Science and God

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to Volbrigade]

I was curious as to whether you had a better explanation for our shared reality than that expressed in Biblical truth -- perhaps one I was unfamiliar with.

Fortunately (or, unfortunately, depending on your point of view, I suppose -- Wink -- you don't.

The explanation I gave is based entirely on that which is observed to be true. I'm not smart enough to have made all of that up on my own.

What caused quantum mechanics?

What caused God? Quantum mechanics occurs because matter/energy interacts with itself energetically. Things have to be SOME way, and in this universe at least, they happen to be THIS way. How is believing in quantum mechanics different from believing in God, you might ask? I don't "believe" in gravity for example. I experience it in a practical and completely physical way at virtually every moment of my life. Accepting the existence of gravity is not a religion that one must have faith in. I don't "believe" in quantum mechanics in the same way. Quantum mechanics is observed to be true, and understanding it explains how and why things occur. God is entirely imagined to be true, and therefore explains exactly nothing.

Aren't you just making the same "declarative statements" that you accuse me of? The type that aren't so, just because you say they're so?

Statements based on observation are not "the same" as declarations made based on assumption and make believe at all.

If we are the "physical evidence" that quantum mechanics can produce mind and intelligence, then surely we are also the physical evidence that God made us in His own image -- i.e.,

with the attributes of mind, intelligence, will, and purpose.

There is no "physical evidence" for God at all. You have declared it to be so.

And surely the universe itself -- so exquisitely and synchronously fine tuned to the nth degree, among numerous exacting standards -- e.g., the gravitational constant; electro-magnetism; the strong and weak force; the periodic table itself, and the 3D information code of DNA, which exists in all living things --

We exist in a universe that allows for our existence. I can see no miracle or anything supernatural in that. If we existed in a universe that was entirely hostile to our existence, THAT would be supernatural. [/quote]

surely that is "physical evidence" by your own criteria, for the kind of exquisite design that requires infinite Intelligence to execute?

There is no "evidence" that the universe was designed in the same way that there is no evidence of intelligence in a lightning strike. Both are entirely natural and occur for entirely natural reasons. The parameters of the universe are such that they allow for our sort of life to exist. Given billions of years and the vastness of the universe, our sort of life has occurred at least once that we know of. The question of life throughout the universe is still an open question. But given billions of years and the vastness of the universe it would seem unlikely that it hasn't occurred elsewhere.

I'm glad you love your children. And I can certainly relate to your curiosity, and interest in sex.

And I'm sured that those things, and others, provide your life with a sense of meaning and purpose. But those are personal and subjective. I am wondering where, in a universe where a quantum fluctuation, of unknown cause, but presumed to be mindless and therefore random in nature, initiated an endless series of random interactions of matter, one of the results of which is a pattern of atoms which is "you", and which has fabricated a sense of meaning and purpose out of whole cloth, that REAL, actual "meaning and purpose" resides. I can see no way how your personal, declarative "meaning and purpose" must, of necessity, be as random, mindless, and without meaning and purpose as the rest of the universe that it takes place in.

Finding a meaning to life IS entirely subjective as you suggest. It's whatever serves to give life meaning. The truth of the universe is whatever it is, and whether that serves to suit your personal sensibilities one way or the other is not going to change the truth of the universe one iota.

A gangster, a serial killer, or a brutal dictator may also have "meaning and purpose" in their life. Those may include the gratification of ego and desires, including the exercise
of their will over others, to the extent of subjugation and exploitation and determining whether, and how, those others will continue living, and the method of their termination.

Now you are talking about justification. Justification is simply an opinion. A serial killer may be of the opinion that his killing is justified, or that for some reason it is his right. The majority opinion is very different, and in our country, the majority share the common opinion that such a person has no right to continue on in our society. The universe has no opinion one way or the other. There is no "universal standard." If there was then executions would be considered exactly as unacceptable as murder, since taking a human life is still taking a human life.

I would like to point out that I do not personally disagree with capital punishment. I have opinions too.

