of a pink polka-dotted cyclops living in my garage?

Religion is invoked and predicated on those mysteries.


I don't think anyone knows why the universe is finest tuned, but many of us have blind guesses and suppositions.

I'm comfortable saying I don't have a clue.
 
Cypress said:
What mysteries or unanswered questions about life and the universe require me to invoke the possibility of a pink polka-dotted cyclops living in my garage?

I don't think anyone knows why the universe is finest tuned
Click to expand...
If you are going to believe that the universe is somehow "finely tuned" you might as well believe that there is a pink polka-dotted cyclops living in your garage.

What fine-tuning?
 
Doc Dutch said:
Go visit the stars in question or find some other way to physically verify whether they contain life or not.

Confirming something outside the Universe is more problematic since there’s no way to physically get there…As far as we know.
Click to expand...

There is no way it can be done....NOW.

And that is what we are talking about...what can be verified.

We may or may not be able to do it in the future.

But we cannot...right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top