4 of 4
4
What caused God to create the Universe?
Posted: 09 July 2017 04:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 46 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  278
Joined  2017-05-04
MikeYohe - 08 July 2017 10:55 AM
Tanny - 08 July 2017 04:51 AM
webplodder - 08 July 2017 02:47 AM

I take your point, but there seems to be something in human beings, at least some human beings, that needs to find some kind of answer to what it is all about.

Yes, I agree of course. 

INQUIRY: We have an inquiry in to the largest of subjects.

METHODOLOGY:  And we have a common methodology, a search for “The Answer”, that is, AN attempt to create a conceptual object which accurately describes the largest of subjects.

After thousands of years of applying this methodology to this inquiry, we have little evidence it’s getting us anywhere.  As it has been from the very beginning, some people believe in God, some don’t, while others aren’t sure.  Nothing has really changed.

So if we are to reason, we have to face this evidence.  If we are to reason, we don’t have the option of just wishing it away.  And so we arrive at a crossroads.

Which is more important to us, the inquiry, or the methodology?

If we answer the inquiry, then it seems time to abandon a methodology with a very long history of failure, and try something else.

If we answer the methodology, then it seems time to abandon this inquiry and proceed to some other inquiry where this methodology has proven useful.

 


The least rational choice would be to keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results, which Einstein declared to be the definition of insanity.

“As it has been from the very beginning”. What are you talking about? From the beginning of Deities? That is what 10,000 years. From the beginning of religion? That is 200,000 years. From the beginning of the white race, that is 12,000 years. 
You are right, change your Methodology. There has been no search of any substance for the answers you seek. Most research so far has been political or religious controlled research. Webplodder is right, there is something in the human beings driving this quest. It is called genes. It is one of the traits that defines humans. All animals have them and they control the behavior of species.
 
God creating the universe is nothing more than a con, driven by greed. History tells us that.

I think we need to recognize that human beings need not only practical, goal-oriented solutions to life but also a spiritual element that ‘makes sense’ of us being here and of the universe as a whole being here. This is, doubtless, something caused by our genes and it is very easy to dismiss the spiritual side of life as ‘hokum’ or ‘superstition’ but it is a deeply rooted need in some (not all, I admit) people and isn’t going to go away anytime soon. The thing about science is that in reality it has become an analogue for religion in promising to find answers to the mysteries of life, however, you can only push science so far, so this inevitably fails to provide answers to the really big questions. Perhaps the best approach might be to look for ideas in the scientific sphere that might give us some insight into spiritual experiences, which, after,  are as real in their way to scientific ones. We may be on the cusp of a new approach in attempting to understand the universe and our place in it by synthesizing scientific theories with spiritual experiences thus creating a new paradigm of reality. We will see.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2017 12:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 47 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2120
Joined  2013-06-01
webplodder - 09 July 2017 04:33 AM

I think we need to recognize that human beings need not only practical, goal-oriented solutions to life but also a spiritual element that ‘makes sense’ of us being here and of the universe as a whole being here. This is, doubtless, something caused by our genes and it is very easy to dismiss the spiritual side of life as ‘hokum’ or ‘superstition’ but it is a deeply rooted need in some (not all, I admit) people and isn’t going to go away anytime soon. The thing about science is that in reality it has become an analogue for religion in promising to find answers to the mysteries of life, however, you can only push science so far, so this inevitably fails to provide answers to the really big questions. Perhaps the best approach might be to look for ideas in the scientific sphere that might give us some insight into spiritual experiences, which, after,  are as real in their way to scientific ones. We may be on the cusp of a new approach in attempting to understand the universe and our place in it by synthesizing scientific theories with spiritual experiences thus creating a new paradigm of reality. We will see.

Not sure how to say this. But you are talking about two different items here. One is religion and the other is science. And your timeline is at the root of both subjects. I very much agree with what you are saying except for the meaning of life. I think it was for the meaning of death. My thinking is that religion and science at the root were started at the same point on the timeline. Religion was people expressing themselves. A couple of assumptions, one is that people did not need writing because they were hyperthymesia. Second is that death of a loved one for hyperthymesia people must have been a hundred times more painful than for people today. Thus, sometime at the beginning of religion, from 200,000 to 300,000 years ago religion was created to comfort the people at the time of death of a loved one. Comfort was in the knowing that your loved one would be reborn again. That evolved to your loved one going to heaven while waiting to be reborn again. Even at the time of Jesus the levels of heaven were understood. One needs to ask, if religion was started by a need to comfort the human genes, were our ancestors a more loving people back then than we are now?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 July 2017 03:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 48 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  278
Joined  2017-05-04
MikeYohe - 10 July 2017 12:35 PM
webplodder - 09 July 2017 04:33 AM

I think we need to recognize that human beings need not only practical, goal-oriented solutions to life but also a spiritual element that ‘makes sense’ of us being here and of the universe as a whole being here. This is, doubtless, something caused by our genes and it is very easy to dismiss the spiritual side of life as ‘hokum’ or ‘superstition’ but it is a deeply rooted need in some (not all, I admit) people and isn’t going to go away anytime soon. The thing about science is that in reality it has become an analogue for religion in promising to find answers to the mysteries of life, however, you can only push science so far, so this inevitably fails to provide answers to the really big questions. Perhaps the best approach might be to look for ideas in the scientific sphere that might give us some insight into spiritual experiences, which, after,  are as real in their way to scientific ones. We may be on the cusp of a new approach in attempting to understand the universe and our place in it by synthesizing scientific theories with spiritual experiences thus creating a new paradigm of reality. We will see.

