If something was not caused by something - then why should it exist? Then what was the "First Cause" - what was the first mover?
Yes, we can say a higher power had always existed too. But is it rational? Is it reasonable to say that there is something else that controls everything with our knowledge that we have today? No, it's completely un-rational. No evidence of a higher power other than our creation, which can also be explained by science. Everything we know of can be explained by science, there is no reason to believe in a higher power. But can a higher power be considered science... ?
Explained yes, proven no. Also, not disproven, that a Higher Power caused the big bang, and evolution. Um.... no it can't. There are countless things, that modern day science, cannot explain. Why ? Because of evolution and the big bang, or any other theory ? If so, please explain to me, how these theories, rule out, or disprove, a Higher Power ? Science, cannot define a Higher Power. If you want to call the Universe science, and the Universe a working together Higher Power, then i guess you could.
I love when religious people start saying how the complexity of a god is so far beyond us. We can't define it, it's so intense and complex that it's beyond us. But then they base their entire life off this thing they admit they don't understand or know anything about. Sorry, you sound insane. You are insane.
I agree. Please, Smigs, explain to me what cannot be proven by science. Basically is that there is an over-thinking involved in your reasoning. We all have no reason to believe in one... why should we? Because it was 'all the rage a couple hundred years ago? Are we trying to make our selves feel better about why we are here? Are we in a rush to figure out who and what we are? I believe so, yes. We always want to know answers, and we are just straying away from The Truth with these crazy religions and what not.
lol There is another theory where time and space are just an illusion. Where's the Universe then? Who created that illusion? What is tricked by it? [An old man with a blue sack on his back looks YOU in the eye and says "dualism"] I think we can all agree with Smigs that there must at least be some higher form of organization than that which humans have created. This higher organization/organism certainly seems to change, form patterns, grow, and provide opportunities for coincidences. Indeed, it also seems to leave a lot of room to question things. Are things not clear enough? Did this higher form not give me enough Proof that it exists? What the heck is rational or reasonable? Using totally subjective and vague adjectives like those will never end a discussion. No evidence other than, huh? So we disregard that? Could not this higher form have set everything in motion but left it to mostly its own devices after? lol Science, huh? Oh boy... look up "dark matter" and "dark energy". Likewise, I'd like to post a quote from the "Is Science a religion?" thread: In fact, would somebody like to attempt to PROVE that these theories (and the fact that some people, but not all, hold them) rule out a Higher Power? Nicely said, Smigs. No need to go there. The human mind can comprehend it, and it gets a lot easier once you start trying a bit. I love when people like mrblonde77 think they really have such a handle on how reality works that they can effectively wish away the will of "religious people". Belief can be power. Some people lack your "self-confidence". Straying, huh? As if we were there before? Well, what a pessimistic view... Perhaps those who view themselves as having higher value are more willing to do what they feel they should? Maybe they are more confident and comfortable thanks to the community religion and spirituality offer?
Generally, Science cannot prove, it can only disprove. Of course, a Hypothesis which has resisted decades of attempts to disprove it graduates to Theory - though always conditionally. But Goedel proved that in mathematics, the language of Science, there are theorems which cannot be proved, even though they may be true. Science therefore does not claim omniscience - to be able to answer every question. It simply attacks those questions which happened to be asked of it and often, but not always, comes up with answers. But it is never true to say that Science "must" be able to answer a question.
I think we (both believers and non-believers in regards to "god") can all agree on one thing... Something exists which is eternal. We know next to nothing about the Universe, yet I can tell you that it is impossible for something to come from nothing. In all honesty, its probably a collection of eternal things that are either part of a whole, or come together in such a way that allows for creation and existence. Some may call it "god", some may call it the "eternal force", either way there is something out there that exists eternally.
Right, and what people should respect is each others' right to believe this Objective Eternality is Real or Ideal. I'm about to go blaze... Which then begs the question: Are Real and Ideal different? Or just separated by time? Potential versus action? Energy versus matter? Or are Real and Ideal simply different perceptive manifestations of the same Basic Concept?
How so? For an easy example: let's talk about.. say.. rain. The science of the water cycle is science, which PROVES (not disproves) that water comes from the ocean. You can also say that it PROVES that it comes from the ocean but DISPROVES it comes from space. Science never just "disproves". Yes, we know that science can't answer what we don't know. But if we DO know it, science can answer it... whether it's easy to answer or hard to answer. That is why it is simply un-rational to believe in a higher power. I mean really- let's think in clear view now.
