I saw some of your video and thought I'd reply to one of the questions you asked

You asked where did life come from; stating nothing can jump into existence by itself.

reply
I would ask you where did your idea of God come from. If you can claim God has always existed, maybe life has always existed as well.

Evolution is not designed to debunk religion or address a beginning to life; and just because science doesn't have all the answers doesn't mean the few answers they do have are wrong.

Kevin
It has been said that religion shouldn't be blamed with what people have done with it...Well, can the same be said about science?

Also,

It has been said not to put so much 'stock' in science...can the same be said about religion?

Both are man-made concepts, no?

If 'faith' is at the root of it all, which many will not dispute, then 'faith' cancels out and is not a sufficient response.
I think the fact that it is all "faith based" though which is a concept not taught to the average lay person is the problem.

The concept of Science / AKA Positivism, is a fairly modern concept that has come to dominate our worldview and be accepted as truth. That is what I find inherently problematic. It is not what science is or does per se, but it is that those who promote it do so without also stating that fundamentally science, like religion, is based upon a priori assumptions that must be taken on FAITH. It forces one to the positivistic approach towards truth which says everything is answerable because there is external objective knowledge that we can know.

Other theoretical approaches like interpretivism, and other theories of knowledge take a more intersubjective approach to truth.

The question I want to know is this, why was I not taught this until I starting my PHD program? This is what occurs when you have a dominant paradigm that seeks to reinforce itself into every day life.
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
I saw some of your video and thought I'd reply to one of the questions you asked

You asked where did life come from; stating nothing can jump into existence by itself.

reply
I would ask you where did your idea of God come from. If you can claim God has always existed, maybe life has always existed as well.

Evolution is not designed to debunk religion or address a beginning to life; and just because science doesn't have all the answers doesn't mean the few answers they do have are wrong.

Kevin


Why does any one believe there is a God? Precondition? Spiritual connection? Perhaps the fact that nothing in reality can not be created nor allowed to exist with out any form of creation. Unplanned Pregnancy's are accidents, but there is creation involved in that as well.
quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:
I think the fact that it is all "faith based" though which is a concept not taught to the average lay person is the problem.

The concept of Science / AKA Positivism, is a fairly modern concept that has come to dominate our worldview and be accepted as truth. That is what I find inherently problematic. It is not what science is or does per se, but it is that those who promote it do so without also stating that fundamentally science, like religion, is based upon a priori assumptions that must be taken on FAITH. It forces one to the positivistic approach towards truth which says everything is answerable because there is external objective knowledge that we can know.

Other theoretical approaches like interpretivism, and other theories of knowledge take a more intersubjective approach to truth.

The question I want to know is this, why was I not taught this until I starting my PHD program? This is what occurs when you have a dominant paradigm that seeks to reinforce itself into every day life.


So you knew you were going to go as far into that PHD program when you were first born? lol
It has been said that religion shouldn't be blamed with what people have done with it...Well, can the same be said about science?
Willy Will says:

(quote)
"Why does any one believe there is a God? Precondition? Spiritual connection? Perhaps the fact that nothing in reality can not be created nor allowed to exist with out any form of creation."

(reply)
Is that what you think? If so I must ask; who created your concept of God? If you insist your God has no creator, than you've contridicted yourself.

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Willy Will says:

(quote)
"Why does any one believe there is a God? Precondition? Spiritual connection? Perhaps the fact that nothing in reality can not be created nor allowed to exist with out any form of creation."

(reply)
Is that what you think? If so I must ask; who created your concept of God? If you insist your God has no creator, than you've contridicted yourself.

