Something can't come from nothing

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Something can't come from nothing

Post #1

Post by nobspeople »

Recently I saw someone elsewhere make the comment, in regards to how 'the universe came to be', that you can't get something (the universe as it is today) from nothing (from before the universe existed), only to go on and say something similar to 'god is the beginning and the end', in reference to creating the universe.
I found it hypocritical to say one believes 'something can't come from nothing' and, at the same time, say 'god created the universe', appearing to mean god was here before anything and thus, came from nothing (as the person making this statement seemed to believe god was here before anything else - seemingly 'coming from nothing').

For discussion:
Where did god come from?
How can god 'come from nothing' but not anything else?
For those that claim 'god has always existed': how? And how can one make such a claim without understanding 'always' and 'eternity', as those aren't concepts humanity can understand fully, in regards to any deity, with their limited minds?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #101

Post by Goat »

Athetotheist wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 7:42 pm
Goat wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 12:41 am
bjs1 wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 11:06 am [Replying to nobspeople in post #1]

If I understand it correctly, the argument is that something cannot come from nothing within the natural world. Therefore, there must exist Something outside of time and space which is not subject to natural laws and capable of creating something from nothing. The title we give to this creative Something that is outside of time and space is “God.”
One thing about the concept of 'nothing' is that the physicists concept of 'nothing' is not the same as the philosophers concept of nothing.

What are the properties of nothing? If nothing exists, then nothing has no properties, and anything can happen.
The definition used by philosophers is accurate. Materialists commit a fallacy of equivocation when they change it.

If nothing exists, then one of the properties lacking is existence; therefore, nothing can happen.
What evidence do you have that the philosophers are right on this? Do you have any objective and tangible evidence? Can you even define what the properties of 'nothing' are? How do you know that the philosophizers are right, and the 'materialists' are wrong? How do you know that 'nothing can happen' if nothing exists?

In fact, the statement 'Nothing exists' is self contradictory , since if it is exists, then it is something, and therefore is not nothing.
Last edited by Goat on Wed Mar 09, 2022 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
Diagoras
Guru
Posts: 1392
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
Has thanked: 170 times
Been thanked: 579 times

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #102

Post by Diagoras »

Athetotheist wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 7:57 pm Whether the universe had a beginning or not, the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it.
Equally, the logical impossibility of the universe* having 'a source beyond it' suggests that we simply don't have the answers.

* - "all existing matter and space"

User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #103

Post by Diogenes »

Goat wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 8:48 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 7:42 pm
Goat wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 12:41 am
bjs1 wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 11:06 am [Replying to nobspeople in post #1]

If I understand it correctly, the argument is that something cannot come from nothing within the natural world. Therefore, there must exist Something outside of time and space which is not subject to natural laws and capable of creating something from nothing. The title we give to this creative Something that is outside of time and space is “God.”
One thing about the concept of 'nothing' is that the physicists concept of 'nothing' is not the same as the philosophers concept of nothing.

What are the properties of nothing? If nothing exists, then nothing has no properties, and anything can happen.
The definition used by philosophers is accurate. Materialists commit a fallacy of equivocation when they change it.

If nothing exists, then one of the properties lacking is existence; therefore, nothing can happen.
What evidence do you have that the philosphers are right on this? Do you have any objective and tangible evidence? Can you even define what the properties of 'nothing' are?
This is an intriguing issue. I'd never thought about it until Krauss mentions it in "A Universe from Nothing." I had always thought of 'nothing' from a philosophical POV, an absolute absence of anything. But, as I recall, Krauss talks about 'nothing' as containing all sorts of unformed, chaotic 'stuff' priming with potential... 'something.' I found this,
Whether it’s a hole in the ground or the vast swathes of space between celestial bodies, these “empty” spaces are filled with something that has physical properties. That vacuum is not nothing, at least as far as Carroll and his contemporaries are concerned.

But that’s only one way of understanding this problem. The other is even more mind-bending: the absence of space-time altogether, “empty” or otherwise.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/vbk5va/what-is-nothing
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 13970
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 904 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #104

Post by William »

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #98]
Then the claimant should be able to show the universe was created, without invoking some entity that's immune to the requirement of having been created itself.