In a random, mindless, unguided universe, that "meaning and purpose" is no better or worse than yours. Just different. There is no standard by which to judge which is "better" or "worse", other than our own personal and subjective ones -- our own personal "declarative statements" toward them.

Humans live in societies because societies afford superior survival advantages through mutual aid. Societies decide on what standards are to be tolerated and what are not. These standards have differed rather widely over the ages. This is precisely because there is no universal standard.

It's like if you were asked how wide your front porch is. And you say "it cannot be said -- their is no yardstick, or measurement, or standard by which to determine its width. I can tell you how wide I think, believe, or feel it is -- but you may have a different standard, which is just as valid as mine, though it may be different. All we can say for sure is the front porch "is". Value determinations, even in regard to its state of repair, are relative, arbitrary, and pointless."

We have standards and they work because everyone understands and operates within them. These standards actually are arbitrary however. The measurement known as a foot was once literally the length of the king's foot. This could change from king to king however so a standard measure of a foot was adopted. But it's still arbitrary. The metre is designated to be the distance that light travels in one three hundred millionth of a second. It's a very specific length, but it's still arbitrary to use that particular length. As long as there is general agreement however it works just fine.

All I'm trying to get you to concede is that according to your view, in a universe that is not created by an infinite, sentient, intelligent being, there is no conceivable meaning
or purpose. That any we assign to it, or to us, is wholly imaginary, illusory, and subjective.

I am unlikely to agree because I disagree fundamentally. I have lived my life according to the principle of the standard of conduct known as the Golden Rule. It has practical value for coexisting with others with my society, and it covers almost all eventualities.

That is the consequence of living in a universe of mindless, random, unguided causation and processes -- the fact that we must confront, if we are to follow our curiosity to its logical conclusion, and face those facts.

This is an attempt to eliminate make believe from the equation so that only physical facts are considered and employed. Empirical evidence has a much better track record in our ongoing attempt to attain genuine knowledge than does make believe, you see.

I think that it's key to the character of our discussion that you confess that you have never confronted that bedrock reality. It is clear that you have lived in an imaginary
reality, though of a different kind than the one you accuse Christians of manufacturing -- one that is tailored to your personal preferences and desires.

Perhaps I just have a naturally sunny outlook on live. I am in no hurry for my life to end at all.

Which is okay. I understand why you would do that; we all do, to one extent or another --
but it is not true.

Your opinion.

Here's how I see it:

If God doesn't exist, then if your life is to have meaning, you have to manufacture it.

From what?

I don't even understand the question. I stopped believing in God when I was 13 years old. I have never once felt that my life has no meaning. Perhaps it only has meaning for me. But then, that's all I require.

"Once there was nothing, and then it exploded". Or there is an eternal vibrating "energy field", that occasionally gets organized for no reason, since it doesn't have a mind. Or whatever. And from that explosion, or vibration, endless random interactions of matter happened to create the illusion of design and order, where there can be none. Yada yada, molecules link up, RNA forms, and becomes DNA (whatever the fable is this week) which makes cells, which make worms, etc. etc., and finally there's you.

The universe exploded into it's current configuration. Does that mean nothing existed prior to this occuring? No, it does not.

Okay, let's tackle this subject head on. My apologies for those of you following along if this becomes somewhat lengthy, and that I am repeating some of the material I provided earlier. But this is a complicated issue. It is often said, and widely postulated to be true, that everything has a beginning. In fact this is entirely ERRONEOUS. Everything is in fact a continuation of things that went before. No discreet spontaneous beginnings are observed AT ALL. For example, none of us existed as discreet individuals prior to our conception. The material that had the potential to become us existed with our parents, just as the material that would become them existed with their parents. Every particle in our bodies, from the moment of our conception to this very moment in time has existed for billions of years, AT LEAST, in other forms.

