Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are religions manmade and natural or supernaturally based?
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


(1)
Message 256 of 511 (772211)
11-09-2015 7:23 PM


i haven't read the book, just the quote and kbertche's comment.
Is mischaracterizing this:
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing."
as
"Stephen Hawking claims that the law of gravity can create a universe from nothing"
worthy of consideration?
No. I wouldn't consider doing it. It's dishonest.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Admin, posted 11-09-2015 8:20 PM Omnivorous has replied
 Message 259 by kbertsche, posted 11-09-2015 10:27 PM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 257 of 511 (772212)
11-09-2015 7:28 PM


Comment
*duplicate*
Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.
Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 258 of 511 (772213)
11-09-2015 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by Omnivorous
11-09-2015 7:23 PM


Omnivorous writes:
s mischaracterizing this:
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing."
as
"Stephen Hawking claims that the law of gravity can create a universe from nothing"
worthy of consideration?
No. I wouldn't consider doing it. It's dishonest.
Your message wasn't a reply to any specific message, so in case you didn't see it let me repeat what I said in Message 255: It might have been more clear had Hawking and Mlodinow began, "Because there are laws such as gravity...". Given what Hawking and Mlodinow *did* say, Kbertsche's misinterpretation seems an honest one. Or so I rule.
If your message was intended as a reply to my Message 255, my main thought was that Kbertsche's comment about Hawking's opinion that natural laws caused the universe seemed worth commenting on. Or is there a different interpretation of what Hawking said that you had in mind?

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Omnivorous, posted 11-09-2015 7:23 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Omnivorous, posted 11-10-2015 9:50 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 259 of 511 (772214)
11-09-2015 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by Omnivorous
11-09-2015 7:23 PM


Omni writes:
i haven't read the book, just the quote and kbertche's comment.
Is mischaracterizing this:
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing."
as
"Stephen Hawking claims that the law of gravity can create a universe from nothing"
worthy of consideration?
No. I wouldn't consider doing it. It's dishonest.
Please don't get tripped up over my wording. I didn't quote Hawking exactly, and I didn't claim to do so. I paraphrased my understanding of his claim.
I think Hawking's position is clear: the law of gravity existed logically prior to the universe and caused the universe to come into existence. I think Lennox' newspaper rebuttal clarifies Hawking's position and its problems extremely well (as does his follow-on book "God and Stephen Hawking").
For the universe to begin to exist, there must be a cause of some sort which logically pre-existed the universe. The two leading options for a pre-existent cause are 1) God, and 2) natural law. But if natural law is only DEscriptive and not PREscriptive, option 2 is ruled out as a cause.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Omnivorous, posted 11-09-2015 7:23 PM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by NoNukes, posted 11-10-2015 12:34 AM kbertsche has not replied
 Message 261 by PaulK, posted 11-10-2015 12:36 AM kbertsche has not replied
 Message 266 by Pressie, posted 11-10-2015 6:28 AM kbertsche has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 260 of 511 (772215)
11-10-2015 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by kbertsche
11-09-2015 10:27 PM


For the universe to begin to exist, there must be a cause of some sort which logically pre-existed the universe. The two leading options for a pre-existent cause are 1) God, and 2) natural law. But if natural law is only DEscriptive and not PREscriptive, option 2 is ruled out as a cause.
Well, no at least to the latter idea. Descriptive simply means that what we know of how things operate is a description and not a commandment. That does not mean that absent our description things would operate differently. I'm not convinced that you are doing anything except playing with words.
Beyond all that, you are making the same assertion that was a point of dispute in at least one past discussion; i.e. that all things require a logical cause. You have not shown that to be the case and there is reason to believe that such is not the case.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by kbertsche, posted 11-09-2015 10:27 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 261 of 511 (772216)
11-10-2015 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by kbertsche
11-09-2015 10:27 PM


Even a descriptive law may be spoken of as a cause. So I would really like to see some evidence that Hawking thinks of the law of gravity as prescriptive rather than prescriptive. Some half-baked apologetics published in a low-quality newspaper hardly qualifies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by kbertsche, posted 11-09-2015 10:27 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 262 of 511 (772217)
11-10-2015 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by New Cat's Eye
11-04-2015 9:51 AM


Re: ICANT,
Hi Cat,
Cat writes:
Right, so since the Universe exists then there cannot be non-existence.
That is what you were questioning so perhaps you may now see an answer.
I would agree and have argued since my first post that there has to be existence. That existence would have to be a supernatural power that was able to supply the energy and mass required to form the universe as we see it.
Now if you want to argue the universe has always existed eternally in the past, give it your best shot.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-04-2015 9:51 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 263 of 511 (772219)
11-10-2015 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Admin
11-07-2015 7:54 AM


Re: ICANT,
Hi Admin,
Admin writes:
If it was a reasonable question for you to ask about the universe it's certainly a reasonable question to ask about God. Could you please answer the question?
But I did answer his question. He and apparently you didn't like my answer.
I stated: "If that supernatural power did not exist we would not exist."
The reason being:
According to the BBT the universe had a beginning to exist.
Einstein created a fudge factor because he believed in a static universe.
If the universe had a beginning to exist there was non existence with out a supernatural power.
Non existence would mean that two branes would not exist to bang together and create the universe.
Non existence would mean that Hartly/Hawking's instanton would not exist or have a vacuum to appear in.
Non existence would mean there would be no energy or mass to produce something.
Therefore a supernatural power would be required to exist to provide the energy and mass which go to make up the universe we see.
If there was no supernatural power to provide the energy and mass there would be no universe.
Without a universe we would not exist.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Admin, posted 11-07-2015 7:54 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Tangle, posted 11-10-2015 3:33 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 269 by Admin, posted 11-10-2015 10:28 AM ICANT has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 264 of 511 (772220)
11-10-2015 3:33 AM
Reply to: Message 263 by ICANT
11-10-2015 2:48 AM


