I'm pretty sure there's no god now

[muhammad_isa]

I'm not sure you understand what nature or "circular reasoning" means. Nature is a result of physical laws acting together in a particular state - evolution is a process that occurs in natural systems. "Where nature came from" is irrelevant with regards to how this process occurs. You're trying to obfuscate the issue because you are in danger of having your ignorance about evolution exposed.

Irrelevant is it? Where did the physical laws come from? You could call them 'natural laws', no?

No, except in a very rudimentary sense.

I thought you'd say that .. according to you, intelligence is something that is a product of a physical system. I'm sure that you'd also say that there is evidence to support that.
A computer could not work without software. Software is not a physical system. Mathematics does not 'ooze' from a piece of meat either.

Don't say God, say nature

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Irrelevant is it? Where did the physical laws come from? You could call them 'natural laws', no?

Does it matter where the physical laws came from? It's somewhat of a separate issue.

A computer could not work without software. Software is not a physical system. Mathematics does not 'ooze' from a piece of meat either.

Don't say God, say nature

What does software have to do with anything? The brain doesn't run software programs.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Irrelevant is it? Where did the physical laws come from?

We don't know yet. Why does it matter?

You could call them 'natural laws', no?

What difference would that make?

I thought you'd say that .. according to you, intelligence is something that is a product of a physical system. I'm sure that you'd also say that there is evidence to support that.
A computer could not work without software. Software is not a physical system. Mathematics does not 'ooze' from a piece of meat either.

Don't say God, say nature

Nothing you are saying even makes one lick of sense, nor does any of it have anything to do with what we were originally discussing. Are you heading towards some sort of point?

 

[muhammad_isa]

What does software have to do with anything? The brain doesn't run software programs.

How do you know that?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Nothing you are saying even makes one lick of sense, nor does any of it have anything to do with what we were originally discussing. Are you heading towards some sort of point?

You must of missed it .. the point's already been made.
You think that I'm talking nonsense, and I think that your 'natural world' philosophy does not explain where it comes from. Saying it all evolved for no reason from a few 'dumb cells' is unbelievable.
I remember when I used to meditate as a child, and often thought that everything that I was experiencing could NOT be a coincidence. The chance of that is <0.0000000000000000001%

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You must of missed it .. the point's already been made.

Where?

You think that I'm talking nonsense, and I think that your 'natural world' philosophy does not explain where it comes from.

I've never once mentioned "my philosophy", so you're just talking jibberish.

Saying it all evolved for no reason from a few 'dumb cells' is unbelievable.

I also never said that. But regardless, this is just an argument from ignorance.

I remember when I used to meditate as a child, and often thought that everything that I was experiencing could NOT be a coincidence. The chance of that is <0.0000000000000000001%

I have repeatedly asked you to explain exactly what this "coincidence" you are referring to is, and you have yet to explain it. I'm beginning to suspect that you don't actually know what a coincidence is. So I'll ask once more:

WHAT coincidence are you referring to?
HOW is it a coincidence?
WHAT are you suggesting it means?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Where?

I have repeatedly asked you to explain exactly what this "coincidence" you are referring to is, and you have yet to explain it. I'm beginning to suspect that you don't actually know what a coincidence is. So I'll ask once more:

WHAT coincidence are you referring to?
HOW is it a coincidence?
WHAT are you suggesting it means?

I said "everything that I was experiencing could NOT be a coincidence" .. that refers to my observations of the universe, the fact that I'm alive and aware of it.

You can suggest that there is nothing coincidental about it, and we 'just happen to be' for no good reason, but as I say, the chances of that is practically 0%. To claim it's a pure fluke or a process of evolution did it with no underlying reason is unbelievable.

 

[viole]

Irrelevant is it? Where did the physical laws come from? You could call them 'natural laws', no?

And where does Allah come from? I hope you are not begging the question that natural things need to come from somewhere, whilst supernatural ones are exempt from that restriction,

I thought you'd say that .. according to you, intelligence is something that is a product of a physical system. I'm sure that you'd also say that there is evidence to support that.
A computer could not work without software. Software is not a physical system. Mathematics does not 'ooze' from a piece of meat either.

Don't say God, say nature

Information is physical. You can measure a piece of SW in energy/temperature units if you want.

Ciao

- viole

 

[muhammad_isa]

And where does Allah come from? I hope you are not begging the question that natural things need to come from somewhere, whilst supernatural ones are exempt from that restriction,

I wouldn't say that I was (begging the question)..
The natural things that are being discussed such as 'the physical laws' or 'the process of evolution' are all about how this universe is observed to function.