It really doesnt matter what type of spin you want to put on it or what kind of word games we want to play, man. There is something out there that is eternal. "Real", "Ideal", energy or matter, it really doesnt matter. Actually, our ideas and theories of it and about it dont matter at all. It is what it is, what it has always been and what it will always be. If its eternal, its perfect....and true perfection need not change. Whether or not this Universe is even "real", whether or not your existence or my existence is "real", one thing I know is that something out there (whatever "out there" means) is eternal.....there HAS to be AT LEAST one eternal foce somewhere that is responsible existence in all forms.
while in general there should always be a cause and effect, when you reach the quantum level nature has an annoying habit of being incredibly spontaneous. Radioactive decay occurs somewhat randomly, while we can say that a huge sample of material will reach its 1/2 life, but its entirely impossible to say this molecule will decay in 2 seconds. likewise in accelerators there are instances where particles seem to appear then immediately disappear with no available answer to why/how. With the current theory of the big bang, the universe was once quantum sized itself leading to the possibility that the universe may have suddenly 'popped' into existence with an ensuing expansion. And if thats the case, there really isnt a whole lot we can do to further explain it. Another intricacy to questions of first cause again goes back to the big bang. The big bang was the start of time, thus to say what caused the big bang is an invalid question because there was no existence. This is to say that the bing bang wasnt created IN time but WITH time. Of course these explanations dont fully satisfy the human need to keep asking why, but science largely answers the question how and leaves the why unattended. Perhaps science needs another incredible mind to think in a different way and discover more definite answers to these questions
I took this quote from a book on the nature of humans. "One of the best known and distinctive qualties of living matter, although it is still one which is unexplainable in terms of physics and chemistry, is its capacity to be modified by its experience."
Perhaps perfection is change. Perhaps the perfect object is the object that can change into the most other objects with the least effort. Has to, huh? I'd love to hear why this is true.
If you're talking about this comment: This has to be true because something cannot come from nothing, it just isnt possible. So the fact that there is SOMETHING, proves that there is also something out there that is eternal in its own existence. Existence is infinite (or eternal) because existence exists. This is true because you cant go back to a time before existence, a time when there was absolutely nothing....complete nothingness. If there were such a time, the Universe would never have come into play....it wouldnt be here.
You act like it is. Something can "come" from nothing if nothing is simply a "placeholder". Think of a virtual reality, if you can't picture binary as being the code of the actual reality. 1s are real, but 0s just mean that "there could be a 1 here, but there isn't": 10110000111110100101010111011011110110. 0 exists just as a placeholder. You could just as easily write it in unary: 11111111111111111111111111111111....11111....1111111111....... Before and after just exist because we perceive now. They aren't anything but illusions. Prove that your feeling that you exist now proves that the past and future also exist.
Again, forget about numbers and word games....just think about it. There was never a time where there was absolutely nothing. We know this because things exist right now....whether its an illusion or not, its still an existing illusion. Complete or absolute nothingness is infinite non-existence, in every direction and in every dimension. Are you implying that something could essentially "pop up" out of this sea of absolute nothingness? If so, where did it come from? What exactly is it made of, and where did those substances or energies come from? Could they have been provided by nothingness? Of course not... The fact that there is SOMETHING proves that there has always been SOMETHING....which in turn leads me to believe that there are forces both within and possibly outside of this Universe that are eternal in there existence. Maybe its only one thing, maybe its many things, but there is at least one thing that is eternal....you simply cant deny that if you really understand the bottom line of existence.
There was never a moment of absolute nothing, you say... okay, so wouldn't that just mean that there was always a starting point? Maybe all things are relative from that central (not necessary "first" in time) point? Word games and numbers? lol You don't have to communicate like I do, but my method works for me. How could the concept of "nothingness" even exist without a concept of somethingness or existence? That's just plain absurd, my friend. Surely you don't mean that the concept didn't have to come first? And by the nature of it being a concept, doesn't that mean that there must be more than one, since I've explained elsewhere that for something to be a noun rather than a proper noun, it must exist in multiple forms? That's why dualism exists, to deal with the problem of the first concept. This concept of dealing with the first concept is called Universalism. One concept for having trouble integrating Universalism and personal experience (the concept of your life/self in and of itself) is closed-mindedness. There are many similar concepts. The fact that there is something now proves there was something before (always, I assume it's implied?) is no fact at all... Unless a fact is one person's belief... which perhaps it is. But anyway, just because you are alive now doesn't mean you always were. Likewise, just because you became conscious that there is a Universe now, doesn't mean even that there really is, much less that there ever or always was.