Kevin


Most people have a belief in there being a God (Depending on their perception of what God is), because in the video you have to ask yourself when one truly does become enlighten and begins to understand the world for much more than what you see, what is that "voice" that must be speaking to you? (The Spiritual connection) Plus, God now, since God is a spirit (energies) and there are debates on this, how can energy be created or destroyed? Therefore there is no creator of God if God has always been around and all knowing. What most of you people do is retard the concept of God and by giving God human qualities and a body as a man, of course you would not understand. God is much more than a human, animal and so forth. The only real contradiction I've seen is a certain group of people go as far to distances themselves from the creator and hide behind the guise of Science to further their own views...when this is impossible (Magic Ooze) and quite laughable. Creation is creation. God is much more than a "magic cloud" too. lol One more thing to close for now, when things go wrong, it has to be God's "fault". What bothers me deeply is not the fact of a ominpetient being, but a bunch of arrogant beings called humans who become so full of themselves (not all) and well, we affect one another in positive and negative ways (mainly negative)...then it seems we just can't take the responsibilities for our own actions.
Willywill says:

"since God is a spirit (energies) and there are debates on this, how can energy be created or destroyed? Therefore there is no creator of God if God has always been around and all knowing."

Humm..... Before you said: "nothing in reality can not be created nor allowed to exist with out any form of creation." Now you are saying God has no creator. Unless you are going to admit God is not a part of reality, you've contridicted yourself.

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Willywill says:

"since God is a spirit (energies) and there are debates on this, how can energy be created or destroyed? Therefore there is no creator of God if God has always been around and all knowing."

Humm..... Before you said: "nothing in reality can not be created nor allowed to exist with out any form of creation." Now you are saying God has no creator. Unless you are going to admit God is not a part of reality, you've contridicted yourself.

Kevin


Is God human, Alien, Robot (lol), or animal? Does God have a life span? Spirit...you missed that, a spirit, energies. Yeah...in other words, God being a spirit, spirit being an large mass of energies would not need a creator if you can not create nor destroy energy. Alpha and Omega, beginning and end. Nonetheless as you know it, you, I, a cat, an Alien (if they truly exist) any physical being or thing (that you touch and see) that is living or non animated and breathing or not and even a robot needs a creator, things do not pop up on its own. A process can not take place all on its own. (i.e Unplanned Pregancy's may be an "accident", but they have creation involved in it.) Yet God does not. Hard to comprehend, but that's the way it is.
Willywill says:

(quote)
"Is God human, Alien, Robot (lol), or animal? Does God have a life span? Spirit...you missed that,"

(reply)
Naaw chief; YOU missed it! When you said " nothing can be allowed to exist without a creator" you neglected to make an exception for spirits.

(quote)
"you, I, a cat, an Alien (if they truly exist) any physical being or thing (that you touch and see) that is living or non animated and breathing or not and even a robot needs a creator,"

(reply)
How do you know? Maybe you, I, a cat, aka. matter has always existed! Maybe matter cannot be created nor destroyed, but only changes form

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Willywill says:

(quote)
"Is God human, Alien, Robot (lol), or animal? Does God have a life span? Spirit...you missed that,"

(reply)
Naaw chief; YOU missed it! When you said " nothing can be allowed to exist without a creator" you neglected to make an exception for spirits.

(quote)
"you, I, a cat, an Alien (if they truly exist) any physical being or thing (that you touch and see) that is living or non animated and breathing or not and even a robot needs a creator,"

(reply)
How do you know? Maybe you, I, a cat, aka. matter has always existed! Maybe matter cannot be created nor destroyed, but only changes form

Kevin


I've been waiting for this response and I never missed a single thing. Spirits can change forms, yes, but who makes that happen (in regard to us always existing)? Now you are saying God must do so then, a creator? Yes of course. After all, we are all apart of God. The point is, God is infinite and has been and always will. You, I, cat, Robot, Alien as we are now, are not. Lesser being, compared to a higher being. That's how it is. Simple as that.
19

Maybe its more to do with the distant in the "leap of faith", that we grapple with and not faith in and of itself. Again, if faith is at the root of it all, then it is moote.

Okay, don't put much 'stock' in science. Okay...I can get with that, with ease.

