what is more likely?

[hornsby]

you hit the nail on the head when you said this:

How do you see the most basic building blocks for the universe and a God that is infinitely more complex than our minds can conceive to be equally the same?

Given this premise it only makes sense to say that it is more likely that something complex came about than something "infinitely" more complex than that something.

Its like saying a grain of sand is just as likely as the Pyramids except times infinity. While both are amazing to have existed, the sand is more likely to have first come about..

i wish someone would address, or rather acknowledge this most simple of logical concepts.

 

[hornsby]

COMPLETE SILENCE

The vast majority of earth's population believes that a pyramid is more likely to have always existed than a grain of sand, and when this ridiculous absurdity is pointed out, we ignore and carry on.

 

[Breathe]

COMPLETE SILENCE

The vast majority of earth's population believes that a pyramid is more likely to have always existed than a grain of sand, and when this ridiculous absurdity is pointed out, we ignore and carry on.

Yes, that would be absurd; absurd to use as a comparison, most definitely.

 

[hornsby]

Yes, that would be absurd; absurd to use as a comparison, most definitely.

then what would be a better comparison? or are you just disagreeing to disagree?

 

[Breathe]

then what would be a better comparison? or are you just disagreeing to disagree?

The whole thing seems absurd from my philosophical standpoint as a panentheist.

And a better comparison? When I find a comparison that works, I'll let you know.

 

[Sir Doom]

COMPLETE SILENCE

The vast majority of earth's population believes that a pyramid is more likely to have always existed than a grain of sand, and when this ridiculous absurdity is pointed out, we ignore and carry on.

You ignored my post completely. Feel free to make a dismissive remark as to why.

 

[George-ananda]

The question posed is: What is more likely?

Just using our own individual rational thinking abilities the question is unanswerable. People that have an answer from 'individual rational thinking' are just showing which prejudice they embrace.

My reasons for believing in Intelligence/God/Brahman in creation is not based on my 'individual rational thinking' but from the teachings of the spiritual masters who I believe can see farther than me and from the super-physical (paranormal) experiences of mankind.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The question posed is: What is more likely?

Just using our own individual rational thinking abilities the question is unanswerable. People that have an answer from 'individual rational thinking' are just showing which prejudice they embrace.

Just as a carpenter who uses a hammer to pound nails and a screwdriver to tighten screws is just showing which prejudice he embraces.

 

[George-ananda]

Just as a carpenter who uses a hammer to pound nails and a screwdriver to tighten screws is just showing which prejudice he embraces.

The analogy fails. That carpenter can rationally grasp why one tool would be better.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That carpenter can rationally grasp why one tool would be better.

Some carpenters are better at grasping than others.

 

[Onkara]

The question posed is: What is more likely?

Just using our own individual rational thinking abilities the question is unanswerable. People that have an answer from 'individual rational thinking' are just showing which prejudice they embrace.

My reasons for believing in Intelligence/God/Brahman in creation is not based on my 'individual rational thinking' but from the teachings of the spiritual masters who I believe can see farther than me and from the super-physical (paranormal) experiences of mankind.

Why depend on others, is there a limitation with yourself?
Just asking, not provoking.

 

[Blackdog22]

The question posed is: What is more likely?

Just using our own individual rational thinking abilities the question is unanswerable. People that have an answer from 'individual rational thinking' are just showing which prejudice they embrace.

My reasons for believing in Intelligence/God/Brahman in creation is not based on my 'individual rational thinking' but from the teachings of the spiritual masters who I believe can see farther than me and from the super-physical (paranormal) experiences of mankind.

Our own rational thinking is all we have when presented with a question that demands it.

What in the teachings of your spiritual masters suggest that the most basic building blocks of the Universe are unlikely to have always existed, but something infinitely more complex than them somehow is. I haven't seen a single person respond to this point, but merely dismiss it on a vague, unknown basis.

 

[Blackdog22]

The analogy fails. That carpenter can rationally grasp why one tool would be better.

We can rationally deduce that complex things come about by less complex things. These are building blocks. We have never witnessed a Pyramid before the invent of sand for example (If this analogy fails then please state specifically why).

 

[Blackdog22]

The whole thing seems absurd from my philosophical standpoint as a panentheist.

And a better comparison? When I find a comparison that works, I'll let you know.

From a Pantheists perspective wouldn't even the tiniest particle having always existed be essentially the same as God having always existed? What exactly is it about my comparison that doesn't mesh with your philosophy? I mean until you find a better comparison isn't it okay to use the best we have? (not saying mine is the best, but any others I can think of fit the same bill)

 

[George-ananda]

Some carpenters are better at grasping than others.

So, you're not even going to address my assertion that your analogy failed?

 

[George-ananda]

Why depend on others, is there a limitation with yourself?
Just asking, not provoking.

We need the great scientists, inventors, philosophers, spiritual teachers, etc. to advance as a species.

If Onkara or George-ananda were left on a deserted island as young children with plenty of food and water would we have figured out the answer to the OP question in our lifetime? I don't think so.

 

[Twilight Hue]

if a thousand flips results in a thousand heads clearly the coin is rigged to come up heads

At least until someone succeeds. Albiet perhaps an ingenious system to discover winning lottery numbers.

 

[George-ananda]

Our own rational thinking is all we have when presented with a question that demands it.

Correct. But it is rational to consider the input of others too. To consider whether we think others have insights we can learn from.

What in the teachings of your spiritual masters suggest that the most basic building blocks of the Universe are unlikely to have always existed, but something infinitely more complex than them somehow is. I haven't seen a single person respond to this point, but merely dismiss it on a vague, unknown basis.

As I said earlier, there is no answer to the question of where God or the building blocks of the universe came from that can be derived from our rational minds.

Some of us believe that consciousness can experience things beyond the rational mind (mystical, spiritual) and convey that back to our rational minds however inadequately in words.

 

[savagewind]

Did anyone see the movie The Iron Giant (1999)? The people bomb the iron giant at the end of the movie. At the very end of the movie the boy sees the shattered pieces moving. Where are they going? They are going to find each other. Why would they do that? They want to be put back together. If those parts were never part of anything else how would they know what to be?

Evolution says the air, humidity, sunlight, space, radiation and what ever else knows what it should be. Really? How do they all agree?

 

[George-ananda]

We can rationally deduce that complex things come about by less complex things. These are building blocks. We have never witnessed a Pyramid before the invent of sand for example (If this analogy fails then please state specifically why).

But we can't rationally deduce where the least complex thing came from then.