lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: The Universe: Accidental or Deliberate?
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 05-14-2008, 07:12 PM   #41
nine.roses
Rookie
 
nine.roses's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: England
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthDingDong
Where do you think the Universe came from? Was its creation an accident?
To be honest, we haven't seen any proof that there has been a beginning or will be an end. We look at the universe through a pinhole, crafting theories only by observing occurances on Earth (or in our galaxy) and try to crowbar said theories into something we know little about. Things here all seem to begin and end, and eternity is difficult to imagine. I contend that time just running in circles (or simply not existing at all - an illusion, perhaps?) is more likely than the illogical "it came into being from nothing".

Quote:
Why is there life? What is the meaning of it? In other words, why does the Universe exist?
I can give you no less an annoying answer than "life exists simply because it had the opportunity to".

Does everything need a reason? Or can it just be, no questions asked? I find it amusing how humans believe everything apparently needs to have a reason to be there, as if everything must be processable by the human mind. Is there really a point to anything at all? I suppose not. But to humans, that's just depressing - nice big rounded answers are power. Which, I suppose, is why we created God. Here's a chap who gives the touch of a human-like mind to all in existence, and thus will apparently be able to give us the answers we so desprerately crave. Comforting, isn't it?

On a less pessimistic note, injecting meaning into ones own life and the life of others is a rather noble aspiration, and I applaud those who do so. Have fun and make love whilst it's here, and appreciate the simple beauty of nature without thinking about it too much.


`
,,`,,
,,,,`,,
,,`,,
`
`
nine.roses is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-14-2008, 07:27 PM   #42
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nine.roses
To be honest, we haven't seen any proof that there has been a beginning or will be an end.
I don't think the science is on your side on this one

Quote:
Originally Posted by nine.roses
We look at the universe through a pinhole, crafting theories only by observing occurances on Earth (or in our galaxy) and try to crowbar said theories into something we know little about.
Again, this is not supported by science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nine.roses
I can give you no less an annoying answer than "life exists simply because it had the opportunity to".
Great answer. I wish more people were comfortable with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nine.roses
Does everything need a reason? Or can it just be, no questions asked? I find it amusing how humans believe everything apparently needs to have a reason to be there, as if everything must be processable by the human mind. Is there really a point to anything at all? I suppose not. But to humans, that's just depressing - nice big rounded answers are power. Which, I suppose, is why we created God. Here's a chap who gives the touch of a human-like mind to all in existence, and thus will apparently be able to give us the answers we so desprerately crave. Comforting, isn't it?
*applause*

Quote:
Originally Posted by nine.roses
On a less pessimistic note, injecting meaning into ones own life and the life of others is a rather noble aspiration, and I applaud those who do so. Have fun and make love whilst it's here, and appreciate the simple beauty of nature without thinking about it too much.
Well said.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2008, 09:06 AM   #43
Arcesious
Trolololololololololololo
 
Arcesious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NE
Posts: 1,876
Current Game: Mass Effect
One thing that's left me in question about what I beleive is modern-day miracles. I've read Hume's argument against Miracles, but some of the 'miracles' today don't seem to be well debunked from any place I can find. For example, there were a few miracles my pasor spoke about, one being a situation in which the crew aboard a ship had to abandon ship in a storm, and at the same exact time that was happening, the wives the men of that crew had to the sudden urge to pray for their husbands, and their husbands survived. A person had appendicitus twice, and his Christian family prayed for him, and he recovered from both times without needing his appendix removed.
'Miracles' like that are leaving me in question about what I want to beleive. Does anyone have a refute against the modern day miracles? Because I can't find anything against them, only more arguments trying to prove thast they really are miracles from God. Maybe it's more that I don't want to admit Christianity possibly being true after all of this, or maybe it's just that more people search on Google for proof of miracles, and more arguments of Miracles being true come up first...


Please feed the trolls. XD
Arcesious is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2008, 01:55 PM   #44
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
One thing that's left me in question about what I beleive is modern-day miracles. I've read Hume's argument against Miracles, but some of the 'miracles' today don't seem to be well debunked from any place I can find.
I think it's important to consider who has the burden of proof in situations like these. Here's how it doesn't work: Anyone can make any claim and that claim is considered legitimate and true until someone can debunk it. Why is this important? Because a lot of people are going to say a lot of things. Sometimes they believe what they are saying but sometimes they have an agenda. If you believe everything you hear, then how are you ever going to know what is true and what isn't?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
For example, there were a few miracles my pasor spoke about, one being a situation in which the crew aboard a ship had to abandon ship in a storm, and at the same exact time that was happening, the wives the men of that crew had to the sudden urge to pray for their husbands, and their husbands survived.
How do you know these things actually happened though? Is it possible that the pastor has taken liberty with a few facts to increase the dramatic effect of the story? Is it possible that whoever told the pastor the story simply made it up? Is it possible that the events described by the pastor happened exactly as he says they did? The answer to all these questions is "yes". So we know that a lot of things are possible. I guess that leaves us wondering which of possibilities are likely (hint: even if there was some evidence that could show us that the wives did all start to pray at that exact moment, do we have any evidence to show us that their prayers had effect? Circumstantial evidence isn't going to be good enough here because we have to rule out that the sailors wouldn't have survived without prayer).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
A person had appendicitus twice, and his Christian family prayed for him, and he recovered from both times without needing his appendix removed.
Same thing as above. How do we know that the person had appendicitis? How do we know that prayer is what "cured" him? Also, if prayer is such an effective treatment for appendicitis, why did the person get it a second time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
'Miracles' like that are leaving me in question about what I want to beleive. Does anyone have a refute against the modern day miracles?
This is a good question. I think the more important question though is: Do the people making claims of modern day miracles have any evidence that a miracle took place at all?