Einstein's famous theorem E=MC^2 tells us that matter and energy are co-equivalent. Matter is simply one of the forms that energy takes. And as nuclear fission has abundantly established, the energy potential of even small amounts of matter is quite enormous. The law of conservation of energy specifically tells us that energy itself can neither be created or destroyed. If the law of conservation of energy is a valid and inviolate law of physics, which is the very purpose of describing the physical laws of nature as "laws," then every particle of our bodies has existed eternally in various forms prior to our current existence, and will continue to exist eternally in other forms after we have passed away. Everything is recycled and reused again and again, eternally. Energy takes many forms, but it's potential always remains constant. If the law of conservation of energy is correct and inviolate, then energy, which is what the universe is, can neither be created or destroyed. Based on all observation, when we consider the beginning of the observable universe as a discreetly unique collection of energy, there is absolutely no basis for supposing that the universe simply popped into being where nothing had existed before. We have ABSOLUTELY NO EXPERIENCE with such a condition. Our experience is that CAUSE ALWAYS PRECEDES EFFECT. Based on all observation and experience, we have every reason to suppose that the universe was BORN as a result of conditions which already existed. And within our own universe this pattern of ongoing change, this FRACTALIZATION, continues through the process
of the formation of black holes.

How did our universe begin? As something approximating a singularity, when matter/energy was squeezed into a point so dense that space would have nearly, at least, ceased to exist, and time would have approached, at least, infinite slowness. What happens when massive stars explode? The lightest elements are blown away and their heaviest elements are then reduced by the force of gravity into something approximating a singularity, from which not even light can escape and which then disappears from our plane of existence. Leaving only gravity for us to mark their passage. The question "Where did the energy for our universe come from" is echoed in the question, "Where did the energy in a black hole go?" The obvious answer in both cases is SOMEPLACE ELSE. A direction which is beyond the plane of our existence which we can not, as of yet at least, perceive. It IS clear however, that the energy in a black hole WAS DERIVED FROM OUR UNIVERSE. In other words, A CONDITION IN WHICH THE ENERGY EXISTED PRIOR TO THE FORMATION OF THE BLACK HOLE. This and the law of conservation of energy implies, at least, that the energy of our universe existed in a condition prior to the big bang. And this of course implies a multi-verse.

It is observed that the centers of most large galaxies glow brightly in x-rays. The explanation for this is that super massive black holes reside at the centers of most large galaxies, and they are accreting material from stars which are within their gravitational reach. As this material falls into the black hole it heats up, causing x-rays. The center of our Milky Way galaxy is an exception. It does not shine in x-rays. The Milky Way galaxy is spinning far too fast for there NOT to be a super massive black hole at it's center however. The inference here is that the super massive black hole at the center of our galaxy has already devoured all of the material within it's gravitational reach. But the point is, it is very possible for a black hole to continue gathering energy FROM OUTSIDE OF ITSELF. It is not creating energy, but acquiring energy which already exists. The law of conservation of energy is in no way violated by this.

According to observation based on the Doppler Effect, our universe is rapidly expanding. The galaxies farthest way from us seem to be receding from us at the speed of light in fact, an observation which seems to confound reason. Because, given the amount of matter that we CAN see, the expansion of the universe should be slowing due to the effects of gravity.

The explanation for this apparent expansion is that there must be some mysterious unseen force, a force termed "dark energy," which is the cause of this expansion. It's as if the universe were gaining energy which WOULD violate the law of conservation of energy. Unless of course this energy already existed. It's as though energy exists outside of the universe, and the universe is tapping into it. Again, this is another implication of a multiverse. A vast cosmos of universes made of energy which we cannot, as yet, observe. Black holes accreting energy from outside of themselves MAY be the clue to conditions that we are observing in our own universe. Just perhaps, the interior of our own black hole we call the universe.

But you see, these are possibilities. Science deals in facts that can be quantified, like the law of conservation of energy, and then reflects on the possibilities of these discoveries. The polar opposite of religion, which declares "God did it, I believe it, and that settles it!" In science nothing is settled and inquiry continues. In religion everything is settled, and the door to inquiry is closed.

