|Bunghole| Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581469' date='Oct 29 2007, 07:01 PM']That's just the thing - these questions have no answers. Its like this - the ultimate philosophical question: why does anything exist?[/quote] Why DOESN'T anything exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamination Posted October 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Bunghole' post='581499' date='Oct 29 2007, 09:36 PM']Why DOESN'T anything exist?[/quote] What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581469' date='Oct 29 2007, 09:01 PM']That's just the thing - these questions have no answers. Its like this - the ultimate philosophical question: why does anything exist?[/quote] Ah, but science is about answers. Philosophy is about asking the right questions! But, even Aristotle posited a Prime Mover. In my experience, and probably the biggest reason I describe myself as a Platonist, is because Socratic/Platonic methodology is all about developing the art of forming questions designed to peel away layer after layer of premise. Not to whack on you or Jamie, but to illustrate. You said to Jamie: [quote]I think that there is some misunderstanding going on here. Lets go back to the speed of light. God, according to you, choose the speed of light to be c, either directly or indirectly. But God could have made it a google kph, or 37mph. However, he chose c. Why did he choose c? The answer is it is his nature.[/quote] God did not choose "c" to be the speed of light. "C" is how we describe this phenomenon as it appears to our understanding. But saying that the speed of light is a phenomenon which suggests God's intent (or nature) does not preclude future advances in our understanding of the universe. It is, in one form or another, simply a hypothetical assertion of a Prime Mover archetype. Now, to suggest that because we don't know the definitive "answer" to the nature of this archetype allows one to infer that, in fact, no Prime Mover exists, is mistaken, imo. That would still leave a burden upon you similar to that which you request of the God-believer: prove that there is no Prime Mover nor a need for one. Now, to ask the question you titled this thread with is a good question. As every individual's intellect is soveriegn and unique to itself, only you can come up with an answer that satisfies. But, as part of a community of sovereign intellects (i.e. the human species), the manner in which you put forward your explanation will necessarily be judged not merely for logical consistency and/or utility, but also for the extent to which it accounts for the "as-yet-unknown." So, my answer to your initial question would be: depends on what sort of God you are referring to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamination Posted October 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Homer_Rice' post='581504' date='Oct 29 2007, 09:41 PM']Now, to suggest that because we don't know the definitive "answer" to the nature of this archetype allows one to infer that, in fact, no Prime Mover exists, is mistaken, imo. That would still leave a burden upon you similar to that which you request of the God-believer: prove that there is no Prime Mover nor a need for one.[/quote] Ah, the burden of proof. It falls on you, however, not on me. We know there is a universe. We do not know if their is a prime mover. The default is that there is no prime mover, according to Occam's Razor, unless you can prove that there needs to be one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 The quoting system around here isnt that great. [quote name='xamination' post='581459' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:45 PM']I think that there is some misunderstanding going on here. Lets go back to the speed of light. God, according to you, choose the speed of light to be c, either directly or indirectly. But God could have made it a google kph, or 37mph. However, he chose c. Why did he choose c? The answer is it is his nature. [color="#FF0000"]His nature to choose C? Why? Why would it not be his design to use the thing that works by his design? And if his design was a fish in a computer, wouldnt your understading of that working be different? If C is what he chose its because its what works by his design, if he had chosen B, then the design would be different and things wouldnt work or would work differently. And by your concept of other universes, is that not plausable that in another universe a computer works with a fish?[/color] I was talking about why would an eternal universe need a creator. [color="#FF0000"]Well it wasnt always around as we know it right?[/color] You and I both know that getting along with one another is the only way humans have been able to survive. Morals are the behaviors that made humans successful. Look at human history, and you will see that humans are not the strongest creatures out there, but they band together and make towns and cities and fight together against nature. Those who were able to get along survived. Those who were able to get along were "the fittest" [color="#FF0000"]The fittest also destroyed other cultures in order to be the fittest. We still do today, we only get along as much as we have to to survive.[/color] Can that question even be answered, that is what I want you to ask yourself. [color="#FF0000"]and mine is does he need a reason to exist other than to create it by his design?[/color] [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Fanatical' post='581461' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:47 PM']And yet, societies have survived for millenia prior to the acceptance of a god, and many continue without a god. A god does not give need for societal rules, only scapegoat for justification. It is in a society's best interest to have rules and laws to prosper and not collapse into anarchy. That's evolution.