Re: ICANT,
ICANT writes:
stated: "If that supernatural power did not exist we would not exist."
Look, you're not making a point that's difficult to understand. It just resolves to 'God did it.' Fine, we all get that. But It's been pointed out several times by several people that that just pushes the argument back a stage. So who or what caused God to exist? It's hardly an original thought, why are you not answering it?
Is God a causeless cause? If such a thing can be possible then perhaps the universe can do it itself? Perhaps the universe is god?
Let's see if you can get beyond goddidit.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by ICANT, posted 11-10-2015 2:48 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by ICANT, posted 11-10-2015 11:01 PM Tangle has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 265 of 511 (772221)
11-10-2015 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by 1.61803
11-09-2015 6:01 PM


Re: ICANT,
Hi 1.61803
1.61803 writes:
link: So as to not post bare links and equations, The proposal that things can come from uncaused causes is a idea that has, and is one of many modern theories, thoughts, dreams, guesses.
I liked the link but it seems to cling to something that has been told to me in science is not allowed.
quote:
All anyone can do is have faith that the probabilities for a circumstance work out in their favor
I thought having faith in something was not allowed in science, is my thinking wrong?
Scientist can have faith that some way something took place in non existence (nothing exists outside of the universe as it is self-contained) that produced the universe we see today.
Yet if I want to have faith in a supernatural power that could supply all the energy and mass to form our present universe I am ridiculed for such faith.
Yet I am told I should accept as fact that somehow our universe began to exist by two branes banging together or Hartley?Hawking's instanton popping into existence and creating our universe. When they had no place to exist without a Supernatural power that existed in existence where those things could take place. There is no scientific evidence to support either hypothesis. If you have some I would be interested in reading it.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by 1.61803, posted 11-09-2015 6:01 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by 1.61803, posted 11-10-2015 10:15 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 266 of 511 (772222)
11-10-2015 6:28 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by kbertsche
11-09-2015 10:27 PM


kbertsche writes:
For the universe to begin to exist, there must be a cause of some sort...
Or causes. Or not. Or the causes for the universe (if they existed then) don't exist anymore today. Or all the other millions of possibilities.
kbertsche writes:
Causes that don't which logically pre-existed the universe.
Or logically didn't survive our current Universe.
kbertsche writes:
The two leading options...
Two leading options? Trying a false dichotomy here?
kbertsche writes:
... for a pre-existent cause are 1) God, and 2) natural law.
Or lots of Gods who died in the meantime. Or lots of non-Gods who died in the meantime. After all, the BB happened billions of years ago...for a scientist the false dilemma you presented is disturbing.
kbertsche writes:
But if natural law is only DEscriptive and not PREscriptive, option 2 is ruled out as a cause.
Really? How so? I mean, nature exists today. Nature causes lots and lots of things, while any Spook or Spooks causing anything has never been observed.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by kbertsche, posted 11-09-2015 10:27 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 267 of 511 (772224)
11-10-2015 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Admin
11-09-2015 8:20 PM


Admin writes:
Given what Hawking and Mlodinow *did* say, Kbertsche's misinterpretation seems an honest one. Or so I rule.
I defer to your ruling.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Admin, posted 11-09-2015 8:20 PM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 268 of 511 (772226)
11-10-2015 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 265 by ICANT
11-10-2015 3:35 AM


Re: ICANT,
Hello ICANT,
What that sentence was referring to I believe is that because of the uncertainty principal and the strange way reality manifest, it all but impossible to predict quantum events with absolute certainty.
We have had a good many discussions on EVC about absolute knowledge and how it is futile to claim absolute knowledge.
That is why I mentioned earlier that the belief in God as far as I know gives one that Certainty.
Hence why it is so appealing.
The link is but one of thousands of points of view of people who want to know more about our cosmos and how it operates.
I myself think what a boring world it would be if humanity ever finds all the answers. And If indeed God exists;what a small god it would be if God could not construct our universe without the supernatural.

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by ICANT, posted 11-10-2015 3:35 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 269 of 511 (772227)
11-10-2015 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 263 by ICANT
11-10-2015 2:48 AM


Re: ICANT,
Hi ICANT,
Tangle raised the correct issues in his Message 264, so please respond to him, not me. I'm just going to clear up some confusion before it goes too far.
But I did answer his question. He and apparently you didn't like my answer.
I stated: "If that supernatural power did not exist we would not exist."
etc...
The question was, "Why does God exist rather than nothing at all?" Your answer is equivalent to, "A supernatural power exists because we exist," just as Straggler stated.
If the universe had a beginning to exist there was non existence with out a supernatural power.
Non existence would mean that two branes would not exist to bang together and create the universe.
Colliding branes is just one theory of the origin of the universe, but in any case, in this theoretical view other branes do not reside within our universe. Other branes can exist without our universe existing.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by ICANT, posted 11-10-2015 2:48 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by ICANT, posted 11-10-2015 11:38 PM Admin has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 270 of 511 (772228)
11-10-2015 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by kbertsche
11-09-2015 3:25 PM


Re: ICANT,
kbertsche writes:
When Stephen Hawking claims that the law of gravity can create a universe from nothing, he is ascribing prescriptive, causative power to natural law.
The position is that gravity can create a universe and the Law of Gravity describes how it does it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by kbertsche, posted 11-09-2015 3:25 PM kbertsche has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by Admin, posted 11-10-2015 11:52 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024