ArcoBlood Mod Finished

[The_Tauren13]

quantum_mechani said:
...the question of whether or not something designed the universe becomes not that important.

Thats true. You could say I believe in god simply because I dont believe that dark matter really exists, yet I find the big bang theory reasonable enough. Without dark matter, there is not enough matter in the universe for it to eventually stop expanding and collapse. So, if there isnt dark matter, some force had to create the universe as it was before the big bang. Why not call that force 'God'? It doesnt really matter, as long as it isnt pointlessly mettling in the affairs of humans. And that I would find nearly impossible to believe. Its pretty damn conceited to think that some all powerful diety would care at all about us.

[quantum_mechani]

The_Tauren13 said:

Thats true. You could say I believe in god simply because I dont believe that dark matter really exists, yet I find the big bang theory reasonable enough. Without dark matter, there is not enough matter in the universe for it to eventually stop expanding and collapse. So, if there isnt dark matter, some force had to create the universe as it was before the big bang. Why not call that force 'God'? It doesnt really matter, as long as it isnt pointlessly mettling in the affairs of humans. And that I would find nearly impossible to believe. Its pretty damn conceited to think that some all powerful diety would care at all about us.

Thanks, that is exactly what I was getting at

[Arryn]

The_Tauren13 said:
some force had to create the universe as it was before the big bang

Actually, this is a logical fallacy. You are quickly (and conveniently) explaining away something in the natural universe, that is (as yet) not understood, by means of the supernatural. It's the same reasoning that had humans inventing rain gods not so long ago.

The_Tauren13 said:
Its pretty damn conceited to think that some all powerful diety would care at all about us.

If some deity was all-powerful, why would it create flawed beings? For amusement is the only logical answer. The more advanced the being, the greater the need for play. If you believe in some deity then you must believe we're all a not-so-huge cosmic joke. Unless ... people's pet deities are *not* all-powerful and all-knowing. I'll let folks try to figure out the ramifications of such a concept with regards to organized religions.

Humans invent deities because (most) humans are fundamentally insecure, and want someone or something to provide direction, meaning, and authority. It's also why, despite us having knowledge of democratic principles dating back from ancient times, most humans on this planet continue to tolerate dictatorships (in one form or another) to this day.

[The_Tauren13]

Arryn said:
Actually, this is a logical fallacy. You are quickly (and conveniently) explaining away something in the natural universe, that is (as yet) not understood, by means of the supernatural. It's the same reasoning that had humans inventing rain gods not so long ago.

I in no way meant to imply that whatever this force was is something supernatural.

TheSelfishGene said:
If you save Janine from cancer (say), and Janine runs into Clarice with her car and kills her, 20 years later, did God just kill Clarice to save Janine? No problem! God can fix that, he's God and can do anything! Sure.... except for that annoying concept of Free Will. If God created us to excerise Free Will, only to be constantly meddling in our everyday activities to reward believers, or subtly changing events without our knowledge at every turn, it rather cheapens the game of life, no?

There is no such thing as free will. That much is a proven fact. If god were truly omniscient, he would be able to completely predict everything that will ever happen. Thus, any entertainment he may derive from actually running the simulation will fall flat, much like watching a movie 1000 times would. So is god not omniscient? Then what makes him so great?

[quantum_mechani]

The_Tauren13 said:

I in no way meant to imply that whatever this force was is something supernatural.

There is no such thing as free will. That much is a proven fact. If god were truly omniscient, he would be able to completely predict everything that will ever happen. Thus, any entertainment he may derive from actually running the simulation will fall flat, much like watching a movie 1000 times would. So is god not omniscient? Then what makes him so great?

Not necessarily, you can create your own game and still have fun playing, particularly with a random element. Plus, there is no particular evidence that anything that may have created the universe would have to be omniscient.

[Arryn]

quantum_mechani said:
Not necessarily, you can create your own game and still have fun playing, particularly with a random element.

To an omniscient being, there's no such thing as "random". Which path an event chain might take might be random, but the being would already, in advance, know which path will be taken. It's the very definition of the term "omniscient": knowing the outcome. All possible outcomes and which one, specifically, will come to pass. Logically, then, where's the fun in waiting for what you already know will happen?

[quantum_mechani]

Arryn said:

To an omniscient being, there's no such thing as "random". Which path an event chain might take might be random, but the being would already, in advance, know which path will be taken. It's the very definition of the term "omniscient": knowing the outcome. All possible outcomes and which one, specifically, will come to pass. Logically, then, where's the fun in waiting for what you already know will happen?

I suppose it depends on your definition of omniscient. I was defining it as knowing all that is happening, not all that will happen.

[Arryn]

quantum_mechani said:
I suppose it depends on your definition of omniscient. I was defining it as knowing all that is happening, not all that will happen.

Cause and effect. If you know *all* that is happening *right now*, then you will know what *will* happen. "All" is a very encompassing term. When one argues philosophy, then little details like the meanings of almost every word used in the discussion becomes important. It's necessary so that both/all parties in the discussion are using a common frame of reference. Otherwise, one gets the morass that's common when people argue religion ...

No, I'm not picking on you, in case you're wondering. If anything, I'm picking on this very-much-gone-astray thread, which was ostensibly about a mod, and has been hijacked into an ethics and philosophy debate.

[Arryn]

The_Tauren13 said:
There is no such thing as free will. That much is a proven fact.

I don't disagree, but for the sake of argument, would you care to provide us with this proof?

The_Tauren13 said:
If god were truly omniscient, he would be able to completely predict everything that will ever happen. Thus, any entertainment he may derive from actually running the simulation will fall flat, much like watching a movie 1000 times would.

Entertainment derives from being surprised. If you cannot be surprised (kind of goes along with the all-knowing shtick) than how can you be entertained? heh What's the *point* of a universe if you (as the all-knowing almighty deity) already know every possible outcome, and worse, can change outcomes to suit yourself by re-initializing the starting conditions? A deity (or deities) only makes sense precisely if it is *not* all-knowing and all-powerful. Ergo throw out the bulk of what most of our religions teach as "undeniable fact".

The_Tauren13 said:
So is god not omniscient? Then what makes him so great?

Nothing at all, other than that such a hypothetical being is likely just a wee bit more advanced (evolutionarily and technologically) than we are. Whether that requires that others less advanced (and more gullible) worship it ...

[Scott Hebert]

There is no such thing as free will. That much is a proven fact.

May I ask how you can prove a negative?