Consider that there are organisms in the animal kingdom that are capable of regeneration. Theoretically, if you chop an earthworm in two, each half will regenerate and you'll have two earthworms where you only had one before. "Miraculous", no? We might not exactly how this happens but we know that it does. Are we better off spinning our wheels with apologetics trying to determine why god will answer the prayers of earthworms and not humans when it comes to regeneration or are we better off using observations and experiments trying to figure out how it is earthworm (and lizards, etc) are able to do this in the first place?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
Because I can't find anything against them, only more arguments trying to prove thast they really are miracles from God.
How do we disprove that they aren't miracles from the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Remember this hypothesis is equally possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
Maybe it's more that I don't want to admit Christianity possibly being true after all of this, or maybe it's just that more people search on Google for proof of miracles, and more arguments of Miracles being true come up first...
*shrugs* At some point, the thought may occur to you that chasing this line of reasoning is going to be a huge waste of your time. As I pointed out earlier, a lot of people say a lot of things. If you see it as your responsibility to debunk each claim, then you are going to spend a lot of time trying to do the impossible (homework: please debunk the claim that there is a teapot orbiting the sun somewhere between Mars and Jupiter). Or you can accept that the burden of proof is always on the person making the claim and use all that extra "free time" to study other things instead.

I hope that helps. Thanks for reading.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2008, 02:14 PM   #45
ForeverNight
nrgurt researcher
 
ForeverNight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 1,204
Current Game: q2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
How do we disprove that they aren't miracles from the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Remember this hypothesis is equally possible
I haven't really been following this discussion, I just saw it was the most updated thing in Kavar's Corner, and I decided to read this post...

Well, there is something about your remark here that bugs me.

You say that it is equally possible, possible. Now, I'm not going to say: "Of course God exists! How can you be so stupid to believe otherwise!!!!" Because that is just plain stupid.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is a product of Pastafarianism (Sp?) or something like that. Not an established religion.

Not to say that a religion has to be established to be correct, but its a good starting point.

But, what does the flying spaghetti Monster do? It's there... it 'flies' and its made of Spaghetti and Meatballs...... Oh, and its a member of a Parody religion that was created in 2005 to get revenge on the Kansas Schoolboard...

Wow... Now, I'm being told that it is equally, equally possible for the miracles to have come from the FSM??? What the heck has the world turned into??? A parody religion is given equal footing as a real one???

Wow. Not to try to attack you Achilles, but you might want to reword that one.
ForeverNight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2008, 02:40 PM   #46
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
I think his point was that there's not much concrete evidence to distinguish a real religion from a parody religion except age and acceptance.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2008, 03:25 PM   #47
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverNight
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is a product of Pastafarianism (Sp?) or something like that. Not an established religion.
And what is the process for "establishing" a religion? It is rigorous enough that I should be duly impressed? Or it is a bunch of guys sitting around a fire deciding that henceforth their collection of stories is "established"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverNight
Not to say that a religion has to be established to be correct, but its a good starting point.
Why is it a good starting point?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverNight
But, what does the flying spaghetti Monster do? It's there... it 'flies' and its made of Spaghetti and Meatballs......
We have evidence of him at the moment of Creation. I think you mock the awesome power of His noodly appendage by referring to Him as "Spaghetti and Meatballs".

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverNight
Oh, and its a member of a Parody religion that was created in 2005 to get revenge on the Kansas Schoolboard...
And calvinism was created in response to a list of complaints against the catholic church. New religions are invented all the time for a variety of reasons. By what criteria do we decide that some of these inventions are legitimate while others are not?

PS: christianity is an spin-off of judaism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverNight
Wow... Now, I'm being told that it is equally, equally possible for the miracles to have come from the FSM??? What the heck has the world turned into??? A parody religion is given equal footing as a real one???
Define "parody" and "real" for me

Yes, whatever explanations you cannot rule out have to be considered. You cannot rule out FSM, invisible pink unicorns, zeus, thor, pixies, fairies, etc, etc.. The logic demands that you consider all possible explanations until the process of elimination is complete. For the purposes of this discussion though, I've decided to throw logic and critical thought aside and accept the FSM hypothesis without any proof. Of course, this also means that I will also be arbitrarily dismissing any other hypothesis, even though I've just admitted that I have no good reason to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverNight
Wow. Not to try to attack you Achilles, but you might want to reword that one.
I'll be happy to if you can tell me why I should

Thanks for the post. I appreciate you allowing me to have fun with my response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
I think his point was that there's not much concrete evidence to distinguish a real religion from a parody religion except age and acceptance.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2008, 08:08 PM   #48
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Despite the fact that I plan on eating His Flying Noodliness for dinner with marinara and put an end to this utterly ridiculous analogy, it has become way off topic. This is an origins thread. Discuss atheism and theism in the correct thread or I'll close this one.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2008, 08:21 PM   #49
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Despite the fact that I plan on eating His Flying Noodliness for dinner with marinara and put an end to this utterly ridiculous analogy, it has become way off topic. This is an origins thread. Discuss atheism and theism in the correct thread or I'll close this one.
Since Creation via FSM is still a creation hypothesis, I don't see how FSM discussion is off-topic. Feel free to close whatever you need to.

Posts 43-47 and the now deleted 49 and 50 don't discuss origins at all, they discuss pasta. Those of you who made those posts are arguing whether the Italian Restaurant of Holiness is a religion or not, not the origin of the universe. Put the arguments in the right threads please. --Jae

Last edited by Jae Onasi; 05-18-2008 at 12:04 AM.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Knights of the Old Republic > Community > Kavar's Corner > The Universe: Accidental or Deliberate?

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:52 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.