If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[Cypress]

The opinion that "it's not an adequate explanation" or "I can't explain" has been the basis for many creating gods for millenia.

Good, now you're saying you have absolutely no logical way to explain the rationality and mathmatical intelligibility of the universe, and all you can do is make wild guesses just like the theists.

The theists - at least the smart ones - actually have decent abductive logical reasoning to infer a higher rational agency or entity, based on observable facts of the universe and historical testimony.

You're saying your best argument is to just throw your hands up and blurt out:"It is what it is! That's just the way things are!"

 

[ZenMode]

"It is what it is! That's just the way things are!"

Yes. There's no need to invoke extraterrestrial beings because we are baffled by something.

 

[Cypress]

Yes. There's no need to invoke extraterrestrial beings because we are baffled by something.

You haven't explained how something can come from nothing, how the rational can come from the irrational, how lawful order can come from random chance.

Your belief in miracles are at least as extraordinary as the theists.

I realize you would like to sweep these uncomfortable questions under the rug, but that's a cop out.

Every human makes decisions based on incomplete information, and there's no reason we can't do that here

Logically there are still least four possibilities to explain the cause of a mathematically rational, lawfully organized, finely tuned universe. It's up to the intelligent person to infer through reasoning what the best explanation among these choices is.

1. The universal parameters were designed by an external rational agency to allow for atomic complexity, organization, and life.​

​

2. We will discover that for one reason or another, the laws of physics just dictate the parameters can not be any other way.​

​

3. It was just an accident. The universal constants could have been something different, but they're just not.​

​

4. There was a selection event, and we just happen to live in a part of a larger multiverse where the physical constants allow us to live.​

 

[ZenMode]

You haven't explained how something can come from nothing,

I don't believe something came from nothing.

how the rational can come from the irrational, how lawful order can come from random chance.

Your belief in miracles are at least as extraordinary as the theists.

Not being able to explain something doesn't mean a miracle occurred.

I realize you would like to sweep these uncomfortable questions under the rug, but that's a cop out.

Acknowledging that I don't know something, and science has yet to explain it, isn't a cop out. What's silly is invoking extraterrestrial beings because you're so desperate to explain something.

Every human makes decisions based on incomplete information, and there's no reason we can't do that here

Agree.

Logically there are still least four possibilities to explain the cause of a mathematically rational, lawfully organized, finely tuned universe.

Finely tuned is your opinion.

It's up to the intelligent person to infer through reasoning what the best explanation among these choices is.

1. The universal parameters were designed by an external rational agency to allow for atomic complexity, organization, and life.​

​

2. We will discover that for one reason or another, the laws of physics just dictate the parameters can not be any other way.​

​

3. It was just an accident. The universal constants could have been something different, but they're just not.​

​

4. There was a selection event, and we just happen to live in a part of a larger multiverse where the physical constants allow us to live.​

Ok.

 

[gmark77]

"You haven't explained how something can come from nothing, how the rational can come from the irrational, how lawful order can come from random chance."

^^^this doesn't sound like someone who is honestly agnostic.

 

[Monad Portal]

Good, now you're saying you have absolutely no logical way to explain the rationality and mathmatical intelligibility of the universe, and all you can do is make wild guesses just like the theists.

The theists - at least the smart ones - actually have decent abductive logical reasoning to infer a higher rational agency or entity, based on observable facts of the universe and historical testimony.

You're saying your best argument is to just throw your hands up and blurt out:"It is what it is! That's just the way things are!"

it doesn't need to be explained.

 

[Into the Night]

Second chance...
Then link to it, provide the post # or admit you're a liar.

RQAA. DON'T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS!

 

[Into the Night]

Explain why would matter, spacetime, and energy conform to precise, lawful mathematical rules, and what would cause them to do so.

The Universe is unorganized. The matter in it is unorganized. Energy in the Universe is a maximum entropy. The Universe is not mathematics. Redefinition fallacy.

Why wouldn't all of physical reality just be chaotic, unlawful, and unpredictable, which is exactly what you might expect if all of nature just popped into existence by pure random chance and irrational, inanimate physical causes?