Why do you think that is even a logical request to be demanding? The 'claim' as far as this thread subject is addressing is more a simple logical observation. Something which came into existence, cannot have logically done so from nothing.
To believe that it did, is really where the special pleading is coming from.
I contend my argument stands to logic, where folks claim the universe was created, they should be able to show it was.
That is actually illogical Mr.Knothead. for two reasons;

1: The idea that the universe popped out of nowhere is special pleading
2: The logical observation that the universe must have being made out of something must imply it was set into motion by something else. "Created".

Logically, the universes existence is the very thing which should show one that the universe was created.
Unless you can prove that the universe has always existed, I have no choice but to accept your argument as unsupported opinion, of the special pleading variety.
To kick that off;
Re: your statement "This raises the question of wherefrom comes the creator."
Q: Why does something which has not been shown to have had a beginning, have to be assumed it ever had one?
It disregards the universe existing in a prior form.
No it does not.
It is possible that the universe has always existed in this manner, but does not assume that the shape that it takes in its manifestation is simply a mindless process, rather than a mindful purposeful reinvention of itself from the one state to the next - and has been happening like that eternally as in - it has always existed as something which begins and ends and begins again ad infinitum essentially meaning that it has never begun or ended at all. All along, mindfully creating itself into whatever it wills to.
Bonus question ;
Re the thread topic;
Q: Why should Creatio ex nihilo be accepted as something other than special pleading?
I don't think it should. Where one proposes a god's involvement, they should be expected show that's what happened.
Well at least we agree on that.
The Tanager claims that a God created the universe from nothing...he is not the only theist to makes such a claim.
But just as interestingly, there are also a number on non-theists who also believe that the universe had a beginning and that it popped into existence from nowhere.

The only minor difference between the two similar belief systems is that the theist who believes in this, claims a "God" made it magically happen, whereas the non-theist who believes in this, claims that it just magically happened.
But like I said, they both believe that it - an obvious something - came from nothing.

aka. Special Pleading by both parties.

Logically The Mind/consciousness/self awareness is therefore that which shapes the matter which we call "The Universe" - and anyone who does not think that the universe has a mind, is not paying attention to the one piece of evidence which indisputably shows that mind and matter interrelate as The Ghost and The Machine.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 13970
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 904 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #105

Post by William »

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #99]
Whether the universe had a beginning or not, the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it.
That is not even logical.

Lets break your statement down to show why.

1: "Whether the universe had a beginning or not" tells us that if it has always existed , then the second part of your statement,
2: "the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it."

becomes illogical because IF indeed the universe had no beginning, THEN there is no 'source to its existence" and therefore cannot suggest that there is "a source behind it".

Re - the unfolding of its present manifestation - it would be the source of its own intelligence - since obviously intelligence is involved.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 13970
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 904 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #106

Post by William »

Diagoras wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 9:16 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 7:57 pm Whether the universe had a beginning or not, the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it.
Equally, the logical impossibility of the universe* having 'a source beyond it' suggests that we simply don't have the answers.
By examining the answers we do have, we cannot say that the universe is not currently mindfully unfolding itself and is therefore the cause of its own -current - manifestation.


* - "all existing matter and space"
lets also include mind with that - since mind is demonstrably involved with the matter and space...

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2672
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #107

Post by Athetotheist »

Miles wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 8:12 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 7:57 pm Whether the universe had a beginning or not, the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it.
How about a conversion from one state of existence into another, like electromagnetism where an existing electrical state is converted into a magnetic field?


.
If electromagnetism and a magnetic field are both part of the universe, neither can be the source of the universe.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2672
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #108

Post by Athetotheist »

William wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 9:43 pm [Replying to Athetotheist in post #99]
Whether the universe had a beginning or not, the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it.
That is not even logical.

Lets break your statement down to show why.

1: "Whether the universe had a beginning or not" tells us that if it has always existed , then the second part of your statement,
2: "the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it."

becomes illogical because IF indeed the universe had no beginning, THEN there is no 'source to its existence" and therefore cannot suggest that there is "a source behind it".

