The clock

[athanasius]

It'd be pointless to do so, since I have not admitted that it's reasonable for there to be a creator. I simply said I understand what you're saying (understand, not agree), and played devil's advocate.

In case you need a refresher, that means I didn't actually believe what I said.

EDIT: Looking back on it, which questions of yours did I not answer?

I would suggest that you did not answer my origninal objection about matter and evolution: IN case you need me to repeat it, here it is:

The question would be where did all the "stuff sitting around"(Matter in the universe) even come from if everthing "material" in the known universe exist from a prior cause! Must have been somthing outside of the material universe ie...spiritual, from the spiritual order to create or be the first cause to even have the matter to begin with to evolve the clock.

 

[Jaymes]

And that I am not qualified to answer, since I am a biology and chemistry student, not one of physics. I'm sure painted wolf can help you with that one, as I prefer to not speak about something when I don't have a damn clue what I'm talking about.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I tend to look at the clock argument as not an argument at all, but a question. How do we determine what is an artifact of an intelligent being and what is simply a product of natural processes? Someday we may arrive (and indeed are already studying) at an alien planet and we will have to be able to distinguish between artifacts and naturally created objects.

Also, I think that looking at the clock argument as an example of a categorical fallacy is a categorical fallacy. Clocks and humans are different in that one is living and one is not, but they are the same in that they are complex systems designed for a specific purpose. Clocks are designed to measure time, and humans are designed to reproduce (among many other things). The conclusion is that both were purposely created: one through the use of gears and tools, the other through DNA and evolution.

It should also be noted that the OP did not compare life with the clock--though that is the common argument. Instead, it compared the solar system and the clock, which I see as pretty clever. It focuses the attention away from life and towards other observable things that appear to be designed for a specific purpose. For instance, atomic structures. Chemical reactions. Solar systems.

It is certainly not proof for a creator, but is still something to ponder...

 

[BFD_Zayl]

Are you thinking about life in the solar system? Then let me expand your story.

Let's say that I was an astronaut who had landed on an unfamiliar planet. I discover something sort of like a clock. I am amazed, and my first thought is that it was a creation of some alien intelligence.

I then notice another clock crawl close to the first clock, and they start mating. My next thought would be that this is an alien lifeform that has achieved its complexity through Evolution.

The lesson of the story -- clocks don't reproduce and don't have anything like DNA, and so they can't evolve. It's a bad analogy.


eudaimonia,

Mark

ahahahahahahahahaha clock erotica! bahahahaha! *wipes tear from eye* oh man, gotta love your sense of humor.

 

[gnomon]

The question would be where did all the "stuff sitting around"(Matter in the universe) even come from if everthing "material" in the known universe exist from a prior cause! Must have been somthing outside of the material universe ie...spiritual, from the spiritual order to create or be the first cause to even have the matter to begin with to evolve the clock. The clock is a great analogy. Its complex, and no complex clock on earth that we know of has ever formed itself by chance with no help? A clock always has a clockmaker. Sorry thats just a lived reality. Did big Ben just form herself?

The body is far more complex than a clock. Evolution yes! No problem there. But is absurd and illogical to assume that there was no intelligent spiritual force that had a hand in creating(Even through evolution) matter as the primary cause. Evolution being the secondary cause. Especially since human logic, and reason have shown that everthing "material" thing has a prior cause, and and every extremely complex thing(Such as a computer or watch) has has a creator(Such as Bill Gates or Machintosh). Then its only logical and reasonable to beleive that a Infinite, Spiritual, Intelligent being has a hand in the evolution process.:yes:

Actually the logical conclusion is "I don't know". Which is the conclusion cosmologists have reached for the era of the universe preceding Planck time.

 

[Mr. Hair]

Clocks and humans are different in that one is living and one is not, but they are the same in that they are complex systems designed for a specific purpose.

As far as I can tell, the issue is not so much about creation and design in themselves, but rather the concept of independent creation and inherent design.

I also don't know what a "categorical fallacy" is...

