Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

do you ever think there could be some sort of 'higher force'

Options
  • 07-02-2010 6:19pm
    #1
    gonnaplayrugby
    Closed Accounts Posts: 453 ✭✭


    with the whole how did something(the universe) form from nothing? as incredible as it sounds we would have to assume that some sort of being which exists outside of time put the wheels in motion.

    thats the only thing that leads me to believe there might be a 'god'


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-_sABor77E


  • Options
    #3
    gonnaplayrugby
    Closed Accounts Posts: 453 ✭✭gonnaplayrugby


    any chance you can thumb down posts like you can on youtube?


  • Options
    #4
    iUseVi
    Registered Users Posts: 1,435 ✭✭✭iUseVi


    gonnaplayrugby wrote: »
    with the whole how did something(the universe) form from nothing? as incredible as it sounds we would have to assume that some sort of being which exists outside of time put the wheels in motion.

    thats the only thing that leads me to believe there might be a 'god'

    Have you heard of "infinite regress"?

    If we assume something or someone made the universe (and I don't), where did this entity come from? If you say it always existed, then why not just say the universe always existed? You are just moving the problem one stage further back (hence the regress). It is possible that the universe is perpetually having big bangs followed by big crunches.


  • Options
    #5
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    4. The Argument from The Big Bang

    1. The Big Bang, according to the best scientific opinion of our day, was the beginning of the physical universe, including not only matter and energy, but space and time and the laws of physics.

    2. The universe came to be ex nihilo (from 1).

    3. Something outside the universe, including outside its physical laws, must have brought the universe into existence (from 2).

    4. Only God could exist outside the universe.

    5. God must have been caused the universe to exist (from 3 & 4).

    6. God exists.

    The Big Bang is based on the observed expansion of the universe, with galaxies rushing away from each other. The implication is that if we run the film of the universe backward from the present, the universe must continuously contract, all the way back to a single point. The theory of the Big Bang is that the universe exploded into existence about 14 billion years ago.

    FLAW 1: Cosmologists themselves do not all agree that the Big Bang is a "singularity" — the sudden appearance of space, time, and physical laws from inexplicable nothingness. The Big Bang may represent the lawful emergence of a new universe from a previously existing one. In that case, it would be superfluous to invoke God to explain the emergence of something from nothing.

    FLAW 2: The Argument From the Big Bang has all the flaws of The Cosmological Argument — it passes the buck from the mystery of the origin of the universe to the mystery of the origin of God, and it extends the notion of "cause" outside the domain of events covered by natural laws (also known as the universe) where it no longer makes sense.

    1. Everything that exists must have a cause.

    2. The universe must have a cause (from 1).

    3. Nothing can be the cause of itself.

    4. The universe cannot be the cause of itself (from 3).

    5. Something outside the universe must have caused the universe (from 2 & 4).

    6. God is the only thing that is outside of the universe.

    7. God caused the universe (from 5 & 6).

    8. God exists.

    FLAW 1: can be crudely put: Who caused God? The Cosmological Argument is a prime example of the Fallacy of Passing the Buck: invoking God to solve some problem, but then leaving unanswered that very same problem when applied to God himself. The proponent of the Cosmological Argument must admit a contradiction to either his first premise — and say that though God exists, he doesn't have a cause — or else a contradiction to his third premise — and say that God is self-caused. Either way, the theist is saying that his premises have at least one exception, but is not explaining why God must be the unique exception, otherwise than asserting his unique mystery (the Fallacy of Using One Mystery To Pseudo-Explain Another). Once you admit of exceptions, you can ask why the universe itself, which is also unique, can't be the exception. The universe itself can either exist without a cause, or else can be self-caused . Since the buck has to stop somewhere, why not with the universe?