The Universe IS unorganized. It is not a 'prediction'. Here you note the paradox of the Theory of the Big Bang, which is not a theory of science. It's a religion.

Einstein famously thought that the intelligibility and predictability of the universe was truly mind-blowing and profoundly incomprehensible.

Einstein is dead. You don't get to speak for the dead. Omniscience fallacy. The Universe us not a prediction. The Universe is unorganized.

You're explanation for why there are mathematical rules of the universe is the equivalent of throwing your hands up in the air and blurting out: "well, that's just the way it is!". That is not an adequate explanation logically, intellectually, or philosophically.

The Universe is not mathematics. Redefinition fallacy. You are denying logic and philosophy. Buzzword fallacies.

 

[Into the Night]

You have no idea the depth of theology I have been taught, but how can I teach people at square one! That's not my mission.

Frankly, it doesn't look like you were taught much. This religion is your own.

 

[Into the Night]

I'm not,

DON'T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS!

they Assume they are Christian ,for all the wrong reasons

You are still locked in this paradox.

 

[Into the Night]

"well, that's just the way it is!".

That is just the way it is. Things are how they are and we try to explain it. That doesn't mean something designed it.

He seems to think that an unorganized Universe is somehow 'organized', or mathematics (a redefinition fallacy).

Why is H2O a life saving liquid but H2O2 toxic? I don't know, but it is.

Water can easily cause loss of life. Hydrogen peroxide is very reactive. A weak solution of it is used as hair bleach or as a sanitizing agent. Typically these uses use a 5% solution or even 3% as a disinfectant. Solutions as weak as 1% can be used to treat cuts as an antiseptic.

See the Material Safety Data Sheets for hydrogen peroxide and water.

Just more God of the gaps stuff.

No 'gap'. Buzzword fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

That's not an adequate explanation. It's a cop out. It's sweeping an uncomfortable question under the rug.

There's nothing to explain. The Universe exists. Deal with it.

No reputable scientist would say 'that's just the way it is'. That is a dereliction of scientific responsibility.

Science isn't a 'responsibility'. Science routinely assumes predicates for it's theories. Newton's theory of gravitation doesn't try to explain what causes gravity, it simply assumes it exists as a force and describes it's behavior as a uniform description over all cases.

Ninety percent of the decisions we make in life are based on incomplete information and missing data.

Yet we have to make those decisions, even if it's to become pandophobic and hole up in your room under the covers. This is called 'faith'.

A good logical inference to the best explanation is that rationality and lawful organization most likely comes from some higher rational agency.

Buzzword fallacies. Repetitious meaningless chant.
The Universe is unorganized.

I will consider that the physical universe is just a random chance occurrence caused by irrational and inanimate physical forces.... as soon as you can tell me when you have ever seen something come from nothing, the rational come from the irrational, and order spontaneously coming from chaos.

There is only one Universe. The Universe is unorganized. You are shooting down your own religion.

 

[Into the Night]

The default position on the origin of life, the universe, and everything is not atheism.

Atheism is not mindless, repetitious chants.

The default position is agnosticism.

There is no such thing as a 'default' position. Atheism is not agnosticism.

Both theism and atheism owe explanations and justifications for their belief systems.

Atheism has no religious belief. It is not a religion. It requires no explanation.

ALL religions are based on some initial circular argument, with arguments extending from that. The initial circular argument is all the explanation a religion requires. The circular argument is also known as the Argument of Faith.

It is not possible to prove any circular argument True. This creates the Circular Argument Fallacy. It's what a fundamentalist does.

BOTH of you are fundamentalists, but in different religions.

 

[Into the Night]

The opinion that "it's not an adequate explanation" or "I can't explain" has been the basis for man creating gods for millenia.

Lie. Every religion is based on explanations. Yours is no exception.

 

[Into the Night]

Good, now you're saying you have absolutely no logical way to explain the rationality and mathmatical intelligibility of the universe,

Redefinition fallacy (Universe<->logic, Universe<->mathematics, Universe<->intelligence). The Universe is unorganized. You are denying logic again.

and all you can do is make wild guesses just like the theists.