To a certain extent, I'd agree that arguing over questions like this is somewhat like quarrelling over how many badgers^ can dance on the head of the pin. To get a really good look at What-Went-On, we'd probably have to get outside the entire (created) system, which could be a little difficult to manage.

On the other hand, perhaps the answers we reach and how we reach them tells us something about ourselves and our condition, and that's no bad thing.

^Badgers are more interesting then Angels.

 

[celestial_vacuum]

So why do the same people say that the solar system was not created?<<

Actually, the origins of the solar system are known. With regard to the universe, which is probably what you meant, I think most non theists would say that the origins of the universe are unknown although there are many theories.

But IF it was created then why would you assume that a god created it? It could just as likely been created by aliens of a superior intelligence or some other entities about which we know nothing.

 

[michel]

The question would be where did all the "stuff sitting around"(Matter in the universe) even come from if everthing "material" in the known universe exist from a prior cause! Must have been somthing outside of the material universe ie...spiritual, from the spiritual order to create or be the first cause to even have the matter to begin with to evolve the clock. The clock is a great analogy. Its complex, and no complex clock on earth that we know of has ever formed itself by chance with no help? A clock always has a clockmaker. Sorry thats just a lived reality. Did big Ben just form herself?

The body is far more complex than a clock. Evolution yes! No problem there. But is absurd and illogical to assume that there was no intelligent spiritual force that had a hand in creating(Even through evolution) matter as the primary cause. Evolution being the secondary cause. Especially since human logic, and reason have shown that everthing "material" thing has a prior cause, and and every extremely complex thing(Such as a computer or watch) has has a creator(Such as Bill Gates or Machintosh). Then its only logical and reasonable to beleive that a Infinite, Spiritual, Intelligent being has a hand in the evolution process.:yes:

I hate to admit it, but I am with you all the way...................

The reason I say that is that I'll have all the agnostics, athiests and those who believe that science could "come out of nothing" on my back, asking me for proof of this supernatural being, which, as we all know, none of us can produce.

But I know he is there, because I have faith in something (one) I cannot see - something that those against religions find impossible to commit themselves to.

 

[rocketman]

I hate to admit it, but I am with you all the way...................

The reason I say that is that I'll have all the agnostics, athiests and those who believe that science could "come out of nothing" on my back, asking me for proof of this supernatural being, which, as we all know, none of us can produce.

But I know he is there, because I have faith in something (one) I cannot see - something that those against religions find impossible to commit themselves to.

I tell people that I know God 'spirit' to 'spirit'. They usually give me a blank stare because they know of my scientific background. But what else can you say to people?

oops, just realised we're travelling off-topic.. hehe

 

[Yerda]

The question would be where did all the "stuff sitting around"(Matter in the universe) even come from if everthing "material" in the known universe exist from a prior cause! Must have been somthing outside of the material universe ie...spiritual, from the spiritual order to create or be the first cause to even have the matter to begin with to evolve the clock.

Is your confidence in that answer supported by sufficient evidence?

 

[athanasius]

Is your confidence in that answer supported by sufficient evidence?

Yes. This theory of mine seems to me to be strongly supported by logic and the empirical evidence of things we have as human beings and how everything we are aware of in the "material" universe works. Can you give me a better more reasonable answer. Whats wrong with this one? It seems to follow logically.

 

[eudaimonia]

If the Earth really did exist inside of perfect concentric crystalline spheres, as Aristotle believed, I'd have to learn towards some kind of intelligent design for the solar system.

However, take a look at the surface of the Moon. Notice the craters? The solar system's history is one of exceptional "messiness", with asteroids and comets on crazy orbits occasionally hitting planets with explosive force. The Earth too has been struck, with the result of mass extinctions.

If the solar system was designed, it was by God's inept grad assistant.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Yerda]

Yes. This theory of mine seems to me to be strongly supported by logic and the empirical evidence of things we have as human beings and how everything we are aware of in the "material" universe works.

What empirical evidence suggests that it Must have been somthing outside of the material universe ie...spiritual, from the spiritual order to create or be the first cause to even have the matter to begin with to evolve the clock.?

