5 ms·
So we essentially arised out of (nothing, at this point) to understand why we did? Gap of logic.
by eternalny1 7y ago
So we essentially arised out of (nothing, at this point) to understand why we did?
Gap of logic.
- glitchc 7y agoNot at all. It’s perfectly okay in science to say we don’t know how that happens yet. Deciding that we’ll never know is an irrational leap. The “never” is a strong statement and requires proof. Can you prove never? I don’t think so. Then why assume it?
- monktastic1 7y agoWell, there's never a way for me to know whether solipsism is true, or to even calculate a (meaningful) probability of it being true. In fact, this applies to probably infinitely many strange metaphysicses. All I know is that I'm conscious (or, more precisely, that "consciousness is"). I can say that "assuming the standard scientific metaphysics is correct, science might solve it," but that assumption is enormous and untestable.
- d1zzy 7y agoThat's assuming that "arising" is done as some part of logical plan. The universe doesn't have to be logical, physical phenomena doesn't have to follow human observation and logic. It's crazy hubris to assume the opposite IMO.
- eternalny1 7y ago> So we essentially arised out of (nothing, at this point) Think about that for one second, if you can ever comprehend what this "nothing" is. There was something before you, and Einstein got it with regards to the fact you can't understand that. We're getting closer. Rest easy.