You ARE a theist. You are a fundamentalist.

The theists - at least the smart ones - actually have decent abductive logical reasoning to infer a higher rational agency or entity, based on observable facts of the universe and historical testimony.

You are denying logic again. Redefinition fallacies (Universe<->facts, Universe<->testimony, Universe<->intelligence, Universe<->agent, observation<->fact, logic<->philosophy). Buzzword fallacy (abduction, reasoning, rational, agency, fact, history).

Go learn English.

You're saying your best argument is to just throw your hands up and blurt out:"It is what it is! That's just the way things are!"

?A->A. This is basic logic. He has the Proof of Identity on his side here.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes. There's no need to invoke extraterrestrial beings because we are baffled by something.

True, but you are assuming someone is baffled. You are blaming someone else for your problem again.

 

[Into the Night]

You haven't explained how something can come from nothing,

He doesn't have to.

how the rational can come from the irrational,

Math error. Paradox. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

how lawful order can come from random chance.

He doesn't have to.

Your belief in miracles are at least as extraordinary as the theists.

Void argument fallacy. What 'miracles' are you discussing?

I realize you would like to sweep these uncomfortable questions under the rug, but that's a cop out.

Redefinition fallacy (random statements<->question).

Every human makes decisions based on incomplete information, and there's no reason we can't do that here

Repetition fallacy (chanting).

Logically there are still least four possibilities to explain the cause of a mathematically rational, lawfully organized, finely tuned universe.

Denial of logic. The Universe is not mathematics. The Universe is not organized. The Universe is not 'tuned'. Buzzword fallacy (rational, lawful).
Void predicate.

It's up to the intelligent person to infer through reasoning what the best explanation among these choices is.

Void predicate.

1. The universal parameters were designed by an external rational agency to allow for atomic complexity, organization, and life.​

The Universe is not 'parameters'. Buzzword fallacy (rational, agency, atomic complexity, organization, life). The Universe is unorganized.

2. We will discover that for one reason or another, the laws of physics just dictate the parameters can not be any other way.​

Reversal fallacy. Physics did not create the Universe. Physics is not a 'parameter'. Physics is just a branch of science. It only consists of falsifiable theories.

​

3. It was just an accident.​

The Universe simply exists. ?A->A is not an accident. It is the Proof of Identity.

The universal constants could have been something different, but they're just not.​

Reversal fallacy. Redefinition fallacies (Universe<->measurement). The purpose of any constant in physics is to convert the relation to our units of measurement. Nothing more. It is different for every unit of measurement that is used. All measurements are taken from a ground, or zero point, which we choose ourselves at are own convenience.

4. There was a selection event, and we just happen to live in a part of a larger multiverse where the physical constants allow us to live.​

There is only one Universe by definition. Nothing is 'selected'. Void argument fallacy.
Illiteracy. Use of plural for singular.

 

[Into the Night]

I don't believe something came from nothing.

Fair enough.

Not being able to explain something doesn't mean a miracle occurred.

He is not describing a miracle. He is attempting multiple redefinitions and buzzwords.

Acknowledging that I don't know something, and science has yet to explain it, isn't a cop out.

Fair enough. However, you try to conduct a negative proof fallacy with this. You cannot use this as a proof of any kind.

What's silly is invoking extraterrestrial beings because you're so desperate to explain something.

No sillier than YOUR religion.

Agree.

Finely tuned is your opinion.

Ok.

No, it's a buzzword. The Universe isn't 'tuned' in any way, much less 'finely'.

 

[Margot]

Frankly, it doesn't look like you were taught much. This religion is your own.

I'm pretty sure Passover is Judaism 101, and most Christians equate
Jesus as Passover Lamb, the Last Supper was a Passover Seder!
My religious views couldn't be more mainstream in traditional Christianity and Judaism!

 

[Margot]

DON'T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS!

You are still locked in this paradox.

I tell it like it is! (Voice of Howard Cosell)