If the multiverse is true, How many infinite possibilities of universes have been realized and will yet be realized, each with it's own set of parameters, given that energy is INFINITE IN DURATION? There is no answer to this of course, because infinity has no number. And within this range of infinite possibility, what are the chances that a just right bowl of porridge which allows for a universe which further allows for our sort of existence, will be produced? Given that we are dealing with infinity, the answer is SOMETHING APPROACHING 100%. The driving force behind this process seems to derive from quantum mechanics. Believers choose to call the process God, because this allows them to feel safe and secure in the belief that their existence is the result of some cosmic plan. Science simply calls it quantum mechanics however. Something to be studied and understood, but not worshiped.

But your mind is just an illusion of ordered processes, according to what you say you believe. You may think you're making decisions, and choosing the meaning and purpose of your life, but in reality you're just doing what interactions of matter dictate you do in your unique environment, at a particular junction in time.

I have some freedom of control over my life, but it is also limited to the things that I am physically able to accomplish and the nature of my environment. Even when I make a decision that seems to be the most likely one to further my best interests, I still have to hope for the best. Well considered decisions have the best chance of turning out well.

But, as they say, there are no guarantees in life.

Because there is nothing but matter. Remember?

So.

Here are the courses of action available to you.

You can accept what I've just written; and that there is, and can be, no real meaning or purpose to life, and try to make the best of it -- it'll be over in a few decades anyway,

what's the diff? Or you can make the "worst" of it, and become one of those sociopathic monsters whose only goal is to experience maximum pleasure -- or just maximum, period --

everything and everybody else be damned. Or just say "screw it", and put a pistol in your mouth --

I have never accepted or considered doing any of the things you suggest before, and see no reason to begin now. I don't see make believe providing any answer either though, I must tell you. Let me say this. The material contained in my body is made of the very same stuff that makes up the universe. In every way I AM the universe...I am the universe attempting to contemplate itself. Why would I ever need any more reason then that to enjoy my sentient consciousness? This understanding has always given me purpose.

Or you can become a mystic, and say "there is a meaning and purpose, we just don't know what or why or how it is (yet)..."

I have never had any mystical inclinations at all, and your declarations that I have little choice leaves me unmoved in that direction.

Or you can be so vague and sentimental and provincial in your outlook that you just sort of make up your own little "meaning and purpose", so to speak. But mainly, just try to stay busy enough that it's not an issue. Which is very easy to do. And, like the first choice -- it'll all be over in a few decades, anyway. And you begin to realize, as you accumulate them -- those decades start to fly, after the first 2 or 3... Wink

Choice #3 is a very prevalent, and popular one. So is choice #2. #1, I submit, is a little stark for most peoples's taste: and tends to produce either monsters or suicides.

And yet none of this pertains to or describes me in any way.

Now, if I may, I would like to present an alternate view:

If Christianity is true, then the universe is the product of the creative act of an eternal, uncreated Mind-force and Intelligence, that is the wellspring of all existence.

That Mind-force -- known to the ancient Hebrews as YHWH, and to us as "God" -- exists outside of our time domain; is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent; and expresses His infinite intelligence and artistry in the stunningly beautiful and orchestrated universe He invented -- including the biosphere of one privileged planet, which he fashioned as an environment for the one creature He made "in His image" -- the only creature that has free will. Man.

Since He is the Creator of our dimensional reality, He makes the rules. And if He says He is "good", then He's "good". And whatever He calls "good" is "good"; and what He calls "bad" is "bad". No matter what we think about those judgments.

We'd have a real problem then, if He called injustice and deceit and treachery and lying and murder "good"; and sex and ice cream and the love of a mother for her children "bad".

Because then our Creator would be a cosmic fiend.

But He's not.

In fact, He demonstrated to us what "good" is, in terms we can understand, by becoming one of us, and living a life of perfect "goodness". A life that was recorded, and the account of which has spread to all nations, in all languages.