However, what sciences' are we scrutinizing? If it is 'not fair' to paint religion with a broad brush, then how is it fair to do that to science?

Perhaps it would bring [us] momentum to this exiciteful/incite-ful (or insightful) age old -science vs. religion- argument if we spoke to specific components of a science and specific components of religion.
Willywill says:

(quote)
"I've been waiting for this response and I never missed a single thing. Spirits can change forms, yes, but who makes that happen (in regard to us always existing)? Now you are saying God must do so then, a creator? Yes of course. After all, we are all apart of God. The point is, God is infinite and has been and always will. You, I, cat, Robot, Alien as we are now, are not. Lesser being, compared to a higher being. That's how it is. Simple as that."

(reply)
Well that's your personal opinion and that's fine; I ain't tryin to take that away from you. I was just pointing out the mistake you made when you said "nothing can be allowed to exist without any form of creation" and then proceded to contridict yourself by saying spirits, energy, and God don't require a creator.

Next time you might wanna make an exception for energy, spirits, ghosts, gods, goblins, or whatever else you believe in that doesn't require a creator.

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by Willywill3:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by kevin1122:
Willywill says:

(quote)
"I've been waiting for this response and I never missed a single thing. Spirits can change forms, yes, but who makes that happen (in regard to us always existing)? Now you are saying God must do so then, a creator? Yes of course. After all, we are all apart of God. The point is, God is infinite and has been and always will. You, I, cat, Robot, Alien as we are now, are not. Lesser being, compared to a higher being. That's how it is. Simple as that."

(reply)
Well that's your personal opinion and that's fine; I ain't tryin to take that away from you. I was just pointing out the mistake you made when you said "nothing can be allowed to exist without any form of creation" and then proceded to contridict yourself by saying spirits, energy, and God don't require a creator.

Next time you might wanna make an exception for energy, spirits, ghosts, gods, goblins, or whatever else you believe in that doesn't require a creator.

Kevin


It's not a contradiction when it comes to God, a being that has always been there. I said God did not need a creator. Ghost and Goblins aren't those at one time in the form of physical beings? Created by a creator? Of course I see where you were trying to go with this by skewing my words, but I never said what you are claiming. Any psychical thing is created not just going to appear with out creation. Spiritual things to a certain extent are created as well, through the will of God. (i.e The Soul is apart of God, an extension to have the free will of choice; individuality of your own) To end this little debate, since this has nothing really to do with my video, now this being on the nature of God. God needs no creator. God is out side of time (measure of change), space (distances from one place to another), and matter (any substance which has mass and occupies space). An Eternal being (Omnipotent, Omnipresent, never changing, immaterial). Alpha and Omega, Beginning and is the End. Would this be God if these qualities did not fit? No. That is the point you wanted to make that God "had to be created" when this is false.
Last edited {1}
I would say the universe can be infinite, but is it volitional? Meaning that it has the ability to consciously form something with order and volition itself?

I think that is what needs to be explored. If we do hold to the idea that order can not exist without energy and forthought, then something that provides energy and forethrough must produce and maintain order. Hence a basic argument for some type of "God" even if it is not God in the traditional monotheistic sense.

For example, let's say the big bang was the infinite source of creation that has been eternally existent. It spawned order and structure and meaning, even if that meaning is self-referrential in that things have meaning reflecting in each other, for example the moon and the earth reflect each others meaning via gravity, and mutual impacts.

So my argument for a transcendent "godlike" event or being is rooted in a cosmological argument based upon order, the maintenance of order, how the meaning between ordered things.
Uppitynegress says:

quote:
"Then why can't the universe be infinite and without need for a creator? Why do you create these rules, but then exempt your own god from them?"

(reply)
In such debates, many theists are guilty of insisting on rules other explanations must follow while neglecting to follow those rules themsleves. This is the only way they can convince themselves that they have easy explanations for such complex questions.

