Life depends on extremely narrow parameters, and couldn't have come into existence unless many specific, often unusual and rare, properties of physics and chemistry happened just the way they did, in just the right order.
Life, in my opinion, is a fundamental part of the universe, and began it's long, 13.7 billion year process of evolution, starting with the big bang.
There are many physical and chemical properties (if not all of them) that have to be perfect for life as we know it to exist.
Protons and electrons have to have matching charge.
A specific type of star has to create carbon in a specific way.
Water has to have it's exact, unusual properties.
A moon of the right size and distance has to be in place around the Earth.
Evolution depends on very narrow parameters, and requires the entire history of the universe.
I think it is specifically made that way, for a specific end result. I see purpose behind it.
While you see purpose and intelligence, I see the results of chaos. There is nothing we know of that is special to that "life as we know it" except that we're in the group. Other life forms would undoubtedly feel the same.
So a specific set of circumstances gives rise to a specific form of life. Exactly what should be expected, and with no indication of a purpose. Only when we decide that we are special enough to warrant the attention of ET out there, that has decided OUR form of life is what it wants, is there any reason to see purpose. And that is egotistical in the extreme; we have no reason whatsoever to think any of that.
Maybe God didn't see a point of creating a Universe without life in it.
Maybe there are multiple Universes, with different sets of natural laws.
Maybe this is the only kind of Universe capable of being created, because nothing else would work, and it simply exists with no creator.
I think what I think because I SEE purpose, so I assume it has to have had a purpose in the first place.
All of those are possibilities, but the only one that even might have a purpose is #1.
No you don't; you see complexity almost beyond our comprehension and decide that it has to have a purpose. That no one (ET) would go to that much effort without a purpose. Or that the probabilities of it just happening are impossible, without ever knowing what those probabilities actually are.
You don't understand, so assume a purpose without knowing if it is so.
You're right, I do assume a purpose without knowing if there is one.
Just the same, you assume there isn't one, without knowing if there is one.
I am willing to admit I might be wrong. Are you?
Of course - I've always said that. There may be a god out there, a creator - we just can't know.
But I've never used my ignorance as the root of belief, that's all. If I can't find at least SOME evidence of something I'll hold belief in abeyance and behave as if it isn't true until I do have evidence. My desire is very seldom a reason to believe.
I didn't know that about you, I'm glad you're open minded.
I don't think my belief is based on ignorance. I believe it is based on circumstancial evidence. Which I think will be proven someday. Where you see chaos, I see design. You see coincidence, I see design.
A universe with billions of galaxies and each with billions of stars and planets. And one would think that the odds of have one planet that has the correct ingredients would be narrow? Of the eight planets in our solar system two may have contained life, one does for sure. Extrapolate those odds tot the rest of the universe and you've got some high numbers. That being said I find it incredibly arrogant to think all of this was created just for us and us alone. It's just like us though to invent a God that makes everything just for us.
You make excellent points. It would be far more difficult to NOT see purpose in it. I would add these to clarify for myself anyway, intent, agency and intelligence. For it to not be the case, is just to unbelievable of an idea to rationally entertain.
I see purpose, and many others do to. But there are people who absolutely refuse to even entertain the idea.
I thought about this last night. I tried to think of a way that the universe can be so perfect, without intentional design. I couldn't come up with anything. I had an idea or two, but nothing that I think would be realistic. I think it's a possibility, but so improbable that I think my time would be wasted exploring it further. I think my time is better spent trying to figure out what the purpose IS.
How do you determine that probability? I can't imagine any method of determining (or even making a wild guess) as to why the proton/electron charges are precisely opposite, for instance.
I've seen people trying to estimate probabilities of life from primordial soup, but even that seemingly easy task quickly deteriorates into making pure guesses and, in every one I've seen, faulty math. Of course, they are all a misbegotten effort to "prove" it to be impossible, too, and that may be why they have all been such failures.
Maybe probability was a badly chosen word. What I mean is that I simply think it's unlikely.
Oh, I think probability is the correct and right term, it's just almost as difficult to find as actual proof, at least in this matter.
We do, after all, very often use probability in determining truth, although we seldom describe it that way. Sitting on a jury, it is almost never clear cut; it comes down to the probability of this vs that. Same for two children fighting. Same for why the car suddenly died. We almost always have alternative possibilities, but which is the most probable?
In the case of a creator it becomes impossible because that creator is generally described as being undetectable; it cannot be found by any means available to us. Then add in that the Big Bang is almost total mystery, with nothing to base that probability idea on, and it is all quite impossible.
The only thing I've ever found that plays a part in the probability of God's existence are the unstated and ignored requirements for the god. Another, also hidden, universe, but only one. With (description) exactly one intelligent creature, no more. That is omnipotent and omniscent (description). That has lived for an eternity and will live for another one (description).
Putting all those unlikely ideas together, with the other ideas they produce, and I find the god idea to be very unlikely. Possible, but very unlikely.
Now, you postulate a bunch of creatures, inhabiting one of many or infinite universes, one or more of which struggled and fought and eventually made our universe, and I wouldn't hazard a guess. Insufficient data.
Sounds smart to me. I personally think the clues for those intentionally looking, are there to point them back to the very thing that got the ball rolling in the first place. You wouldn't ever need any religion, or bible, or other revelation than that, to have a very strong suspicion of such a being that seems to operate with intentionality. We don't just have something instead of nothing, but we have a whole bunch of amazing things instead of nothing, including beings that can ponder their own existence. It is amazing to observe this kind of faith in material stuff, without agency.
I think the clues are there for people who look for them too. Maybe God does that on purpose, who knows?
I actually think God want's us to find him. For some reason, he seemed to leave clues, like breadcrumbs, for those interested in looking.
It's not that god created people but that people created god. Just a thought out of the box:)
That thought is nothing new. I would think it started back in the Bronze Age when god was invented.
Why not approach the question scientifically? Find a community of faith whom you can approach respectfully and figure out what it takes to join them for a season. Not forever, just be honest and say that you're looking for answers. Then within the context of community, engage in science: observe, hypothesize, test. Yours are the only observations that matter in this test. Speak to the silence with sincerity, "God - if you're real and want to know me, show me who you are."
Put it to the test, come back with your observations, and let's discuss.
by Alexander A. Villarasa2 years ago
Multiple arguments have been presented in various forums (inside and outside of HubPages) to argue for the existence of God. They run the gamut from the Cosmological ( Efficient Causality, Contingency,...
by Davidsonofjesie5 years ago
If you believe in your heart there is no God,there is no right or wrong,there is no creator,no absolute truth,no moral authority,then you must believe that nothing turns into chemicals,and chemicals turn into...
by Emile R5 years ago
I just read a comment on another thread that implied the poster believed in the possibility of the human species existing outside of our solar system.If we were visited by aliens that looked exactly like us; with proof...
by andycool7 days ago
I've heard so much in the forums about believing and not believing in Religion or God, being atheist or religious or agnostic and so forth, I've just got confused that is there anyone out there concerned about the role...
by Alexander A. Villarasa4 months ago
The classical definition of causality states that a cause and its effect(s) can be different types of entity. In equational terms a cause is considered necessary:->> if x is a necessary cause of y,...
by Kathryn L Hill2 years ago
there is no evolution. That's what I say.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.