No God?

[Kakumei]

There are too many time when people ask me, "How can there be a God?"
My simple response is how can you not?
How is it that we just happen to exist? That we just happened to find a need to evolve into a counciouness, yet nothing else around us has?

Take this story for example. Your walking along around some random place and you find a nicely made watch on the ground. You pick it up and you say "hmm, nice watch. I wounder who made it."
Now say for a minute that it can talk to you. It says, "I have no maker, I just all of the sudden existed when the sands of time moved around me. I just happen to have all the parts I need to be a nice, perfectly working machine."
Now how many of you would actually beleve the watch? You know that It had to be made by someone or somthing, So why is the concept so hard that even us humans have had some sort of Maker here on Earth?

[Jack]

The watchmaker analogy has been refuted many times. I would recommend a read of the full article from which this conclusion is taken:

The watchmaker argument is not a proof, it is an analogy. As most other analogies it is quite lame. It is contradictive, misses many important features, does not aid us in knowing who the watchmaker is, and most important does not stand alone as evidence of god, but must reliy on external evidence. Therefore the argument does not the least prove that the world was designed by a superhuman being. I cannot help ending with these rude, yet beautiful and poetic, words, which sum up P.W. Atkins wonderful book The Second Law (Atkins, 1994) "We began with the steam engine... Nature reflects the steam engine, but in a much more elaborate way... We are the children of chaos, and the deep structure of change is decay. At root there is only corruption, and the unstemmable tide of chaos. Gone is purpose; all there is left is direction. This is the bleakness we have to accept as we peer deeply and dispassionately into the heart of the Universe. Yet when we look around and see beauty, when we look within and experience conciousness, and when we participate in the delights of life, we know in our hearts that the heart of the Universe is richer by far. But that is sentiment, and is not what we should know in our minds. Science and the steam engine have a greater nobility. Together they reveal the awesome grandeur of the simplicity of complexity."

Apologia Atheos: The Watchmaker argument refuted

There is no reason to suppose that the complexity of the universe demands a supernatural cause.

[FenianKiwi]

There are too many time when people ask me, "How can there be a God?" My simple response is how can you not?

Very simple...no one has yet presented either good arguments or compelling reasons to believe in any gods at all.

How is it that we just happen to exist?

You answered it yourself. We 'just happen' to exist (by 'we', I assume you mean humanity). The odds of us existing are precisely 1 in 2. Either we exist, or we do not exist. Since we obviously DO exist, the probability rises to 1:1, it's a metaphysical certitude.

That we just happened to find a need to evolve into a counciouness [sic], yet nothing else around us has?

Are you dead certain that nothing else on Earth is a conscious entity? Very good cases can be made for the rest of our close kin group (gorillas, chimpanzees, orangs, bonobos) and for the cetaceans.


[clipped an extraneous bit about Rev Paley's watch]

Now how many of you would actually beleve the watch? You know that It had to be made by someone or somthing, So why is the concept so hard that even us humans have had some sort of Maker here on Earth?

The Argument To Design is valid if (and only if) you can demonstrate that human beings are the intended result of the Universe. There is really no reason to think so.

That being said, watches are not living artifacts. Evidence of human design in a watch is not the same as evidence of Divine design in a leaf, or a spider monkey, or even a Volconvo poster. The primary difference being that, when humans design artifacts, they tend to work properly. Life is, by and large, horribly 'designed': the eye, the urethra, parasitic wasps, and so forth. What we see around us is exactly what we would expect if life evolved 'just good enough to get by'. If life is designed, or is the product of an omnibenevolent Deity, please explain the following as evidence of 'perfectly working:

-diabetes
-Harlequin infant syndrome
-The little girl in India who was just operated on to remove her extra
pair of arms and legs.
-SIDS
-Bubonic plague
-rabies

etc, etc ad infinitum ad nauseum. If the universe was created, the Creator is a sick, sick puppy.

[HelioPrime]

As i've read the watch argument isn't valid because the watch was produced following a long line of history into time pieces. Humans are the same way, we came from a long evolutionary process.

The better question I think would be how did rock and gas become simple celled organisms.

[another day]

"Suddenly existed"

"Happened to exist"

"Came out of nothing"

Religious folk need to get this idea out of there heads. To most people they see it as either "God exists and created the world" or "god doesn't exist and life sprang out of nothing".