Not sure how to say this. But you are talking about two different items here. One is religion and the other is science. And your timeline is at the root of both subjects. I very much agree with what you are saying except for the meaning of life. I think it was for the meaning of death. My thinking is that religion and science at the root were started at the same point on the timeline. Religion was people expressing themselves. A couple of assumptions, one is that people did not need writing because they were hyperthymesia. Second is that death of a loved one for hyperthymesia people must have been a hundred times more painful than for people today. Thus, sometime at the beginning of religion, from 200,000 to 300,000 years ago religion was created to comfort the people at the time of death of a loved one. Comfort was in the knowing that your loved one would be reborn again. That evolved to your loved one going to heaven while waiting to be reborn again. Even at the time of Jesus the levels of heaven were understood. One needs to ask, if religion was started by a need to comfort the human genes, were our ancestors a more loving people back then than we are now?

Oh, I think religion was simply a way of making death less frightening. However, maybe this a little disingenuous, because people would have been more spiritually attuned to their surroundings then and it would only have seemed natural to attribute spiritual status to things like animals, rocks, rivers, mountains and so on and, as an extension, to the spirit of people when they died, which carried on. Science wouldn’t have got much of a look-in, I think, in such a spiritually oriented culture. Maybe, when civilizations became more complex and the need of technological innovations became more pressing, then science began to really make its appearance, such for example, in the building of the Egyptian pyramids. Certainly trade fueled the need for mathematical developments such as algebra, I believe, in reckoning up what was owed.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 July 2017 02:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 49 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1451
Joined  2016-12-24
webplodder - 11 July 2017 03:22 AM

I very much agree with what you are saying except for the meaning of life. I think it was for the meaning of death.

Sure pondering death is a big one, but
Why am I here?
What part do I have to play?

Seems to me such questions live right beside the death question.  People been multitasking since way back.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 August 2017 01:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 50 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  380
Joined  2015-11-28

Creationists believe that what came first a chicken or an egg is a mind boggling question.  Religious beliefs discourage contemplating the process of evolution.  If a chicken never existed it is perfectly natural the egg contained a new species.  This is exactly the story for every new species of plant and animal that has morphed into life and must constantly improve adaptability to inhabit the planet.  Theological arguments are inutile.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 August 2017 06:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  78
Joined  2017-08-06

“The story so far:
In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”

― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

 Signature 

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.” - Richard Feynman

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 August 2017 05:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

In which case where does god come from. If god exists then he/she/it needs an origin as well.

The goal of any religion is bias confirmation, not an objective exploration of the data.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 August 2017 03:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7745
Joined  2009-02-26
DougC - 28 August 2017 05:44 PM

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

In which case where does god come from. If god exists then he/she/it needs an origin as well.

The goal of any religion is bias confirmation, not an objective exploration of the data.

This lecture by Anil Seth may shed some light on how our brain makes “best guesses” as to what we experience.
https://www.ted.com/talks/anil_seth_how_your_brain_hallucinates_your_conscious_reality

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 August 2017 06:24 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1307
Joined  2005-01-14
DougC - 28 August 2017 05:44 PM

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

In which case where does god come from. If god exists then he/she/it needs an origin as well.

The goal of any religion is bias confirmation, not an objective exploration of the data.

You missed it, Doug.  This sentence was specifically formulated to get around that loophole.  It says “Everything that BEGINS to exist has a cause.”  For the theist, God has always existed.  He never BEGAN to exist, so he doesn’t need to be explained.  Very clever, those theists.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 August 2017 02:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 55 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1541
Joined  2012-04-25
Advocatus - 29 August 2017 06:24 AM
DougC - 28 August 2017 05:44 PM

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

In which case where does god come from. If god exists then he/she/it needs an origin as well.

The goal of any religion is bias confirmation, not an objective exploration of the data.

You missed it, Doug.  This sentence was specifically formulated to get around that loophole.  It says “Everything that BEGINS to exist has a cause.”  For the theist, God has always existed.  He never BEGAN to exist, so he doesn’t need to be explained.  Very clever, those theists.

Everything that doesn’t BEGIN to exist doesn’t exist. We can play word games too and just stipulate them to be true.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 August 2017 08:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 56 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7745
Joined  2009-02-26
Advocatus - 29 August 2017 06:24 AM
DougC - 28 August 2017 05:44 PM

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

In which case where does god come from. If god exists then he/she/it needs an origin as well.

The goal of any religion is bias confirmation, not an objective exploration of the data.

You missed it, Doug.  This sentence was specifically formulated to get around that loophole.  It says “Everything that BEGINS to exist has a cause.”  For the theist, God has always existed.  He never BEGAN to exist, so he doesn’t need to be explained.  Very clever, those theists.

They have been at this a long time….and they are not stupid.

Personally I call it Potential (that which may become reality). It meets all the standards and properties of God, except the concept of intelligent intentional creative motivation, which IMO, is a human invented but superfluous theistic asset.

The definition of Potential has profound implications in the emergent creative (ordering) functions of the universe.

[ Edited: 29 August 2017 09:41 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
   
4 of 4
4