Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If you believe in god, you have to believe in leprechauns.
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1399 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 136 of 150 (166892)
12-10-2004 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by The Dread Dormammu
12-10-2004 5:52 AM


Re: Actually I disagree
[begin butt in]
Isn't this just pushing cause into some other place? So the cause isn't in OUR universe, it's in the multi-verse... you're still talking all about causality. In other words, you haven't shown that anything exists without a cause, you've just argued that the cause of our universe may lie somewhere else.
So I don't think your point is a valid one, unless you can argue something about the multiverse being a place where 'causeless' things happen. And as it stands, you state that you think that the multiverse is a causal place.
I think quantum mechanics is the best place to argue for causeless events, but ... well, I'll leave it at that.
[end butt in]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by The Dread Dormammu, posted 12-10-2004 5:52 AM The Dread Dormammu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 11:07 AM Ben! has not replied
 Message 146 by The Dread Dormammu, posted 12-10-2004 6:43 PM Ben! has not replied

Taqless
Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 285
From: AZ
Joined: 12-18-2003


Message 137 of 150 (166941)
12-10-2004 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by robinrohan
12-10-2004 1:43 AM


Re: Which cause & effect?
The First Cause is X.
You cannot establish a "First Cause". The assumption you make here is that time is linear i.e. a beginning and an end. Where is your support for this?
X does not exist in space and time.
Which "space" and which "time"? You are using arbitrary definitions.
X has always existed.
This is an assertion...if something/someone exists outside of space and time, how does that allow you to use this definition of existence?
That's the only qualities we can assign to X.
You can't even apply this further.
Not that I want to lend credence, but how does this prevent this entire event from being caused by a leprechaun...I mean call it whatever you want. As Mike says you have disproven nothing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 1:43 AM robinrohan has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 138 of 150 (166942)
12-10-2004 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Ben!
12-10-2004 6:02 AM


Re: Actually I disagree
I think he was claiming by introducing the multiverse that there is no reason to suppose that the multiverse has not existed forever and that therefore there is not need for a First Cause.
What evidence is there for a multiverse?
What evidence is there for the Big Bang? Quite a bit, I think.
Is there more evidence for the Big Bang than for a multiverse?
I assume so.
However:
"2. Unprovability is an absolute quality. I.e. one thing cannot be more or less unprovable then another."
How are we supposed to know if something is "unprovable" or not?
I guess you mean, (1)unprovable unless some new evidence turns up any minute now?
Or do you mean, (2)that the existence (or non-existence)of X is unprovable in a logically necessary way, and therefore absolutely unprovable--in other words, that there can be no possible evidence in our wildest imaginations that would prove that X existed or did not exist?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Ben!, posted 12-10-2004 6:02 AM Ben! has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by mikehager, posted 12-10-2004 4:17 PM robinrohan has replied

1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 139 of 150 (166948)
12-10-2004 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by robinrohan
12-10-2004 1:43 AM


Re: Which cause & effect?
robinrohan writes:
The First Cause is X.
X does not exist in space time
X has always existed.
Thats's the only qualities we can assign to X.
Let's replace X with the word Universe.
First Cause is the Universe.
The Universe does not exist in space time
The Universe has always exsited.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 1:43 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 1:05 PM 1.61803 has replied
 Message 141 by Taqless, posted 12-10-2004 3:32 PM 1.61803 has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 150 (166964)
12-10-2004 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by 1.61803
12-10-2004 11:32 AM


Re: Which cause & effect?
Could you explain in what sense the universe does not exist in space/time and in what sense it has existed forever?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by 1.61803, posted 12-10-2004 11:32 AM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by coffee_addict, posted 12-10-2004 3:38 PM robinrohan has not replied
 Message 148 by 1.61803, posted 12-12-2004 1:06 AM robinrohan has not replied

Taqless
Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 285
From: AZ
Joined: 12-18-2003


Message 141 of 150 (166993)
12-10-2004 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by 1.61803
12-10-2004 11:32 AM


Re: Which cause & effect?
Well, that was more concise than my reply.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by 1.61803, posted 12-10-2004 11:32 AM 1.61803 has not replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 142 of 150 (166996)
12-10-2004 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by robinrohan
12-10-2004 1:05 PM


Re: Which cause & effect?
I don't know what 1.61803 meant when he said that, but my thought on this is this. According to the string theory, the universe exists in at least 11 dimensions. Space/time is only 4 dimensions.