It's just so asinine to think like this. The universe and reality IS god. Instead of personalizing and personifying it, we look at is what it is - a system of nature. Nothing sprang out of nothingness. There are countless forces that exist that guide the functions of reality to produce the life we see today.

A thinking, seeing, god with emotions is not a necessary or real part of this. It's a projection of our own egos onto the forces of the universe.

[Winter wind]

The watchmaker argument is not a proof, it is an analogy. As most other analogies it is quite lame.

*Gasp* you didn't. I love analogies.

Religious folk need to get this idea out of there heads. To most people they see it as either "God exists and created the world" or "god doesn't exist and life sprang out of nothing".

I'm going to nip this right in the bud.
Stop putting all "religious folk" in the same category and labeling them stupid. Einstein was one of the "religious folk"

There is no reason to suppose that the complexity of the universe demands a supernatural cause.

This is true, but the complexity of the universe demands a cause. What's the answer to that? (not rhetorical, asking for a position)

It's just so asinine to think like this. The universe and reality IS god. Instead of personalizing and personifying it, we look at is what it is - a system of nature. Nothing sprang out of nothingness. There are countless forces that exist that guide the functions of reality to produce the life we see today.

While i did ask you not to label us all stupid, unfortunately I am stupid. Could you clarify this please, because you've lost me.

A thinking, seeing, god with emotions is not a necessary or real part of this. It's a projection of our own egos onto the forces of the universe.

Interesting theory, but could you present some proof.

Oh and even I think the watch analogy is an over simplification at best.

[Kakumei]

If you believe the the big bang theory then you also believe in the super natural. How can something have infinite mass and matter and be smaller than an Atom? Explain how something limitless is not connected to something supernatural.

Also in the big bang theory this atom was to contain the 4 elements of the universe being Magnitism, Gravitation, Stong Nuclear and Weak Nuclear energy.
If gravity is the force that attracts 2 objects with mass together, where was the second object that this big bang should also have?

[Kakumei]

Quote by: FenianKiwi Very simple...no one has yet presented either good arguments or compelling reasons to believe in any gods at all. You answered it yourself. We 'just happen' to exist (by 'we', I assume you mean humanity). The odds of us existing are precisely 1 in 2. Either we exist, or we do not exist. Since we obviously DO exist, the probability rises to 1:1, it's a metaphysical certitude. Are you dead certain that nothing else on Earth is a conscious entity? Very good cases can be made for the rest of our close kin group (gorillas, chimpanzees, orangs, bonobos) and for the cetaceans. [clipped an extraneous bit about Rev Paley's watch] The Argument To Design is valid if (and only if) you can demonstrate that human beings are the intended result of the Universe. There is really no reason to think so. That being said, watches are not living artifacts. Evidence of human design in a watch is not the same as evidence of Divine design in a leaf, or a spider monkey, or even a Volconvo poster. The primary difference being that, when humans design artifacts, they tend to work properly. Life is, by and large, horribly 'designed': the eye, the urethra, parasitic wasps, and so forth. What we see around us is exactly what we would expect if life evolved 'just good enough to get by'. If life is designed, or is the product of an omnibenevolent Deity, please explain the following as evidence of 'perfectly working: -diabetes -Harlequin infant syndrome -The little girl in India who was just operated on to remove her extra pair of arms and legs. -SIDS -Bubonic plague -rabies etc, etc ad infinitum ad nauseum. If the universe was created, the Creator is a sick, sick puppy.

Oh, my goodness gratious, I ment to add that it works till something changes the homiostasis of our bodies. Sides with a little bit of Insulin and an application of the will to give it to myself in the form of shots, my body works just fine with type 1 diabetes. Who said mortality was easy and perfect? Oh, I did, but that wasnt the point, now was it?

[rez]

Quote by: Kakumei If you believe the the big bang theory then you also believe in the super natural. How can something have infinite mass and matter and be smaller than an Atom? Explain how something limitless is not connected to something supernatural. Also in the big bang theory this atom was to contain the 4 elements of the universe being Magnitism, Gravitation, Stong Nuclear and Weak Nuclear energy. If gravity is the force that attracts 2 objects with mass together, where was the second object that this big bang should also have?

Stop asking ridiculous questions to make an explanation seem misguided or not plausible. If you think you have a better explanation that can do a better job at explaining reality better then the current one when, then by all means go ahead and show us.