[/quote] No societies have conqured each other and used each other as far as they could without collapsing into anarchy. This continues even today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581519' date='Oct 29 2007, 10:04 PM']Ah, the burden of proof. It falls on you, however, not on me. We know there is a universe. We do not know if their is a prime mover. The default is that there is no prime mover, according to Occam's Razor, unless you can prove that there needs to be one.[/quote] If "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one", you tell me which is more plausable. That rules just existed "just because" or that the laws and rules of the universe as described by what we know as physics exist because they were designed that way. Science can not allow the "just because" answer. That's faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanatical Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='581532' date='Oct 29 2007, 09:17 PM']No societies have conqured each other and used each other as far as they could without collapsing into anarchy. This continues even today.[/quote] That is completely irrelevant as to why a god is needed for moral existence. The Designer Theory would be intriguing, but there has been no concluding or supporting evidence that a Designer exists. As an analogy, we should have every reason to believe life in some familiar form should be somewhere else in the galaxy; however, extraodinary claims need extraordinary evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Fanatical' post='581549' date='Oct 29 2007, 10:41 PM']That is completely irrelevant as to why a god is needed for moral existence. The Designer Theory would be intriguing, but there has been no concluding or supporting evidence that a Designer exists. As an analogy, we should have every reason to believe life in some familiar form should be somewhere else in the galaxy; however, extraodinary claims need extraordinary evidence.[/quote] I would say that in primary (by this i mean even cavemen) societies a fear of a god or unknown has exisited and then developed into a moral code for the purpose of survival, the packages may have different wrapping, and some wrappings may not have a need for a god, but the moral codes are similar. If there was no need for a moral code, what prevents us from using and destroying each other as far as we need each other? And as a matter of faith I wonder if thats intended in the design? Meaning what good is faith if you know for sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DICKMAN Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 Educate yourself and go with what YOU believe and let noone change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='DICKMAN' post='581557' date='Oct 29 2007, 10:53 PM']Educate yourself and go with what YOU believe and let noone change that.[/quote] I can agree with that, but make sure you do work in both fields to have a full and good education. Im not sure most do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamination Posted October 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='581531' date='Oct 29 2007, 10:15 PM']The quoting system around here isnt that great. [/quote] No, it isn't... [quote name='Jamie_B' post='581531' date='Oct 29 2007, 10:15 PM']His nature to choose C? Why? Why would it not be his design to use the thing that works by his design? And if his design was a fish in a computer, wouldnt your understading of that working be different? If C is what he chose its because its what works by his design, if he had chosen B, then the design would be different and things wouldnt work or would work differently. And by your concept of other universes, is that not plausable that in another universe a computer works with a fish?[/quote] Yes, but if this is the only universe/multiverse, why did God choose to make it the way he did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581564' date='Oct 29 2007, 11:02 PM']No, it isn't... Yes, but if this is the only universe/multiverse, why did God choose to make it the way he did?[/quote] What other way would he make it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claptonrocks Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581425' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:08 PM']Your error here is that you assume that these basic rules come from somewhere. These rules exist, just as anything else, for no reason. Let me put it this way: Why does, in your opinion, God exist?[/quote] Guess you havent been reading what some posters have tried to convey to those who want to question .. God exists for them because they Choose to believe that there is something more than our mere existence for such a short time here compared to the universe in general. Your here as a gift from God... you won the lotto my friend upon conception. You have free will and thoughts alike. You can choose to have faith and believe in the hereafter and all it brings or you can question all of it and never ever really come to a finite answer.... In the case of a believer he has the burden of doubt lifted from him and experiences a joy only one that has accepted the gift can have.. The ones who question the logics of it all will forever be in doubt .. the mere existence here is all they have... You can choose either... why one would want to believe there is nothing more than this is sad to me....but again its up to everyone to decide what they want to believe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581519' date='Oct 29 2007, 10:04 PM']Ah, the burden of proof. It falls on you, however, not on me. We know there is a universe. We do not know if their is a prime mover. The default is that there is no prime mover, according to Occam's Razor, unless you can prove that there needs to be one.