From our scientific observations, we see that life has evolved to what it is today. It's accepted that the process of evolution needs something to evolve from.

The question of where Almighty God comes from is a different question .. He is not physical and is not part of the space-time continuum ie. the universe which He created

 

[viole]

I wouldn't say that I was (begging the question)..
The natural things that are being discussed such as 'the physical laws' or 'the process of evolution' are all about how this universe is observed to function.

And? Is there something about them that requires them to come from something else?

From our scientific observations, we see that life has evolved to what it is today. It's accepted that the process of evolution needs something to evolve from.

So, do you accept the fact that one of your ancestors was a fish, before we can start talking about abiogenesis (not part of evolution theory)?

The question of where Almighty God comes from is a different question .. He is not physical and is not part of the space-time continuum ie. the universe which He created

Which begs the question that natural things need to come from something (while supernatural ones don't) or that the Universe was created.

Ciao

- viole

 

[SkepticThinker]

..and that's what you'd expect in a creatorless universe?
Quite a coincidence isn't it, that mankind are the rulers?
I imagine you think that we evolved into 'rulers' from apes .. why's that then?
Why have no other creaatures evolved in the same way?

Mankind are the rulers now. At the moment. And only for a very short period of time, in terms of the age of the earth.

Dinosaurs used to be the rulers of the planet tens of millions of years ago. Would you consider that a coincidence too?

 

[muhammad_isa]

And? Is there something about them that requires them to come from something else?

That's what we observe, yes.

So, do you accept the fact that one of your ancestors was a fish, before we can start talking about abiogenesis (not part of evolution theory)?

No, I don't .. maybe we do come from fish, I don't care .. I highly doubt it though!

Which begs the question that natural things need to come from something (while supernatural ones don't) or that the Universe was created.

If you wish to classify Almighty God as 'supernatural', that's fine by me .. He's not part of the space-time continuum, as I say. Therefore there is no 'time' for God .. He doesn't have an 'international clock' on his wall

Most scientists think that the universe has a 'start' yes.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Dinosaurs used to be the rulers of the planet tens of millions of years ago. Would you consider that a coincidence too?

Rulers? Did they have an organised council, or something?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Rulers? Did they have an organised council, or something?

Did mankind hold some kind of organized council with all other animals to declare themselves rulers of the planet?

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Rulers? Did they have an organised council, or something?

They didn't need one. Mankind didn't have one when they became rulers either.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

How do you know that?

Software is a set of instructions for a computer to perform certain tasks. We don't have that in our brain.

 

[viole]

That's what we observe, yes.

What do we observe? That natural laws come from something? Got any pictures?

No, I don't .. maybe we do come from fish, I don't care .. I highly doubt it though!

If you do not accept that, then why do you accept anything else science says in order to make a point? You give me the impression that you filter out only what does not contradict your a-priori belief.

If you wish to classify Almighty God as 'supernatural', that's fine by me .. He's not part of the space-time continuum, as I say. Therefore there is no 'time' for God .. He doesn't have an 'international clock' on his wall

Most scientists think that the universe has a 'start' yes.

Does having a "start" entail being created?

Ciao

- viole

 

[muhammad_isa]

Software is a set of instructions for a computer to perform certain tasks. We don't have that in our brain.

Yes, I know what software is..
A computer is like a brain with its electrical impulses, and external peripheries such as eyes, ears etc.

You wouldn't expect a computer to function without software, so why do you think that a brain can?

 

[muhammad_isa]

If you do not accept that, then why do you accept anything else science says in order to make a point? You give me the impression that you filter out only what does not contradict your a-priori belief.

I don't have to accept it. Just because we have common features, does not mean that we necessarily evolved from fish. Do the majority of scientists believe that we do? I wasn't aware of it..

Does having a "start" entail being created?

You tell me .. what other explanation have you on offer?

 

[viole]

I don't have to accept it. Just because we have common features, does not mean that we necessarily evolved from fish. Do the majority of scientists believe that we do? I wasn't aware of it..

What? Do you believe scientists think we started out magically as full formed apes?

You tell me .. what other explanation have you on offer?

I have a plethora. From eternal inflation, to quantum tunneling, to multiverses, to ... all the current competing models in science. Outside science, whatever naturalistic explanation my imagination can think of. And that would be, at worst, as plausible as any supernaturalistic explanation.

But I do not need that. For, the Universe did not start.

Ciao

- viole