[Kakumei]

Quote by: rez Stop asking ridiculous questions to make an explanation seem misguided or not plausible. If you think you have a better explanation that can do a better job at explaining reality better then the current one when, then by all means go ahead and show us.

I never tryed to make it seem non plausible or misguided, I only showed how shakey and weak of a theory it really is. And as it is stated it is only a theory. I do not need proof or simple knowlage that God exsists, the simple fact that im a living breathing person the ability to reason and have complete conciouness right now is all the proof there needs be to know that there is a God. Its simple logic, the same people use to try and tear people away from the faith and knowlage that they have of the Gospel.

[another day]

Quote by: Winter wind *Gasp* you didn't. I love analogies. I'm going to nip this right in the bud. Stop putting all "religious folk" in the same category and labeling them stupid. Einstein was one of the "religious folk"

1.) It's true you all suffer from a debilitatingly small understanding of the way the universe works as a gigantic organic entity, rather then an isolated arena which things can be dumped into (created).

2.) einstein was not one of the "religious folk". He believed in spinoza's god which is essentially not a god at all. It's exactly what I said, the universe and all it's forces as god, removing the unnecessary projection of our egos and emotions onto it.

This is true, but the complexity of the universe demands a cause. What's the answer to that? (not rhetorical, asking for a position)

Natural forces. Everything is centered towards creation and balance.

While i did ask you not to label us all stupid, unfortunately I am stupid. Could you clarify this please, because you've lost me.

It's easy. You believe in god, I believe in the forces of nature. I simply remove the part where you anthromorphize nature into a person or creature called "god".

Interesting theory, but could you present some proof.

The proof is in examining human tribal behaviour. Humans have been projecting their tribal animal images onto the unexplainable for centuries. Eg: Zeus used to be thought to throw lightning bolts, we thought of the sun and moon as gods. We anthropomorphize everything in nature to help our tribal human minds relate to it. We say "mother nature", we draw talking trees and animals. It's no different then god. We put a human face on a natural force so people can understand it. People like christians will tell me their god is completely different then humans, but reading the bible tells a different story. He is a human to the core, complete with jealously, rage, vengeance, and a pathetic need for worship, like a king.

[Suburbanite]

Quote by: Kakumei There are too many time when people ask me, "How can there be a God?" My simple response is how can you not? How is it that we just happen to exist? That we just happened to find a need to evolve into a counciouness, yet nothing else around us has?

Sometimes you have to ask yourself, "is our children learning?"


Also, there is no such thing as consciousness, it is as fantastic an idea as God.

[ZNFYRH]

If anything, the Watchmaker Analogy supports that God created Evolution.

The watch evolved from timepieces, clocks, and sundials.

But someone had to make the first sundial.

[rez]

Quote by: ZNFYRH If anything, the Watchmaker Analogy supports that God created Evolution. The watch evolved from timepieces, clocks, and sundials. But someone had to make the first sundial.

comparing a watch to a universe has to be the most ridiculous thing I ever heard of.

[FenianKiwi]

Oh, my goodness gratious, I ment to add that it works till something changes the homiostasis of our bodies.

This still doesn't address how or why a perfect God created an imperfect Universe

Sides with a little bit of Insulin and an application of the will to give it to myself in the form of shots, my body works just fine with type 1 diabetes.

That's the nub...if your body was properly 'designed', it should work just fine WITHOUT insulin injections

.

Who said mortality was easy and perfect? Oh, I did, but that wasnt the point, now was it?

No, it wasn't. You yakked on about the Argument to9 Design, and it seems you really don't understand it.

I never tryed to make it seem non plausible or misguided, I only showed how shakey and weak of a theory it really is. And as it is stated it is only a theory.

As stated, this shows that you do not understand what a
'theory' is.

I do not need proof or simple knowlage that God exsists, the simple fact that im a living breathing person the ability to reason and have complete conciouness right now is all the proof there needs be to know that there is a God.

If this were true, then everyone would be a believer.

Its simple logic, the same people use to try and tear people away from the faith and knowlage that they have of the Gospel.

You understand 'logic' as poorly as you understand 'theory', and are as misguided about these two as you are about the Big Bang Theory.

[ZNFYRH]

Quote by: rez comparing a watch to a universe has to be the most ridiculous thing I ever heard of.

The Watchmaker Analogy is used for biological evolution, not the universe.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Kakumei There are too many time when people ask me, "How can there be a God?" My simple response is how can you not? How is it that we just happen to exist?