[/quote] I've more or less spoken my piece. I was simply suggesting some avenues of potential pursuit. According to Ockham's Razor? Be honest, you've never read Ockham in the context of medieval philosophy, have you? Know the difference between a nominalist and a realist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SINcinnati513 Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='claptonrocks' post='581599' date='Oct 30 2007, 12:20 AM']Guess you havent been reading what some posters have tried to convey to those who want to question .. God exists for them because they Choose to believe that there is something more than our mere existence for such a short time here compared to the universe in general. Your here as a gift from God... you won the lotto my friend upon conception. You have free will and thoughts alike. You can choose to have faith and believe in the hereafter and all it brings or you can question all of it and never ever really come to a finite answer.... In the case of a believer he has the burden of doubt lifted from him and experiences a joy only one that has accepted the gift can have.. The ones who question the logics of it all will forever be in doubt .. the mere existence here is all they have... You can choose either... [b]why one would want to believe there is nothing more than this is sad to me[/b]....but again its up to everyone to decide what they want to believe...[/quote] More than this? What more could there be? And how do you know about it? It saddens me that people make the decisions they make fearing eternal punishment or looking for a reward. Is this one life we are guaranteed not enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThurmanMunster Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 im shocked by the lack of bj in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumble In the Jungle Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='ThurmanMunster' post='581630' date='Oct 30 2007, 01:24 AM']im shocked by the lack of bj in this thread[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawman Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [color="#8B0000"]claptonrocks why one would want to believe there is nothing more than this is sad to me[/color] [quote]SINcinnati513 More than this?[/quote] You are born, live your life, then die. [quote]SINcinnati513 What more could there be?[/quote] The afterlife [quote]SINcinnati513 And how do you know about it?[/quote] Circular argument; How do you know there isn't an afterlife. Speaking only on behalf of christianity (the words of christ and not any specific denominational doctrine). [quote]SINcinnati513 It saddens me that people make the decisions they make fearing eternal punishment or looking for a reward.[/quote] I would agree with this statement to an extent. They are missing the reasoning in it's total concept. Is this one life we are guaranteed not enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamination Posted October 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='581565' date='Oct 29 2007, 11:04 PM']What other way would he make it?[/quote] Any way he wanted to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamination Posted October 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='claptonrocks' post='581599' date='Oct 30 2007, 12:20 AM']Guess you havent been reading what some posters have tried to convey to those who want to question .. God exists for them because they Choose to believe that there is something more than our mere existence for such a short time here compared to the universe in general. Your here as a gift from God... you won the lotto my friend upon conception. You have free will and thoughts alike. You can choose to have faith and believe in the hereafter and all it brings or you can question all of it and never ever really come to a finite answer.... In the case of a believer he has the burden of doubt lifted from him and experiences a joy only one that has accepted the gift can have.. The ones who question the logics of it all will forever be in doubt .. the mere existence here is all they have... You can choose either... why one would want to believe there is nothing more than this is sad to me....but again its up to everyone to decide what they want to believe...[/quote] Belief, unfortunately, doesn't make it true. I feel bad for people who disillusion themselves, thats why I try to show them the error in their thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamination Posted October 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='SINcinnati513' post='581621' date='Oct 30 2007, 01:58 AM']More than this? What more could there be? And how do you know about it? It saddens me that people make the decisions they make fearing eternal punishment or looking for a reward. Is this one life we are guaranteed not enough?[/quote] Thank you. Live for this life, not the next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamination Posted October 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='Homer_Rice' post='581600' date='Oct 30 2007, 12:20 AM']I've more or less spoken my piece. I was simply suggesting some avenues of potential pursuit. According to Ockham's Razor? Be honest, you've never read Ockham in the context of medieval philosophy, have you? Know the difference between a nominalist and a realist?[/quote] I actually have... Occam's Razor is also a fairly basic philosophical concept, so even if I hadn't researched Occam, it would be irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581664' date='Oct 30 2007, 09:05 AM']I actually have... Occam's Razor is also a fairly basic philosophical concept, so even if I hadn't researched Occam, it would be irrelevant.[/quote] Fair enough. We just take different positions on the universals vs particulars argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted October 30, 2007 Report Share Posted October 30, 2007 [quote name='xamination' post='581663' date='Oct 30 2007, 07:02 AM']Thank you. [b]Live for this life, not the next.[/b][/quote] The two aren't mutually exclusive, you know. At least they don't have to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.