Re - the unfolding of its present manifestation - it would be the source of its own intelligence - since obviously intelligence is involved.
Think of a universe with no beginning as an eternally running spring of water. Even though the spring has been running eternally, the "water" is coming from something.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #109

Post by JoeyKnothead »

William wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 9:26 pm [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #98]
Then the claimant should be able to show the universe was created, without invoking some entity that's immune to the requirement of having been created itself.
Why do you think that is even a logical request to be demanding?
Site rules indicate claims are open to challenge, no matter how many claimants refuse to honor those rules.
The 'claim' as far as this thread subject is addressing is more a simple logical observation. Something which came into existence, cannot have logically done so from nothing.
To believe that it did, is really where the special pleading is coming from.
So the claimant is expected to show this aledgedly "created" universe came into existence, as opposed to having always existed, as they'd propose for their "creator" god.
JK wrote:I contend my argument stands to logic, where folks claim the universe was created, they should be able to show it was.
That is actually illogical Mr.Knothead. for two reasons;

1: The idea that the universe popped out of nowhere is special pleading
As folks propose their God "popped out of nowhere"?

As previously stated, I make no claims regarding how the universe "came to be" other'n there it sits.

I'll not be expected to proffer support for claims I don't make. I ain't doing me no special pleading.

To propose a god poofed" the universe into existence is a claim with no valid evidence in support.
2: The logical observation that the universe must have being made out of something must imply it was set into motion by something else. "Created".
So I ask how'd this "creator" get created.
Logically, the universes existence is the very thing which should show one that the universe was created.
No, the most logical conclusion is there it sits. We have no means of knowing if it existed in a prior form.
Unless you can prove that the universe has always existed, I have no choice but to accept your argument as unsupported opinion, of the special pleading variety.
I NEVER claimed the universe always existed, so hold no obligation to defend that position.

Unlike the theist who'd claim their creator God always existed.
William wrote: To kick that off;
Re: your statement "This raises the question of wherefrom comes the creator."
Q: Why does something which has not been shown to have had a beginning, have to be assumed it ever had one?
JK wrote:It disregards the universe existing in a prior form.
No it does not.
It is possible that the universe has always existed in this manner, but does not assume that the shape that it takes in its manifestation is simply a mindless process, rather than a mindful purposeful reinvention of itself from the one state to the next - and has been happening like that eternally as in - it has always existed as something which begins and ends and begins again ad infinitum essentially meaning that it has never begun or ended at all. All along, mindfully creating itself into whatever it wills to.
So I ask what evidence can be brought to bear to show there's some cosmic mind involved?

Bonus question ;
Re the thread topic;
Q: Why should Creatio ex nihilo be accepted as something other than special pleading?
William wrote:
JK wrote:I don't think it should. Where one proposes a god's involvement, they should be expected show that's what happened.
Well at least we agree on that.
The Tanager claims that a God created the universe from nothing...he is not the only theist to makes such a claim.
But just as interestingly, there are also a number on non-theists who also believe that the universe had a beginning and that it popped into existence from nowhere.
That's on them, not me.
William wrote: The only minor difference between the two similar belief systems is that the theist who believes in this, claims a "God" made it magically happen, whereas the non-theist who believes in this, claims that it just magically happened.
But like I said, they both believe that it - an obvious something - came from nothing.

aka. Special Pleading by both parties.
That too, is on them. I won't be beholden to support claims I don't make.
William wrote: Logically The Mind/consciousness/self awareness is therefore that which shapes the matter which we call "The Universe" - and anyone who does not think that the universe has a mind, is not paying attention to the one piece of evidence which indisputably shows that mind and matter interrelate as The Ghost and The Machine.
So now you're saying I'm not paying attention, as if this entire exchange between us has been you carrying on with the typing, and me just sitting here coloring on the walls?

I have been paying attention.

That's why I don't make claims regarding how the universe came to be.

It's why I don't make claims of some celestial, universe spanning mindform/s.


I pay me just enough attention until a claimant bores me with unsupported, illogical, irrational claims.

Only then do I do my wall coloring.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: Something can't come from nothing

Post #110

Post by JoeyKnothead »

Athetotheist wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 7:57 pm Whether the universe had a beginning or not, the logical impossibility of the universe being the source of its own existence suggests a source beyond it.
Tell that to the god squad.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

Post Reply