    FLAW 2: The notion of "cause" is by no means clear, but our best definition is a relation that holds between events that are connected by physical laws. Knocking the vase off the table caused it to crash to the floor; smoking three packs a day caused his lung cancer. To apply this concept to the universe itself is to misuse the concept of cause, extending it into a realm in which we have no idea how to use it. This line of skeptical reasoning, based on the incoherent demands we make of the concept of cause, was developed by David Hume.

    COMMENT: The Cosmological Argument, like the Argument from the Big Bang, and The Argument from the Intelligibility of the Universe, are expressions of our cosmic befuddlement at the question: why is there something rather than nothing? The late philosopher Sydney Morgenbesser had a classic response to this question: "And if there were nothing? You'd still be complaining!"


    There ya go both your possible arguments restated and the flaws identified. If it's the only thing that leads you to believe in God, then at the very least you should be having doubts right about now.


  • Options
    #6
    karlog
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,563 ✭✭✭karlog


    I don't know and i don't pretend to know


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Antbert
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭Antbert


    gonnaplayrugby wrote: »
    do you ever think there could be some sort of 'higher force'
    No.


  • Options
    #8
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    gonnaplayrugby wrote: »
    with the whole how did something(the universe) form from nothing? as incredible as it sounds we would have to assume that some sort of being which exists outside of time put the wheels in motion.

    thats the only thing that leads me to believe there might be a 'god'

    Have I ever wondered? Sure.


  • Options
    #9
    Genghiz Cohen
    Registered Users Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    *Everything Malty just said, but in a much more condesending tone.


  • Options
    #10
    fitz0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭fitz0


    So then instead of nothing creating something from nothing, God created something from nothing? Or did God create the universe from part of itself, its incorporeal self that resides in a reality apart from our own?


  • Options
    #11
    Pete M.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Pete M.


    Well, yes, kind of, but as in maybe really advanced aliens who predetermined elements of the history of mankind, kind of like as if we are their anthill.
    But only because it may be possible.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #13
    Wacker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭Wacker


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    Or when the remote is just out of reach and my chair is really comfortable.


  • Options
    #14
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo


  • Options
    #15
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    gonnaplayrugby wrote: »
    with the whole how did something(the universe) form from nothing? as incredible as it sounds we would have to assume that some sort of being which exists outside of time put the wheels in motion.

    thats the only thing that leads me to believe there might be a 'god'

    Never really understood the position that a god solves the something from nothing problem.

    People say you can't have something from nothing and then present "God" as if he solves this. Ok, how does God make something from nothing? Well apparently God can do anything, including making something from nothing.

    Needless to say that is an entirely unsatisfactory answer, a sort of defining yourself out of a problem answer.

    If God can create something from nothing then surely it is easy to imagine something coming from nothing by other means and thus we no longer have any problem.

    If God can do it why can't a primary super particle do it, or a fundamental energy field, or a space time bend?


  • Options
    #16
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    liamw wrote: »
    <epic kraussness>

    That's too long Liam, this one is better and more to the point.:)


  • Options
    #17
    Daftendirekt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Daftendirekt


    gonnaplayrugby wrote: »
    with the whole how did something(the universe) form from nothing? as incredible as it sounds we would have to assume that some sort of being which exists outside of time put the wheels in motion.

    thats the only thing that leads me to believe there might be a 'god'


    Why would we have to assume this? For all anyone knows, there might be universes constantly popping in and out of existence outside of this one.

    Fact of the matter is, nobody knows, and we never will know if people keep inventing explanations rather than looking for real ones.


  • Options
    #18
    mickmcgee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 30 ✭mickmcgee


    no


  • Options
    #19
    hiorta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭hiorta


    Antbert wrote: »
    No.

    If this question had been asked some time ago the replies might have been the same, yet we could now add:

    Radio
    x-ray
    electricity
    nuclear
    microwave
    magnetic fields.....etcetera.
    There are more, of course, but the point is that our mental evolution enables us to realise a bit further and deeper just what is 'out there'.
    Anyone want to bet there are no more/ others?


