Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
Simultaneous isness and isn’tness (only ‘til oblivion though)
Now we can all get back to being
Sorry, I am not able to communicate on your superior level—but I wish you well.
I wish you well too ISOC! Thanks for your (facetious) response.
Hey, that youtube clip you posted had some lovely imagery with some irritating music (just my opinion), but I was wondering about the pictures of the Milky Way galaxy. Where were they taken from?
ISOTC: It would appear that you agree with Stephen Hawking who declares there was no Creator of the universe because time did not exist for a Creator to function as the cause of creating the universe since the launching of time was one of the effects of creating the universe.
Actually, I don’t ponder the question of a creator because I know it is unanswerable. I guess I’m one of those Wittgensteinian people who contend that “that of which we cannot speak, we must remain silent.”
Answerer: She seems to have that effect ... big-boobed mom who loves all her children equally with open arms. Come one, come all. Easily manipulated enabler unable to apply strict discipline when it’s called for, only seeing the good in each of her children, overlooking that a couple of ‘em are out in the back yard mutilating the cats.
I know you’re sorry that you mutilated the cats because, at heart, you’re a good person.
‘Actually, I don’t ponder the question of a creator because I know it is unanswerable. ‘
If Science can provide a plausible answer for the natural assembly of our universe, supported by some good evidence, then why is the question of a God creator unanswerable? You don’t really KNOW it is unanswerable sara, you are just making an assumption. We have ideas as to how it could have happened without a supernatural undefinable creator.
Isn’t that good enough? As Hawking said-God is really not necessary. I think that is a pretty good answer actually.
Simultaneous isness and isn’tness (only ‘til oblivion though)
Now we can all get back to being
Sorry, I am not able to communicate on your superior level—but I wish you well.
I wish you well too ISOC! Thanks for your (facetious) response.
Hey, that youtube clip you posted had some lovely imagery with some irritating music (just my opinion), but I was wondering about the pictures of the Milky Way galaxy. Where were they taken from?
Most pictures are clearly labeled as Hubble pictures. Perhaps you could research the NASA website to find out. Sorry I can’t be more specific but they are indeed awesome pictures.
SARA: ‘Actually, I don’t ponder the question of a creator because I know it is unanswerable. ‘
EPA: If Science can provide a plausible answer for the natural assembly of our universe, supported by some good evidence, then why is the question of a God creator unanswerable? You don’t really KNOW it is unanswerable sara, you are just making an assumption. We have ideas as to how it could have happened without a supernatural undefinable creator.
Isn’t that good enough? As Hawking said-God is really not necessary. I think that is a pretty good answer actually.
I’m using the term “God” in the broadest sense. What I’m saying is that, given the limited nature of our understanding, there may be all sorts of possibilities that we can’t even imagine. Maybe the Universe is within another universe or the Universe is an atom in some kind of giant being. Maybe there is a spiritual dimension or a series of overlapping dimensions or an “intelligence” permeating everything. Maybe, as Burt has speculated, consciousness itself is an attribute of reality, rather than emergent quality of the brain. Maybe we are accidents of ancient chemistry and blind processes that eventually produced poetry, or maybe there is a direction to evolution. Maybe the universe originated spontaneously or always existed or was created by itself or by something outside it. No one knows and no one can know. People who claim otherwise are projecting their own assumptions and understanding onto an unknown. It’s like a giant Rorschach test which reveals more about the observer than it does the observed.
I’m using the term “God” in the broadest sense. What I’m saying is that, given the limited nature of our understanding, there may be all sorts of possibilities that we can’t even imagine. Maybe the Universe is within another universe or the Universe is an atom in some kind of giant being. Maybe there is a spiritual dimension or a series of overlapping dimensions or an “intelligence” permeating everything. Maybe, as Burt has speculated, consciousness itself is an attribute of reality, rather than emergent quality of the brain. Maybe we are accidents of ancient chemistry and blind processes that eventually produced poetry, or maybe there is a direction to evolution. Maybe the universe originated spontaneously or always existed or was created by itself or by something outside it. No one knows and no one can know. People who claim otherwise are projecting their own assumptions and understanding onto an unknown. It’s like a giant Rorschach test which reveals more about the observer than it does the observed.