Urbanson says:
quote:
"If we do hold to the idea that order can not exist without energy and forthought, then something that provides energy and forethrough must produce and maintain order. Hence a basic argument for some type of "God"

(reply)
Yeah but if we don't hold on to that idea, the whole God thing sorta goes out the window.

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:
The concept of Science / AKA Positivism, is a fairly modern concept that has come to dominate our worldview and be accepted as truth. That is what I find inherently problematic. It is not what science is or does per se, but it is that those who promote it do so without also stating that fundamentally science, like religion, is based upon a priori assumptions that must be taken on FAITH. It forces one to the positivistic approach towards truth which says everything is answerable because there is external objective knowledge that we can know.


I am a molecular biologist and find that few scientists comprehend the faith based assumptions we make in approaching our craft or have an appreciation for the limitations of positivism.


quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:
The question I want to know is this, why was I not taught this until I starting my PHD program? This is what occurs when you have a dominant paradigm that seeks to reinforce itself into every day life.


Great point. Great post.
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Urbanson says:
quote:
"If we do hold to the idea that order can not exist without energy and forthought, then something that provides energy and forethrough must produce and maintain order. Hence a basic argument for some type of "God"

(reply)
Yeah but if we don't hold on to that idea, the whole God thing sorta goes out the window.

Kevin


Hi Kevin, here's the issue. Nothing which has order and volition (giving it meaning) exists in our universe that did not first have the prerequisite of intelligence. So there's no way we can "not hold on" to that idea (urbansum's cosmological argument) and still be faithful to the metaphysical reality that we all share.
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Urbanson says:
quote:
"If we do hold to the idea that order can not exist without energy and forthought, then something that provides energy and forethrough must produce and maintain order. Hence a basic argument for some type of "God"

(reply)
Yeah but if we don't hold on to that idea, the whole God thing sorta goes out the window.

Kevin


Hi Kevin, here's the issue. Nothing which has order and volition (giving it meaning) exists in our universe that did not first have the prerequisite of intelligence.


And you know this how?

That claim is extraordinarily broad in its scope.
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
Hi Kevin, here's the issue. Nothing which has order and volition (giving it meaning) exists in our universe that did not first have the prerequisite of intelligence.


And you know this how?


I don't know exhaustively any more than Kevin knows exhaustively what he believes. But I think urbansun's argument is more plausible based on what (I think) we all accept as metaphysical reality.

Reordering matter for a volitional purpose takes a specific consumption of energy which a system in entropy left to itself won't do. If we observe volitional order, either the metaphysical nature of the system (where system = our universe) has changed or the system became open to outside influence which has a purpose in causing energy to be expended (energy consumption is costly and is not done unless the system gets something out of it). Humanity recognizes that purposed influence as "intelligent".

I never understood the perspectives of Carl Sagan or Arthur Clarke who were avowed atheists (not agnostics!) but whose entire works of literature focused on how humanity would "recognize" alien lifeforms. The basis for recognition of such came from a cosmological argument for ordered volition (review the book "Contact"). But both refused to give a first cause to that volition. Weird. sck
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
Hi Kevin, here's the issue. Nothing which has order and volition (giving it meaning) exists in our universe that did not first have the prerequisite of intelligence.


And you know this how?


I don't know exhaustively any more than Kevin knows exhaustively what he believes. But I think urbansun's argument is more plausible based on what (I think) we all accept as metaphysical reality.

Reordering matter for a volitional purpose takes a specific consumption of energy which a system in entropy left to itself won't do. If we observe volitional order, either the metaphysical nature of the system (where system = our universe) has changed or the system became open to outside influence which has a purpose in causing energy to be expended (energy consumption is costly and is not done unless the system gets something out of it). Humanity recognizes that purposed influence as "intelligent".

