Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bugs · 12-06-2002, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquidrage:
I was reffering to creation from nothing.

If a creation occured I would be rather surpised to find out that before stars or heavily elements had even formed that in the beginning was a paramecium.

Straw man. No one said a paramecium was created before the stars.

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquidrage:
No, I was pointing out the problems with the original OP.
Like it or not, if there is no eternal universe then the infinite regressions must stop with a process that is able to create itself. An omnipotent deity would fit that bill. Does it mean that there is evidence for that deity? No. Does it mean that it's even likely? No.
But it does mean if I had a presupposition for ID the OP would not stand as a evidence against.

You still haven�t shown why it couldn�t stop one step before your omnipotent deity. (Not without special pleading and circular reasoning, anyway.)

Russell E. Rierson · 12-06-2002, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Victor Drake:
If we accept for a moment the premise that nothing as complex as a living cell can come into being without having been designed by an intelligence, we must recognize that an intelligence capable of such designing must necessarily be AT LEAST as complex as the thing it designs. Who, then designed the designer? If the complexity of a cell needs a designer, the designer must need a much more complex designer, which would need an even more complex designer, ad infinitum. If at any point in this regression, it is possible for an designing intelligence to exist without a designer, then why can't a paramecium?

Interesting...

A closed timelike curve would be "self generating" without the need for "pushing back" the explanation.

A self generating universe seems to be the only plausible answer.

If reality is "infinitely old" there must be a process of continuous regeneration, or else thermal equilibrium would have been reached.

All of the evidence points toward the fact that the universe began a "finite" amount of time "ago". Either an outside agent caused reality to exist...which invokes an infinite regression, or reality is self generating.

Russ

[ December 06, 2002: Message edited by: Russell E. Rierson ]

pz · 12-06-2002, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Russell E. Rierson:
Either an outside agent caused reality to exist...which invokes an infinite regression, or reality is self generating.

...or was self-generating, or the explanation is something altogether different, not encompassed in your dichotomy. One suggestion here: although E/C is grouped under the "II Philosophical Forums", empty philosophical musings tend to be disparaged, if not entirely discouraged. We're more data driven here, and evidence is better; you may find the other philosophical fora more to your taste.

Oh, and welcome to Infidels. You can introduce yourself at the <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=43" target="_blank">Welcome forum</a>.

Russell E. Rierson · 12-06-2002, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by pz:


...or was self-generating, or the explanation is something altogether different, not encompassed in your dichotomy. One suggestion here: although E/C is grouped under the "II Philosophical Forums", empty philosophical musings tend to be disparaged, if not entirely discouraged. We're more data driven here, and evidence is better; you may find the other philosophical fora more to your taste.

Oh, and welcome to Infidels. You can introduce yourself at the <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=43" target="_blank">Welcome forum</a>.

Thank you pz...

Yes the "closed timelike curve" is explained by Dr. Michio Kaku in the book "Hyperspace". I was not aware that this particular explanation is an "empty philosophial musing"

Dr. Archibald Wheeler also talks about "Observer Participation".

Thanks <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Russ

pz · 12-06-2002, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Russell E. Rierson:

Yes the "closed timelike curve" is explained by Dr. Michio Kaku in the book "Hyperspace". I was not aware that this particular explanation is an "empty philosophial musing".

You've learned something new and worthwhile, then. Yes, in the context of the evolution/creation debate, philosophical musings are usually empty noise. The word "hyperspace" is also a good sign that a truckload of BS is about to be dumped on us, unless it is specifically used in the appropriate context of mathematics and physics.

Victor Drake · 12-06-2002, 12:00 PM

One more time before I give up on you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquidrage:
Devils advocate:
No matter what you put forth as existing first it will always have at least some degree of complexity.
Therefor, it stands to reason that whatever came first must have been capable of creating itself.

Am I the only person here who sees that there is a difference between 'it designed itself' and 'it exists without having been designed by an intelligence'?
The latter EXCLUDES the former.

Your entire argument seems to be predicated on the assumption that without a 'creation event' nothing can exist.
Kindly define what you mean by 'creation'. I have been talking about 'intelligent design' i.e. deliberate design by an intelligence. The two are not necessarily identical.

Bugs · 12-06-2002, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Victor Drake:
One more time before I give up on you.

Am I the only person here who sees that there is a difference between 'it designed itself' and 'it exists without having been designed by an intelligence'?

No, I can see that too. I have changed "paramecium designed itself" to "paramecium was not designed" at least twice in this debate.

JusticeMachine · 12-06-2002, 12:58 PM

Maybe the problem is that we have trouble fathoming that an intellgence can exist that is not temporal, like ourselves. Perhaps who created us is the beginning of everything and the end of everything. To put it in temoral terms, since we seem to have trouble seeing any other way.

Russell E. Rierson · 12-06-2002, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pz:

You've learned something new and worthwhile, then. Yes, in the context of the evolution/creation debate, philosophical musings are usually empty noise. The word "hyperspace" is also a good sign that a truckload of BS is about to be dumped on us, unless it is specifically used in the appropriate context of mathematics and physics.

I respect your advice pz.

I will continue to study the mathematics of space-time. I don't know didly about biology though

Maybe I can learn something here at "infidels".

Russ

Russell E. Rierson · 12-06-2002, 10:44 PM

Here is a quote from the book "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" by the physicist Lee Smolin.

Dr. Smolin talks about how there can be nothing outside the universe. I interpret this to mean that the genesis of the universe is intrinsic TO the universe. Does Dr. Smolin present a logically valid argument? If not, where are the flaws in his reasoning???

Thanks!

Also, Chris Langan wrote about the principle of "There is Nothing Outside the Universe-Reality" in "Introduction to the CTMU"...before...Dr. Smolin wrote his book.

Interesting!

Here is the quote:

Chapter One

THERE IS NOTHING OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSE

[deleted as a possible copyright violation]

End quote.

Very interesting...

Russ

[ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: Russell E. Rierson ]

[ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: pz ]

12-06-2002, 10:44 PM	#30
Russell E. Rierson Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: usa Posts: 31	Here is a quote from the book "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" by the physicist Lee Smolin. Dr. Smolin talks about how there can be nothing outside the universe. I interpret this to mean that the genesis of the universe is intrinsic TO the universe. Does Dr. Smolin present a logically valid argument? If not, where are the flaws in his reasoning??? Thanks! Also, Chris Langan wrote about the principle of "There is Nothing Outside the Universe-Reality" in "Introduction to the CTMU"...before...Dr. Smolin wrote his book. Interesting! Here is the quote: Chapter One THERE IS NOTHING OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSE [deleted as a possible copyright violation] End quote. Very interesting... Russ [ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: Russell E. Rierson ] [ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: pz ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-06-2002, 12:58 PM	#28
JusticeMachine Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Arizona Posts: 403	Maybe the problem is that we have trouble fathoming that an intellgence can exist that is not temporal, like ourselves. Perhaps who created us is the beginning of everything and the end of everything. To put it in temoral terms, since we seem to have trouble seeing any other way.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.