Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Does the flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?"
Chaos theory acknowledges that there is a randomness in complex systems that cannot be ignored.
"Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future."
Edward Lorenz
Chaos theory describes how small differences in initial conditions yield widely diverging outcomes. Chaos theory concerns deterministic systems that yield different results.
You will note that this is reminiscent of Newton's Second law of Thermodynamics that states that the total entropy of a system increases over time.
Heraclitus and Siddhartha Gautama also spoke of change and flux. In the Pali language the word is anicca, inconstancy.
But what does this have to do with agnosticism? Actually quite a lot. If one applies the principles of chaos theory to the world as we know it, the chance of the existence of a permanent God is vanishingly small.
In Buddhist philosophy the concept of a creator God is rejected in a world of flux and change. Nothing is permanent and nothing stays the same.
Chaos theory says the same thing. The possibility of the existence of a god is unlikely. Not impossible, but extremely unlikely.
I would certainly say that the kind of god one is talking about becomes increasingly less Biblical/personal and increasingly more natural/sorta.
Indeed, wheen one looks at the claims of I/D and the signs of a designed and ordered universe, and understand how they actually support a natural origin rather than designed, the 'God' becomes not only more sorta but more deist.
Agnostic -god is not only becoming ever more indistinguishable from natural origins, but increasingly more acadenic as it is long since remote from the claims of organized religion.
god is natural. There is no "not natural things". what you mean is the traits of what theist call god are beginning to line up with observation. The older descriptions are just based on old understandings. The traits of god will change, it just takes time.
The next bone of contention will be how any body could think that we are not in a system of life. We will laugh at that notion as we laugh that people called exo planets "naked speculation",. I was one that some astronomy professors laughed at. I said just based on the periodic table they exists.
Purely academic is a silly term. Its purely academic that people feel the connections to their surroundings, that surrounding is life, and the expression of that is based on the individual brain state.
yeah, purely academic and purely the more valid claim (truth). suck on that scope and reason.
It seems impossible to sustain the theory that our creator loves us when aware of the incredible fragility of any individual's existence. To come into being, the You-Sperm had to outswim a few million competitors. Even the slightest alteration in the timing of your parent's sex act...someone else, but not you. And this holds true not only for everyone alive, but for everyone who has ever lived. Alter even slightly any link in the staggeringly immense chain required to ultimately produce you, one which reaches back to the origin of life, and you would not be here reading this sentence.
It would be flattering to assume that the creator set this entire set of zillions of actions and consequences into motion with the idea of one day producing me, but I just don't see that I have ever been, or ever will be, of any real consequence to the universe. Further, if I were actually a designer being, wouldn't that mean that all which came before me..had to come before me and free will was never in operation?
Each of us is the product of utter chaos in that the chain was not set in motion with any particular goal. Not even our parents, our closest and most immediate links, had any thing more than "a child" in mind, it wasn't "Okay, Honey. Lets go upstairs and make Grandstander."
god is natural. There is no "not natural things". what you mean is the traits of what theist call god are beginning to line up with observation. The older descriptions are just based on old understandings. The traits of god will change, it just takes time.
The next bone of contention will be how any body could think that we are not in a system of life. We will laugh at that notion as we laugh that people called exo planets "naked speculation",. I was one that some astronomy professors laughed at. I said just based on the periodic table they exists.
Purely academic is a silly term. Its purely academic that people feel the connections to their surroundings, that surrounding is life, and the expression of that is based on the individual brain state.
yeah, purely academic and purely the more valid claim (truth). suck on that scope and reason.
How Gldnrulishly pointless.
You know very well what I mean by 'natural'. Not requiring anything that doesn't come down in the end to physics and particles. Your Gldnrulish dickering about 'academic' is also irrelevant because if you don't know that I mean that "agnostic god" is irrelevant to the way we orgainize society, law and education, you ought to.
In fact, I think, like Goldie, you DO know and are just trying to score piddling cheap points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
I call it seeding. "utter chaos" doesn't match observation. But neither does omni dude.
You seee to have got a taste for semantic dickering with Grandstander's excellent post above. Replacing "utter Chaos' woth 'seeding' is just pedantry. Planned or unplanned - and the evidence suggests unplanned - is the only point worth posting about or for us to read.
You know very well what I mean by 'natural'. Not requiring anything that doesn't come down in the end to physics and particles. Your Gldnrulish dickering about 'academic' is also irrelevant because if you don't know that I mean that "agnostic god" is irrelevant to the way we orgainize society, law and education, you ought to.
In fact, I think, like Goldie, you DO know and are just trying to score piddling cheap points.
You seee to have got a taste for semantic dickering with Grandstander's excellent post above. Replacing "utter Chaos' woth 'seeding' is just pedantry. Planned or unplanned - and the evidence suggests unplanned - is the only point worth posting about or for us to read.
yeah, pointless. The best descriptor of the system we are part of is so pointless when it doesn't suit a belief statement.
you are down to 'pointless" and "personal scope and reason". all fundy-think does that when observations infringe on their pesky little world views. now if you want to go more valid clarity, logic, and reason you will need to dump your personal opinion based belief statements.
You use somatic dickingering to avoid, minimize, and dismiss more valid claims all the time. Planned or unplanned is irrelevant to me. The fact is we are here now in a system of life.
"seeding" is exactly what we see the universe doing. But your gut wrenching event clouds your reason. You are taking the universe personally. thats your flaw, not mine.
I don't need to debate it with you. Everyone can see the point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
yup, you have clarity, logic, and reason.