  • Options
    #20
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    Sure there could! There are, however, an infinite number of things that could be, and we have no way of knowing if any of them are true. So I will continue to regard with utter scorn those who claim that the that one just happened to have been taught to them as children is the right one.


  • Options
    #21
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    gonnaplayrugby wrote: »
    with the whole how did something(the universe) form from nothing? as incredible as it sounds we would have to assume that some sort of being which exists outside of time put the wheels in motion.

    This is a strawman with really poor contradictory reasoning.
    Firstly the universe didn't come from "nothing", it came from a initial hot, dense, state. When the big bang happened (essentially and expansion of said state), time and space where created, and so therefore the initial state was not necessarily subject to the laws of space time as we know them (ie what "caused" the expansion didn't necessarily have to happen "before" it as the terms "cause" and "before" are time dependent).
    Secondly, even if the universe came from "nothing", that couldn't point to some eternal being causing it, because then the universe would not actually have come from "nothing", it would have come from that being. Basically you have set up a false premise and tried to prove it with a conclusion that contradicts it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    hiorta wrote: »
    If this question had been asked some time ago the replies might have been the same, yet we could now add:

    Radio
    x-ray
    electricity
    nuclear
    microwave
    magnetic fields.....etcetera.
    There are more, of course, but the point is that our mental evolution enables us to realise a bit further and deeper just what is 'out there'.
    Anyone want to bet there are no more/ others?

    In what ways are these higher forces, as opposed to just forces?


  • Options
    #23
    Undergod
    Registered Users Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    Do I ever think there could be some sort of higher force?

    Yeah, there could be. I'll think about it more when there's evidence to base my opinions on.


  • Options
    #24
    hiorta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭hiorta


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    In what ways are these higher forces, as opposed to just forces?

    They are 'higher' than any that are naturally detectable by humans without resorting to some kind of instrument.
    I not sure what you mean by 'higher', but my point is that there are more than we realise.


  • Options
    #25
    Osgoodisgood
    Registered Users Posts: 869 ✭✭✭Osgoodisgood


    No, cos it's not much more grown up than....
    "A big boy did it and he ran away!"

    Come to think of it, it's exactly that grown up. You know, not very.


  • Options
    #26
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    hiorta wrote: »
    They are 'higher' than any that are naturally detectable by humans without resorting to some kind of instrument.

    Hmmm I think you need to read a physics book. Radio, microwave and xray are all to do with same force, electromagnetic radiation, visible light is also part of this spectrum. The radiation is of the same type, regardless of wether humans can detect it mechanic instruments (radio receiver) or organic ones (the eye).
    hiorta wrote: »
    I not sure what you mean by 'higher', but my point is that there are more than we realise.

    Why call them higher then? Calling them higher has connotations, particularly in a thread where someone is talking about the existence of god.
    Besides, there are not necessarily more than we realise. In physics, there are only four fundamental forces, the various forces you listed are just the interactions of these viewed on a larger scale.


  • Options
    #27
    HxGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 767 ✭✭✭HxGH


    Unkept political promises fuel our existance :pac:


  • Options
    #28
    Undergod
    Registered Users Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    hiorta wrote: »
    They are 'higher' than any that are naturally detectable by humans without resorting to some kind of instrument.
    I not sure what you mean by 'higher', but my point is that there are more than we realise.

    Like the strong and weak nuclear force?


  • Options
    #29
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    hiorta wrote: »
    They are 'higher' than any that are naturally detectable by humans without resorting to some kind of instrument.
    I not sure what you mean by 'higher', but my point is that there are more than we realise.

    Er that doesn't answer the question.

    How are they higher, on what scale of height are they higher?

    Or is this just this wishy-washy new age terminology nonsense again, a "higher" plane of existence type stuff.


  • Options
    #30
    toiletduck
    Registered Users Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭toiletduck


    This thread just makes me think of The Last Question


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    toiletduck wrote: »
    This thread just makes me think of The Last Question

    tl;dr
    Is there an answer to the question. Wot's the question anyway?:p


Advertisement