Hate world.
Revenge soon!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 1:05 PM robinrohan has not replied

mikehager
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 534
Joined: 09-02-2004


Message 143 of 150 (167004)
12-10-2004 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by robinrohan
12-10-2004 11:07 AM


Re: Actually I disagree
What evidence is there for a multiverse?
What evidence is their for a god of some kind? I am unsure about the multiverse thing, but I know how much real evidence there is for a god. None. Next?
By unprovable I mean your second suggestion. You know, like an infinitely powerful and knowledgable god. Want to hear why?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 11:07 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 5:24 PM mikehager has not replied
 Message 145 by dpardo, posted 12-10-2004 5:52 PM mikehager has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 144 of 150 (167031)
12-10-2004 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by mikehager
12-10-2004 4:17 PM


Re: Actually I disagree
Let's have it. Just don't do any special pleading or beg any questions or try an "argument from ignorance."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by mikehager, posted 12-10-2004 4:17 PM mikehager has not replied

dpardo
Inactive Member


Message 145 of 150 (167040)
12-10-2004 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by mikehager
12-10-2004 4:17 PM


Mikehager writes:
You know, like an infinitely powerful and knowledgable god.
What do you mean by infinitely powerful and knowledgeable?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by mikehager, posted 12-10-2004 4:17 PM mikehager has not replied

The Dread Dormammu
Inactive Member


Message 146 of 150 (167047)
12-10-2004 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Ben!
12-10-2004 6:02 AM


Problems
Isn't this just pushing cause into some other place? So the cause isn't in OUR universe, it's in the multi-verse... you're still talking all about causality. In other words, you haven't shown that anything exists without a cause, you've just argued that the cause of our universe may lie somewhere else.
Right that was all I wanted to do. I do not claim to know what the "first cause" was perhaps the first effect happend without a cause or perhaps there was no first cause at all and the multiverese is eternal. I have no idea.
I just wished to point out that though everything in our universe started with the big bang, the big bang was NOT nessesaraly the first event.
I have basicly 2 major problems with the assertion that God is the only thing that could have caused the big bang.
1) The big bang may have had a materialistic cause in a larger multiverse.
2) Not event has to have a cause. If you claime that some things don't have causes (like god) then why can't other things also not have causes. The argument that "god is not an effect" doesn't make sense to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Ben!, posted 12-10-2004 6:02 AM Ben! has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 147 of 150 (167057)
12-10-2004 8:03 PM


I am curious as to the application of cause and effect as concerns the big bang.
If the effect of first cause is the universe itself does this not mean that all subsequent events are therefore determined by that first cause since the universe is the given result of it?
If not, then any effects that occur after the first cause are necessarily not a result or effect of the first cause and constitute something seperate from that first cause within the universe.
This appears to me to be paradoxical.One is also drawn to wonder what is meant by first cause.How can it organize the given effect of the universe without previous effects occuring?

"A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death."-

1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 148 of 150 (167299)
12-12-2004 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by robinrohan
12-10-2004 1:05 PM


Re: Which cause & effect?
space/time is a phenomenon that occurred at t=

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 1:05 PM robinrohan has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 149 of 150 (167319)
12-12-2004 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by mikehager
12-02-2004 3:12 PM


Runaway Topic! Stop that Train!
Ahhhh. This topic is running amok! Here is mikehagars original statement:
It is my contention that accepting the existence of a deity logically forces the believer, if they are consistent, to also believe in myriad other fanciful imaginings.
We can either stick with tried and true provable concepts,
we can speculate on scientific theories that are as yet theoretical, or, as Mike suggests, we can accept the fanciful world of the supernatural.
Has everyone made their points? Is there anything that you wanted to continue with, Mike? The ball is again in your court.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by mikehager, posted 12-02-2004 3:12 PM mikehager has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by mikehager, posted 12-12-2004 11:24 AM Phat has not replied

mikehager
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 534
Joined: 09-02-2004


Message 150 of 150 (167366)
12-12-2004 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Phat
12-12-2004 5:43 AM


Re: Runaway Topic! Stop that Train!
It did get pretty far afield. Also, I fear that I may have missed a lot in the middle as well as leaving a challenge unanswered. As to that, I must plead the distractions of work and such and apologize.
As to the runaway-ness of this thread, I agree. Close 'er down, unless someone else objects.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Phat, posted 12-12-2004 5:43 AM Phat has 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