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.
It seems like a whole new ballgame, where we cannot know the score. What is testable, observable, and definable within or universe could never be expected to be the same outside of it.
The question is, why should we be playing that ball game at all?
I contend it's because we don't like the answer we get when the normal tools of discovery are used.
For example, if I were to ask you if you had a golf ball in your pocket, you could quickly tell me no. You may put your hands in your pocket, or even allow me to pat you down to be certain. But after seeing no evidence of the golf balls existence, we would both be satisfied that there was in fact no golf ball in your pocket.
In the normal course of events, you would never entertain the possibility that a magic invisible golf ball is inside of your pocket. You would know with certainty that magic invisible golf balls do not exists, and your proof would be something like this:
For magic invisible golf balls to exist, everything we know about physics would have to be wrong.
Since you don't believe everything you know about physics is wrong, you would 100% of the time believe there was no magic golf ball in your pocket.
That train of thought is used by you and I everyday in every other matter we encounter. It isn't until we are talking about the possibility of a God that the stakes get really high that we start to allow for magic and supernatural answers that would violate every rule of physics that we know.
(Here I'm talking about a supernatural God, not a Spinoza type God)
Many people want to believe in a God so badly, they create special rules of evidence that make it almost impossible to come to any conclusion other than he might exist. But if you used your normal common sense, you would quickly agree that no being with the qualities normally attributed to God exists, because it would violate every rule of physics for him to exist.
Under what rationale do you suppose that that is a negative assertion? The fact that we exist requires some sort of explanation.
Its a negative assertion because you are asserting that something is not true. You are saying that God does not exist, which is negative. Positively asserting something is to say that God does exist.
Perhaps you are using the term in a specialized sense that I'm not familiar with. If so, i apologize, (I'm not sure it makes much of a difference to be honest.)
The question is, why should we be playing that ball game at all?
I contend it's because we don't like the answer we get when the normal tools of discovery are used.
For example, if I were to ask you if you had a golf ball in your pocket, you could quickly tell me know. You may put your hands in your pocket, or even allow me to pat you down to be certain. But after seeing no evidence of the golf balls existence, we would both be satisfied that there was in fact no golf ball in your pocket.
In the normal course of events, you would never entertain the possibility that a magic invisible golf ball is inside of your pocket. You would know with certainty that magic invisible golf balls do not exists, and your proof would be something like this:
For magic invisible golf balls to exist, everything we know about physics would have to be wrong.
Since you don't believe everything you know about physics is wrong, you would 100% of the time believe there was no magic golf ball in your pocket.
That train of thought is used by you and I everyday in every other matter we encounter. It isn't until we are talking about the possibility of a God that the stakes get really high that we start to allow for magic and supernatural answers that would violate every rule of physics that we know.
(Here I'm talking about a supernatural God, not a Spinoza type God)
Many people want to believe in a God so badly, they create special rules of evidence that make it almost impossible to come to any conclusion other than he might exist. But if you used your normal common sense, you would quickly agree that no being with the qualities normally attributed to God exists, because it would violate every rule of physics for him to exist.
Actually, I agree with you that in any conventional way, there is no evidence for the existence of any God. The reason why the stakes get higher is because of the possible implications if a God DOES exist, and perhaps what an existing God may want from us. The possible existence of Unicorns, Santa, or Leprechauns has no meaning to me. Yet, if my existence is due to a God which exists outside of our Universe, and perhaps has some sort of purpose for my existence, suddenly, the existence of the supernatural has great meaning to me. More meaning than I could rule out upon my physical observation. Furthermore, as long as that possibility exists, I would want to intellectually persue it. Call it the FSM, Yaweh, hell, even Unicorns. I don't care what you call it. What it boils down to is, I don't believe that there is nearly enough information in to throw the cards, and it is important to me to know whether I have the hand I think I do in whatever game we are playing. This is not Pascal's Wager, as I do not commit to any man-made God, but rather, considering the evidence, I would lean towards the Theistic.
Its a negative assertion because you are asserting that something is not true. You are saying that God does not exist, which is negative. Positively asserting something is to say that God does exist.
Perhaps you are using the term in a specialized sense that I'm not familiar with. If so, i apologize, (I'm not sure it makes much of a difference to be honest.)
Yet I would say that positing that our existence is due to random chance is a positive assertion as to the explanation of our existence.
Actually, I agree with you that in any conventional way, there is no evidence for the existence of any God. The reason why the stakes get higher is because of the possible implications if a God DOES exist, and perhaps what an existing God may want from us. The possible existence of Unicorns, Santa, or Leprechauns has no meaning to me. Yet, if my existence is due to a God which exists outside of our Universe, and perhaps has some sort of purpose for my existence, suddenly, the existence of the supernatural has great meaning to me. More meaning than I could rule out upon my physical observation. Furthermore, as long as that possibility exists, I would want to intellectually persue it. Call it the FSM, Yaweh, hell, even Unicorns. I don't care what you call it. What it boils down to is, I don't believe that there is nearly enough information in to throw the cards, and it is important to me to know whether I have the hand I think I do in whatever game we are playing. This is not Pascal's Wager, as I do not commit to any man-made God, but rather, considering the evidence, I would lean towards the Theistic.
That makes sense.
I only pointed that out to explain why I consider myself an atheist. I "know" there is no God in the same sense that I "know" there is no invisible golf ball in my pocket. I accept that there is a metaphysical possibility that I am wrong on both occasions, but that as a matter of semantics does not change my position to agnostic.
Of course. An entity. Then the questions becomes what is the nature of that entity.
Thank you for answering the question. So are you saying an entity was the first thing to exist IN the universe? Or outside of the universe? What kind of entity? What kind of scientific evidence do you have to at least support that view?
Thank you for answering the question. So are you saying an entity was the first thing to exist IN the universe? Or outside of the universe? What kind of entity? What kind of scientific evidence do you have to at least support that view?
RESPONSE:
1. Since the universe includes everything in existence, there is nothing outside the universe.
2. One cannot use "scientific evidence" if matter and energy as we know them aren't involved.
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.