I'm sorry but the force doesn't work on everyone. I am exquisitely aware of Christian beliefs and Christian claims. But as I pointed out, they stopped having any meaning for me when I was 13 years old. I haven't missed them because I haven't needed them. Try to understand that I passed through and beyond Christianity years ago.

So we know He is "good".

"Good" is just another opinion. It's a description of that set of things that most satisfy our wants and needs, including our emotional needs. I certainly have my own set of opinions on what I consider to be "good," and my set may well overlap your set to a degree of 99%. But it's still opinion. You believe that your God is "good." And yet your own holy scripture tells us that God ordered thousands of helpless women, children and babies to be hacked to death with swords. This in no way qualifies as "good" in my opinion. You may well believe that this was necessary according to the Will of God. But I have an entirely different opinion on the entire matter, and it is my firm opinion that any truly moral person should reasonably be outraged by these stories. I would be outraged at God if I even for a moment suspected that such a Being actually exists. I am outraged at the people who are reported in the Bible to to have committed these outrages. I would be even more outraged if I had any real reason to suppose that the story is true, which it could very well be. But I am [B[INTENSELY OUTRAGED[/B] at anyone today who would seek to justify such heinous behavior as God's right. I am as outraged at such an opinion as I am outraged at those who fly airliners into buildings, or strap high explosives to themselves and kill as many unsuspecting men women and children as they can because they are little better than mindless sheep who have been convinced by their religious leaders that God demands this sort of slaughter. Those who can find it in themselves to justify Numbers 31:15-18, Joshua 6:20-21, Ezekiel 9:4-7, are little better than mindless sheep and terrorists in waiting, IN MY OPINION. Couple this with the hideous end of times death wish that Christians so furiously espouse, with the pure foolishness of many of the other claims contained in their holy scripture; "The Night of the Living Dead Story"(Matt.27:52-53), "The Day the Earth Stood Still" yarn (Joshua 10:12-13), along with the whole flying reanimated corpse of Jesus story, and you have just the barest tip of the iceberg concerning why I walked away from Christianity at the tender age of 13. Yet I was not angry with anyone, although if I had even the slightest inkling that any of it was actually true I might have been.

And we know that He has gifted us with many "good" things. such as a measure of intelligence, in the "image" of the intelligence that He has. We have used that intelligence to produce science and technology.

And because of that, we now understand that we live in a limited, bounded, temporary dimensional environment -- which is precisely what God has been telling us in His message system to us, for 4000 years.

And we know, from that message system, that once we leave this 4D, temporal dimensionality, we can enter into His eternal one, which is unbounded spatially, and outside of time. And that we will be adopted joint heirs with His Son, Jesus Christ, and share the same manner and mode and quality of existence that He has.

And while we don't know what that fully entails, from our side of the divide between the temporary and the eternal --

We know it's "good". Really, really good. Beyond our imagining good. Beyond ANYTHING we know of in this present world good.

Therefore, my friend -- the meaning and purpose in acquiring that mode of existence is an eternality of GOOD.

The meaning and purpose of existence in a godless, random universe is nothing.

It follows that the meaning and purpose that an infinite (Christian) life has, that a finite (atheist) one doesn't?

Is total.

It is EVERYTHING.

I believe that is the reality, and the choice, that each of us is faced with.

Preach on preacher. I understand every word you said here, but it has about as much effect on me as if it came from a Voodoo priest chanting spells and incantations.

[Inigo Montoya]

That was an enjoyable read.

It's a hell of a lot of words to convey "I don't understand how X can be explained presently, therefore God," but I liked the filler commentary a great deal.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

That was an enjoyable read.

It's a hell of a lot of words to convey "I don't understand how X can be explained presently, therefore God," but I liked the filler commentary a great deal.

Elijah John seems to disagree with you on your assessment of that post. In fact, he seemed greatly perturbed by it.

[Inigo Montoya]

Link?

Not sure what thread this originally occurred in

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Link?

Not sure what thread this originally occurred in

It was originally in the "If all you knew about Jesus" string.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... c&start=30

And a nasty little quarrel broke out.