I never understood the perspectives of Carl Sagan or Arthur Clarke who were avowed atheists (not agnostics!) but whose entire works of literature focused on how humanity would "recognize" alien lifeforms. The basis for recognition of such came from a cosmological argument for ordered volition (review the book "Contact"). But both refused to give a first cause to that volition. Weird. sck


shulamite you're an interesting one. wel to the board. lol


I'll respond more fully a bit later. Smile
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

shulamite you're an interesting one. wel to the board. lol


I'll respond more fully a bit later. Smile



Thanks for the welcome and for the respite ('cause I'd really like to go to bed now! Smile).

Thanks much for the good discussion.
Shulamite says:
quote:
"Reordering matter for a volitional purpose takes a specific consumption of energy which a system in entropy left to itself won't do. If we observe volitional order, either the metaphysical nature of the system (where system = our universe) has changed or the system became open to outside influence which has a purpose in causing energy to be expended"
(reply)
Or maybe there are other explanations which we are unaware of. There is so much about the universe that we just don't know.

Kevin
First of all science disputes so call “truths” by scientific evidence of measurement, faith on the other hand is indisputable since know one can measure faith or question God! Therefore faith for the believer is the final word, e.g., if the Bible says Jesus split the seas and walked across the ocean, - then that is final. No scientific tool exists that measures the reality of Jesus much less whether he actually walked across the ocean, (remember Jesus ascended to the Heavens, so no bones were left. And even if there were, the science of DNA didn’t exist in the days of Jesus). Science is the act of measurement through Scientifically proven tools of measurement, e.g., the ruler that measures inches, the stethoscope that measures heartbeats; triangles, circumference, radius and numerous other tools specifically design to measure. Without the tools of measurement there would be no science! Religion is based on faith, that means; there is no need to question or measure, - all one must do is believe.
I just noticed something. On 1/01/09 willywill said:

quote:
"God is out side of time (measure of change), space (distances from one place to another), and matter (any substance which has mass and occupies space)."

(reply)
When you say God exists outside of time, space, and matter, you are discribing your God the same way one would discribe something that does not exist.
If I were to discribe something that doesn't exist, I would discribe it as something that you can't apply time to, something that doesn't take up any space, and something that doesn't consist of matter.
I just thought that was ironic. Okay it's late; I'm going to bed now

Kevin
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
Or maybe there are other explanations which we are unaware of. There is so much about the universe that we just don't know.


True. No one can know anything exhaustively. But we deal with probabilities every day in spite of not knowing things ad infinitum. That doesn't stop you or I from making rational (and mostly correct) conclusions about the world we live in.

How entropy works in a system and what it takes for order to arise out of said entropy is pretty well defined in physics (there's a reason it's called a "Law"). If order in a system has meaning, it is volitional (intelligent).

Throughout the whole of human history, human thought is hardwired to assign volition to meaningful order. There's a reason for that. In fact, there's a reason we can comprehend the concept of "meaning".
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
Hi Kevin, here's the issue. Nothing which has order and volition (giving it meaning) exists in our universe that did not first have the prerequisite of intelligence.


And you know this how?


I don't know exhaustively any more than Kevin knows exhaustively what he believes. But I think urbansun's argument is more plausible based on what (I think) we all accept as metaphysical reality.

Reordering matter for a volitional purpose takes a specific consumption of energy which a system in entropy left to itself won't do. If we observe volitional order, either the metaphysical nature of the system (where system = our universe) has changed or the system became open to outside influence which has a purpose in causing energy to be expended (energy consumption is costly and is not done unless the system gets something out of it). Humanity recognizes that purposed influence as "intelligent".

I never understood the perspectives of Carl Sagan or Arthur Clarke who were avowed atheists (not agnostics!) but whose entire works of literature focused on how humanity would "recognize" alien lifeforms. The basis for recognition of such came from a cosmological argument for ordered volition (review the book "Contact"). But both refused to give a first cause to that volition. Weird. sck


shulamite you're an interesting one. wel to the board. lol


yeah 4 real!

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×