Can you give me a better more reasonable answer. Whats wrong with this one? It seems to follow logically.

I think that what is wrong with your explanation is that it isn't one at all. I appreciate that your experience is different to mine, but as far as I can see attributing phenomena to the spiritual order has the same explanatory power as saying I don't know.

It also has the problem of an infinite regress.

 

[Quiddity]

I think that what is wrong with your explanation is that it isn't one at all. I appreciate that your experience is different to mine, but as far as I can see attributing phenomena to the spiritual order has the same explanatory power as saying I don't know.

It also has the problem of an infinite regress.

It’s this idea of parsimony. If you don’t have an empirical answer, then it’s as useless as any. In fact, saying something is false is far more useful then an answer that involves parsimony. Because we all know that empirical answers are the only thing necessary in people’s day to day lives.

Truly, it doesn't matter that I (or any theist) don't have emperical data to support our sixth sense. The fact that we are able to rationalize beyond the emperical plane is just fine for us.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I have to wonder why the clock is always in the desert. Why can't it be in a tropical rainforest?

It would rust away?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

To a certain extent, I'd agree that arguing over questions like this is somewhat like quarrelling over how many badgers^ can dance on the head of the pin.

Just before the big bang they all did.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

It’s this idea of parsimony.

that's the green garnish on the plate when you eat at a restaurant....right?

 

[Quiddity]

that's the green garnish on the plate when you eat at a restaurant....right?

He he he....

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsimony

 

[athanasius]

What empirical evidence suggests that it Must have been somthing outside of the material universe ie...spiritual, from the spiritual order to create or be the first cause to even have the matter to begin with to evolve the clock.?

I think that what is wrong with your explanation is that it isn't one at all. I appreciate that your experience is different to mine, but as far as I can see attributing phenomena to the spiritual order has the same explanatory power as saying I don't know.

It also has the problem of an infinite regress.

Actually, there would be no infinite regress because we are not talking about somethiing within the realm of the "Material" universe. Remember, everything that we know of (Our empirical witness of all materiel things in this life) of the "Materiel" universe came from a prior cause. Thats just how it works with "matter". But God is believed to be Spiritual, not material.

Can you name me any "Material" thing at all imn this life that caused or causes itself to exist out of nothing. I think you are dodging the question. I would too if I were in your shoes. Your dodging the real problem. The problem that I brought up that atheist have in explaining the origin of matter. Theist have a reasonable answer to that as I have shown! Athiest fall flat on thier face.

I am going to hold you to that! We are finite creatures and can make medicines and things like cars out of other materials such as Metal or Plasitics , but what material thing in the universe ever caused itself to be out of nothing??? We are finite. It would take something infinite to do that. Matter has to have a first cause by logical conclusion! It has to be outside of the "material" universe to be able to begin to create the first thing inside of the material universe, so it had to be Spiritual.

It would seem reasonable that this thing would be intelligent becuase the material universe is vast and complex, far more vast than the best computer, which we know had a creator(Bill Gates). So its only logical and reasonable given our understadning of how the material universe works to assume that a infinite, Spiritual, intelligent being(Or beings) created the univers (using secondary causes such as evolution). what do you call a inifnite, intelligent, Spiritual being who creates the univese(even by evolution), we call it God.

Remember the definition of God is Spiritual, not material, So it would be absured to assume that it would have to have infinite regress because we cannot test the spiritual. Given that, I think theist have great and logical intellgient reasons to believe in the existance of God. As a matter of fact I would suggest that if a person didn't, he runs into the problem of explaining the cause of all the original matter in the universe that the big bang was made up of. He also seems not to use the fullness of his mind in thinking these things out. Theist have it right. Evolution, and God. :yes:

 

[sandy whitelinger]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsimony

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsimony:

"In science, parsimony is preference for the least complex explanation for an observation." which leads me to:

"If something is so complicated that you can't explain it in 10 seconds, then it's probably not worth knowing anyway." -Calvin