ChatterBank0 min ago
In The Beginning ........
107 Answers
If you are a materialistic secular atheist, then by definition, you believe that everything, that is all matter, energy, space, time and physical laws are contained within the universe.
Therefore, the cause of the universes existence must also be included somewhere in that list.
So, based on the latest from science and your own experiences and opinions, given that you preclude any outside agency, that is, God, as a cause, are you happy to shrug off the question of origin, and simply say, "don't know," or do you have a sensible theory you would be willing to defend?
Therefore, the cause of the universes existence must also be included somewhere in that list.
So, based on the latest from science and your own experiences and opinions, given that you preclude any outside agency, that is, God, as a cause, are you happy to shrug off the question of origin, and simply say, "don't know," or do you have a sensible theory you would be willing to defend?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//given that you preclude any outside agency, that is, God, as a cause, are you happy to shrug off the question of origin, and simply say, "don't know,"//
Yes, I am, because it's the only rational thing that anyone can say. You’re running ahead of yourself, Theland. Tell me who or what ‘God’ is – and provide the evidence to support your claim – and I’ll consider it.
Yes, I am, because it's the only rational thing that anyone can say. You’re running ahead of yourself, Theland. Tell me who or what ‘God’ is – and provide the evidence to support your claim – and I’ll consider it.
-- answer removed --
I don't believe that anyone with any scientific credibility could claim to be an atheist without ignoring the fact that there are many unknown things. Therefore if the origin of the universe, be it God or external agency as you put it is real, it is very possible that the existence of such is outside the current knowledge of a person, however intelligent they may be; no one knows everything!
I disagree. If one isn't sure one is in the agnostics camp and have no need of another.
Agnostics merely point out that one can not know as far as they can tell. A simple logical conclusion given the evidence, or more accurately, lack of it. That stated a large hand pointing down from the sky accompanied by a booming voice might change their mind.
Agnostics merely point out that one can not know as far as they can tell. A simple logical conclusion given the evidence, or more accurately, lack of it. That stated a large hand pointing down from the sky accompanied by a booming voice might change their mind.
I doubt anyone has, or ever will, come up with a theory to explain the origin of the Universe that can be meaningfully tested. Still, it's not too hard to see, even in our limited (present) understanding, hints of how a universe could spontaneously form. OG has already mentioned the Uncertainty Principle -- although I'm not sure his interpretation afterwards is the clearest -- and, on its own, that can provide the hint I mean.
I'm too tired to go too far into it, but the point is essentially that "nothing" is too exact a state, so that there may be no such thing as a perfect vacuum. By extension, there's probably no such thing as a perfect state of utter oblivion in which nothing exists at all, and there is not even a space and time to define the existence of nothing.
I'm too tired to go too far into it, but the point is essentially that "nothing" is too exact a state, so that there may be no such thing as a perfect vacuum. By extension, there's probably no such thing as a perfect state of utter oblivion in which nothing exists at all, and there is not even a space and time to define the existence of nothing.
