Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
52 online now:
kjsimons, nwr, PaulK, Phat (4 members, 48 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,025 Year: 5,137/6,534 Month: 557/794 Week: 48/135 Day: 0/25 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   universe- why is it here?
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 17 of 144 (122283)
07-05-2004 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by tubi417
06-22-2004 1:18 PM


I'm not arguing for or against evolution but I don't understand why the universe could be here just because it's here.

I know this topic's old, but I couldn't help but notice it.

There's something called the 'anthropedic principle' that answers that question like so, when put in layman's:

We're here because if the conditions were any different the part of the universe we live in would either not support intelligent life that could ask such questions, or it would be able to and we'd still ask why it was like it was.

Yes, I know, that's more of a 'why WE're here' answer, and not why the universe is here; the two questions are close relatives.

If you're looking for purpose in this universe, the best place to look is closest to home until we can exchange information with other intelligent life.(assuming they exist, and if they do, assuming we ever meet.)

Personally, there are two ways that I like to look at it, you don't have to take either of them seriously.

1.(God not taken into account) The intelligent life within it will decide the purpose(of the universe). Pretty self-explaintory, and it opens up plenty of possiblilities.

2.(God taken into account) In short, God has a plan. Something really awesome. His plan could infact just be the possibility above, but it's something huge, something massive, something that beats any sci-fi space novel you could ever read!... not that a good episode of the Chapelle's Show won't do that, but you know what I mean! Personally, I believe God wants us to explore the universe and understand the laws that govern it, but I'm sure the Revalations although symbolism do forshadow an incredible battle between good and evil, and this planet's just not big enough to host something so paramount.

The first day I joined this forum(I'll never forget this), somebody quoted some airhead scientist that said, in summary:

"The universe is just too big to be just a stage for a battle between Good and Evil"

Man was that guy full of it! No amount of space could be big enough for there to not be evil, and some good to challenge it. And since disorder increases with time naturally that means intelligent life will inevitably become corrupt with time. So after all this time, you'd think we would have killed eachother off. But for some reason this 'disorder' keeps getting supressed somehow. Now if that's not something to ponder about I don't know what is; so in short I believe this universe is a stage for something huge, and who wouldn't want to be a part of something that big? And besides, too bad! They live in it .


Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by tubi417, posted 06-22-2004 1:18 PM tubi417 has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Eta_Carinae, posted 07-06-2004 12:31 AM One_Charred_Wing has taken no action
 Message 19 by coffee_addict, posted 07-06-2004 12:37 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied
 Message 28 by sidelined, posted 07-07-2004 12:45 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 25 of 144 (122428)
07-06-2004 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by coffee_addict
07-06-2004 12:37 AM


A Wrinkle In Time

S-U-C-K-E-D.

I was thinking something much bigger, by the way. A Wrinkle In Time showed the universe at the mercy of a big machine that could be beaten by talking to it. Pfft! Weak chi...


Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by coffee_addict, posted 07-06-2004 12:37 AM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by coffee_addict, posted 07-06-2004 4:41 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 27 of 144 (122486)
07-06-2004 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by coffee_addict
07-06-2004 4:41 PM


No wonder you don't like the book. The "big machine" is just a small part of a whole that is known as evil. Oh wait, did you just skim through the cliff notes?

Haven't read it since 4th Grade so a lot of details have slipped. Still, it's not my kind of book; mainly because there was way too much dawdling around before they actually got to the thing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by coffee_addict, posted 07-06-2004 4:41 PM coffee_addict has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by nator, posted 08-29-2004 10:08 AM One_Charred_Wing has taken no action

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 36 of 144 (122814)
07-07-2004 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by sidelined
07-07-2004 12:45 AM


Richard Feynman is a woozle
Yeah, I guess you are right. Richard Feynman,who, at the age of 23 was brought into work on the Los Alamos project constructing the first nuclear weapon.Working as an invaluable part of the greatest collection of intellect ever assembled while his wife lay dying in an Albequerque New Mexico hospital and keeping her spirits up by toying with the military censors through their letters to each other.
From there to teaching at Caltech and eventually to a Nobel Prize in physics in 1964. He also worked on the Commission investigating the space shuttle Challenger disaster.

I've said it to a lot of people before, and I'll be more than happy to say it again(directed at the proverbial Feynman, not you ofcourse):

NO AMOUNT OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE CAN CHANGE THE FACT THAT YOUR PHILOSOPHY IS FULL OF SHIT

and honestly, I want a bumpersticker that says that. No offense against scientists in general so PLEASE DON'T start calling me a fundie who is biased against science or anything, but what you showed me just reinforced my observations that scientists aren't philosophers...

This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 07-07-2004 07:28 PM


Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by sidelined, posted 07-07-2004 12:45 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by sidelined, posted 07-07-2004 8:44 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 38 of 144 (122827)
07-07-2004 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by sidelined
07-07-2004 8:44 PM


Re: Richard Feynman is a woozle
Good bloody thing. No real progress would ever be made otherwise.

Yeowch.

(Edited in) You do realize that I was NOT saying philosophers were better than scientists, right?

This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 07-07-2004 08:56 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by sidelined, posted 07-07-2004 8:44 PM sidelined has taken no action

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 48 of 144 (123080)
07-08-2004 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by sidelined
07-08-2004 9:15 AM


Re: Richard Feynman is a woozle
Sorry Lam I should have placed a smiley face at the end of that sentence.