How is it that God just happens to exist? Introducing God into your gaps of knowledge does not explain or answer anything. It simply puts the goal post back further.

Quote by: Kakumei That we just happened to find a need to evolve into a counciouness, yet nothing else around us has?

Animals have. Due to the 100's of billions of extrasolar planets, there's a good chance other life may have evolved consciousnesses too.

Quote by: Kakumei Take this story for example. Your walking along around some random place and you find a nicely made watch on the ground. You pick it up and you say "hmm, nice watch. I wounder who made it." Now say for a minute that it can talk to you. It says, "I have no maker, I just all of the sudden existed when the sands of time moved around me. I just happen to have all the parts I need to be a nice, perfectly working machine." Now how many of you would actually beleve the watch? You know that It had to be made by someone or somthing, So why is the concept so hard that even us humans have had some sort of Maker here on Earth?

The analogy fails. Same can be said about God.

Quote by: Kakumei If you believe the the big bang theory then you also believe in the super natural.

The Big Bang is not supernatural. It's founded on evidence.

Quote by: Kakumei How can something have infinite mass and matter and be smaller than an Atom?

It didn't have infinite mass and matter. That's an incorrect assumption due to ignorance on your part. If it had infinite mass and matter, our universe would have infinite mass and matter too.

Quote by: Kakumei Explain how something limitless is not connected to something supernatural.

The Big Bang was not limitless. And limitless things are not connected to the supernatural if they have evidence.

Quote by: Kakumei Also in the big bang theory this atom was to contain the 4 elements of the universe being Magnitism, Gravitation, Stong Nuclear and Weak Nuclear energy.

Those are not elements, they are forces. The initial point of the Big Bang was not an atom. At this point, I'm sure you can understand that you really need to educate yourself before spewing this nonsense.

Quote by: Kakumei If gravity is the force that attracts 2 objects with mass together, where was the second object that this big bang should also have?

Christ..

Let me just say this once and for all. People who know nothing of a theory, and make no obvious attempt to learn, should not be able to debate the theory.

Quote by: Kakumei I never tryed to make it seem non plausible or misguided, I only showed how shakey and weak of a theory it really is.

LEARN the theory before you make such uneducated opinions.

Quote by: Kakumei And as it is stated it is only a theory.

So is the theory of evolution. So is the theory of gravity.

You obviously know NOTHING about what the scientific term of "theory" means. Look up theory in a scientific encyclopedia.

Quote by: Kakumei I do not need proof or simple knowlage that God exsists, the simple fact that im a living breathing person the ability to reason and have complete conciouness right now is all the proof there needs be to know that there is a God. Its simple logic, the same people use to try and tear people away from the faith and knowlage that they have of the Gospel.

This is the saddest, most pathetic reasoning for God I often encounter. As Christopher Hitchens once said, it's impossible to tell religious parody from religious argument. I honestly can't tell if this is an atheist trying to make Christians look bad or if it's a Christian with no sense of reasoning power what so ever. Oh, the humanity..

I can't believe I'm even going to debunk it..

Quote by: Kakumei I do not need proof or simple knowlage that God exsists, the simple fact that im a living breathing person the ability to reason and have complete conciouness right now is all the proof there needs be to know that there is a God.

Explain why this is proof of God and not The Flying Spaghetti Monster. Explain why this is proof of God and not any other religious god. Explain why this is proof of God and not a deistic god. Explain why this is proof of God and not a natural explanation.

You have FAILED to correlate your existence to the Christian god.

In the face of many many other possible explanations that can use this crappy logic, you must also prove God himself, otherwise, the other crappy possible explanations hold more water.

[Sweet Katie]

Quote by: Isherwood The watchmaker analogy has been refuted many times. I would recommend a read of the full article from which this conclusion is taken: Apologia Atheos: The Watchmaker argument refuted There is no reason to suppose that the complexity of the universe demands a supernatural cause.

There is no reason to not suppose that the complexity of the universe demands a supernatural cause.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Sweet Katie There is no reason to not suppose that the complexity of the universe demands a supernatural cause.

Why?

[Jack]

There is no reason to not suppose that the complexity of the universe demands a supernatural cause.

True, you can suppose anything.
However, the workings natural processes have moved beyond supposition, we have evidence of that. The ideas of gods and other supernatural creators have never advanced beyond conjecture.