Good summary, saralynn. Your observations are one reason why I find nothing irrational about personal faith. We don’t know and can’t know right now, so faith based on personal experience is as good as anything else as far as determining what “ultimate reality” is.
Yes sara one can posit practically anything for a God concept. But if God can be anything, he is actually nothing.
It becomes so obtuse and vague that it is useless.
This is partly what drives people to Atheism. Something that cannot be defined, or can be defined in any way shape or form, most probably is only imaginative.
Anthropologists estimate that since the last ice age there has been approximately 10,000 different religions, all supporting belief in some type of supernatural agency. They all have tried to say the same thing in different ways. However not one of those religions has ever provided evidence to make any of us see that it or any of them are based on any realistic truth. 10,000 opinions about the same thing probably says that opinions are what they truly are, and no more.
I think that many opinions trying to explain relatively the same thing says that they are all illusory. 13,000 years of human cognitive imagination run amok.
How many millenia do we need to go before things need to be accepted empirically before they are accepted as real? Another 13?
The unanswerable becomes close enough to answerable because of pure redundant ridiculousness at some point.
But I know this can be spun in the opposite direction as well, so don’t bother.
Answerer: She seems to have that effect ... big-boobed mom who loves all her children equally with open arms. Come one, come all. Easily manipulated enabler unable to apply strict discipline when it’s called for, only seeing the good in each of her children, overlooking that a couple of ‘em are out in the back yard mutilating the cats.
I know you’re sorry that you mutilated the cats because, at heart, you’re a good person.
See, you have so many children you can’t keep us all straight in your head. That wasn’t me, that was TheTwistedSister, OusermanO and N/A. Me? I was the Answer to your dreams ... respectful, polite, never lied and only spoke when asked. I didn’t Create any problems for you, nor Search for any trouble.
I’m using the term “God” in the broadest sense. What I’m saying is that, given the limited nature of our understanding, there may be all sorts of possibilities that we can’t even imagine. Maybe the Universe is within another universe or the Universe is an atom in some kind of giant being. Maybe there is a spiritual dimension or a series of overlapping dimensions or an “intelligence” permeating everything. Maybe, as Burt has speculated, consciousness itself is an attribute of reality, rather than emergent quality of the brain. Maybe we are accidents of ancient chemistry and blind processes that eventually produced poetry, or maybe there is a direction to evolution. Maybe the universe originated spontaneously or always existed or was created by itself or by something outside it. No one knows and no one can know. People who claim otherwise are projecting their own assumptions and understanding onto an unknown. It’s like a giant Rorschach test which reveals more about the observer than it does the observed.
Good summary, saralynn. Your observations are one reason why I find nothing irrational about personal faith. We don’t know and can’t know right now, so faith based on personal experience is as good as anything else as far as determining what “ultimate reality” is.
I couldn’t disagree more. [Sorry mommy, that was then and this is now.] Flip that around: Given the previous limits surpassed by our ongoing understanding, we can rule-out a whole lot more shit people have and still can think up. What no one knows is not the same as what no one can know. Even the Rorshach can reasonably be evaluated and assigned a knowledge value.
Sara: I’m using the term “God” in the broadest sense. What I’m saying is that, given the limited nature of our understanding, there may be all sorts of possibilities that we can’t even imagine. Maybe the Universe is within another universe or the Universe is an atom in some kind of giant being. Maybe there is a spiritual dimension or a series of overlapping dimensions or an “intelligence” permeating everything. Maybe, as Burt has speculated, consciousness itself is an attribute of reality, rather than emergent quality of the brain. Maybe we are accidents of ancient chemistry and blind processes that eventually produced poetry, or maybe there is a direction to evolution. Maybe the universe originated spontaneously or always existed or was created by itself or by something outside it. No one knows and no one can know. People who claim otherwise are projecting their own assumptions and understanding onto an unknown. It’s like a giant Rorschach test which reveals more about the observer than it does the observed.
Answerer I couldn’t disagree more. [Sorry mommy, that was then and this is now.] Flip that around: Given the previous limits surpassed by our ongoing understanding, we can rule-out a whole lot more shit people have and still can think up. What no one knows is not the same as what no one can know. Even the Rorshach can reasonably be evaluated and assigned a knowledge value.
RSS Feed