Okay, I respect your opinions and I hope you respect mine, but next time could you please apologize to the person who you aimed the agressive remark at in the first place?

I do believe that science is hardly non-philisophical but that scientists do not concern themselves with the things that philosophers do.When science discovers phiosophers argue the ramifications of the discovery like tourists following the explorers.

Please don't generalize; the last sentence appeared to encompass all philosophers, not just a few. Not all philosophers are like stupid tourists.

They seldom pick up on the just how much a change of the view of the world is involved in the discovery of new knowledge.

Again, 'they' would refer to the last plural subject, which was 'all philosophers'. This is just not right.

Of course scientists are no better than phlosophers as people in their relations with the world.

I agree, no class of people are better than any other in that respect.
However, you really need to think about why we have philosophers; they're not just around to try and impede scientific progress like you're portraying them to be in your posts.

I'll do some amateur philosopher to explain my point, althought we should probably start a new thread if this discussion continues.

Knowledge, Wisdom, Wit. The three pillars of enlightenment in my opinion. Science deals with the first and only the first, and philosophy the second.

Knowledge is raw, nuetral information. It can potentially create wonderful things, like vaccine and electric cars. But it can equally well create terrible things like poision gas and atom boms. Wisdom incompasses the understanding of right and wrong, adding the 'why' to all these incredible discoveries; without it we'd have long made nuclear winter.

A little off topic, but please understand that both these people have their equally important places.

This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 07-08-2004 06:08 PM


Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by sidelined, posted 07-08-2004 9:15 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by coffee_addict, posted 07-08-2004 7:01 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied
 Message 52 by sidelined, posted 07-08-2004 8:51 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 50 of 144 (123084)
07-08-2004 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by coffee_addict
07-08-2004 7:01 PM


Re: Richard Feynman is a woozle
It is my opinion that B2P is a moron.

Please enforce your statement with concrete evidence.

By the way, I'm sorry for calling you a moron

Apology accepted, you imbecile. Oh, sorry about that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by coffee_addict, posted 07-08-2004 7:01 PM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by coffee_addict, posted 07-08-2004 7:22 PM One_Charred_Wing has taken no action

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 53 of 144 (123181)
07-09-2004 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by sidelined
07-08-2004 8:51 PM


Re: Richard Feynman is a woozle
Just to clear up something here.Are you stating that knowledge can create poison gas or atomic bombs vaccine and electric cars or are you meaning to say that the people who employ knowledge, which you state is neutral,can create terrible or wonderful things.

I wasn't specific on that, sorry. I meant people can use the knowledge to create the items mentioned.

Philosophers who engage in science work need to understand that science well enough to take a problem applicable to that science and correctly work it out before they may comment on the philisophical ramifications of the knowledge gained.

I agree completely.

(what B2P said about Feynman)is a puzzle to me as you are generalizing on his philosophy without pointing out what his philosophy is.

I pointed it out in the post that you first replied to. I realize I didn't quote him exactly, but the quote you gave me did nothing to change my opinion that the philosophical point he gave is not a good one.

I apologize to you as well for my previous statement and for using Lam as proxy to do so earlier.I had a feeling that you might tag me on that.

Apology accepted, and I'm sorry if my responses were a little cocky. I do that sometimes.


Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by sidelined, posted 07-08-2004 8:51 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by sidelined, posted 07-09-2004 8:58 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 55 of 144 (123451)
07-09-2004 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by sidelined
07-09-2004 8:58 AM


Re: Richard Feynman is a woozle
The stage is too big for the drama?

That is what I am curious about.I get the impression that you do not understand just how much space he was talking about.

Please, I know you're not trying to insult my intelligence, but I understand just how big the universe is. From this, I get the impression that both you and Feynman just don't understand how big this all-to-real drama is.

The entire Earth is less than a drop of water in the oceans of our planet in comparison to the amount of space that is simply not being utilized by God in His drama.Much of that space is not even accesible to us and plays no part.

Hey now, just because we can't see it doesn't mean God can't. How do we know there aren't other things going on in other parts of the universe? I really doubt this 'drama' as we're calling it will all take place on earth; there's a great big universe out there and if God is any fun he'll allow us to take the battle to the next level, because divine space battles rule.


Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by sidelined, posted 07-09-2004 8:58 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by sidelined, posted 07-13-2004 8:48 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 5426 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 57 of 144 (124267)
07-13-2004 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by sidelined
07-13-2004 8:48 AM


Re: Richard Feynman is a woozle
Fighting on universal scale would be boring in the exteme.Fighting in real combat is also obviously not the ambition of a sane mind but regardless of that having to plod along at the limits of speed that are imposed on us by the universe would make a fight even within our local star system futile.

I didn't mean a literal battle. Please don't take me seriously when I say things like "divine space battles rule". I meant that we may only be a small part of a divine plan that expands throughout the universe.
But this is only speculation, so I don't think we could get a full topic going on this. And no, I don't really enjoy violence on the level of a full-scale war or anything where people get killed; my bloodlust is limited to wrestling and boxing, which are great because you get to hit people. I can't complain, and if you or anyone else are going to deny that we all have a primal desire to hurt once in awhile, then you're crazy.

P.S. He's still a woozle!


Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by sidelined, posted 07-13-2004 8:48 AM sidelined has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022