5 ms·

In this context you seem to be expecting a rule of thumb to do quite a lot of lifting. You seem to imply that the universe is self-evident to all and is theref

by keane 4y ago

In this context you seem to be expecting a rule of thumb to do quite a lot of lifting. You seem to imply that the universe is self-evident to all and is therefore “simpler” as something that has always existed. That’s what theists are claiming God is: already self-evident to all. Conflating God and the universe as interchangeable is addressed by the Contingency Argument: https://youtu.be/FPCzEP0oD7I https://youtu.be/FPCzEP0oD7I

taylodl 4y ago
God is ascribed attributes the universe is not: omniscience and omnipotence. To a lesser extent one realizes those attributes of God also means God is conscious, which is not something we typically ascribe to the universe. I would argue since the universe lacks omniscience, omnipotence, consciousness, and by extension, will power it is a far simpler entity than God. So saying the universe has existed forever and saying God has existed forever are therefore two vastly different statements due to the different complexities inherent in the two different entities being compared. The universe is far, far, far simpler a construct than God and by using Occam's Razor I conclude a universe that has existed forever is far more likely than a God that has existed forever.
- taylodl 4y ago
  Though I suppose it is possible for a universe that has existed forever to have yielded a God that has also existed forever! Strange things are possible when we allow for infinite timelines! That's why it makes more sense that the universe had a definite beginning and asking about time before that beginning is undefined - time simply doesn't exist before the beginning. Roger Penrose has some interesting ideas on what happened before the Big Bang (the universe "forgets" how to "tell" time and so time doesn't exist between different "epochs" of the universe): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o0gAglNdZw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o0gAglNdZw
- yellowapple 4y ago
  > God is ascribed attributes the universe is not: omniscience and omnipotence. Ain't really sure whence you'd get that impression. It's hard to exist without the universe being aware of it and causing it to be, both in the sense of the universe having been in a state enabling your existence and in the sense of your existence having effects on the universe (and thus producing new states enabling other existences). God and the universe might not be one and the same, but they're intertwined; for the universe and the contents thereof to exist in any meaningful sense beyond some homogenous blob of cold matter, you need something dictating the interactions of matter and energy to produce something meaningful. Call it God, call it physics, call it whatever, but regardless it's obvious that it exists - the universe would be a rather boring place otherwise.
  - taylodl 4y ago
    I don't subscribe to metaphysical BS and I don't subscribe to quantum voodoo. The universe can exist just fine without any awareness of its existence.
- keane 4y ago
  There’s issues with the idea of a universe existing forever, namely Kant’s First Antinomy: if the universe existed for an infinite time, then an infinite amount of events would have already taken place.
  - taylodl 4y ago
    That's why I think Penrose may be on to something by saying the universe "forgets" how to tell time between different "epochs", where each "epoch" appears to have begun with a time zero corresponding with a big bang. If the universe "forgets" how to tell time between those "epochs" then those epochs are causally separated and you sidestep the infinite amount of events. The interesting bit is what evidence would reveal that to be the case?

by keane 4y ago

taylodl 4y ago

God is ascribed attributes the universe is not: omniscience and omnipotence. To a lesser extent one realizes those attributes of God also means God is conscious, which is not something we typically ascribe to the universe. I would argue since the universe lacks omniscience, omnipotence, consciousness, and by extension, will power it is a far simpler entity than God. So saying the universe has existed forever and saying God has existed forever are therefore two vastly different statements due to the different complexities inherent in the two different entities being compared. The universe is far, far, far simpler a construct than God and by using Occam's Razor I conclude a universe that has existed forever is far more likely than a God that has existed forever.

taylodl 4y ago
Though I suppose it is possible for a universe that has existed forever to have yielded a God that has also existed forever! Strange things are possible when we allow for infinite timelines! That's why it makes more sense that the universe had a definite beginning and asking about time before that beginning is undefined - time simply doesn't exist before the beginning. Roger Penrose has some interesting ideas on what happened before the Big Bang (the universe "forgets" how to "tell" time and so time doesn't exist between different "epochs" of the universe): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o0gAglNdZw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o0gAglNdZw
yellowapple 4y ago
> God is ascribed attributes the universe is not: omniscience and omnipotence. Ain't really sure whence you'd get that impression. It's hard to exist without the universe being aware of it and causing it to be, both in the sense of the universe having been in a state enabling your existence and in the sense of your existence having effects on the universe (and thus producing new states enabling other existences). God and the universe might not be one and the same, but they're intertwined; for the universe and the contents thereof to exist in any meaningful sense beyond some homogenous blob of cold matter, you need something dictating the interactions of matter and energy to produce something meaningful. Call it God, call it physics, call it whatever, but regardless it's obvious that it exists - the universe would be a rather boring place otherwise.
- taylodl 4y ago
  I don't subscribe to metaphysical BS and I don't subscribe to quantum voodoo. The universe can exist just fine without any awareness of its existence.
keane 4y ago
There’s issues with the idea of a universe existing forever, namely Kant’s First Antinomy: if the universe existed for an infinite time, then an infinite amount of events would have already taken place.
- taylodl 4y ago
  That's why I think Penrose may be on to something by saying the universe "forgets" how to tell time between different "epochs", where each "epoch" appears to have begun with a time zero corresponding with a big bang. If the universe "forgets" how to tell time between those "epochs" then those epochs are causally separated and you sidestep the infinite amount of events. The interesting bit is what evidence would reveal that to be the case?