4 ms·

Thank you for taking the time to write that and explain the concepts so clearly. How do you know that concepts/categories like "necessary" and "contingent" app

Thank you for taking the time to write that and explain the concepts so clearly. How do you know that concepts/categories like "necessary" and "contingent" apply to the universe? Specifically, if the universe is everythibg that there ever is or ever will be, how can it be contingent upon something external to itself? Could it not be the case that there concepts come from a causality-based view of reality that may be far from universally applicable?

caloriesdont 4y ago
> Specifically, if the universe is everything that there ever is or ever will be, how can it be contingent upon something external to itself? It would be contingent upon a necessary foundation within the universe. So there is one specific part in the universe that is necessary, and everything else around that is contingent.
- cpr 4y ago
  It can't be contingent on something necessary within itself. Within means being part of the contingency.
  - caloriesdont 4y ago
    Hmm, I don't see the problem - Everything in the universe is contingent, except for one thing which is necessary. Everything relies on that necessary foundation. What's the issue?
    - andyjohnson0 4y ago
      > Everything in the universe is contingent, except for one thing which is necessary. Everything relies on that necessary foundation. How do you know this?
      - smitty1e 4y ago
        How do we know anything, and how do we deem the human mind a suitable tool for ascertaining the result? At some point I understood that faith is orthogonal to the mind, and the tension was lowered.
        kbelder 4y ago
        Fine, but don't go into conversation and state your object of faith is a fact.
        smitty1e 4y ago
        I repeat: > faith is orthogonal to the mind Conflating the two is intellectually dishonest, in addition to commonplace.
jawns 4y ago
I think "universe" is an ambiguous word that is not helpful when we talk about this stuff. Like, for instance, you've probably heard of multiverse theory, where there is not just one universe, but many. In which case, "universe" means the subset of physical reality that we are a part of. Maybe there are other universes that truly exist, but there's no door between ours and theirs. So maybe we can more precisely talk about all of physical reality, regardless of whether they exist in our universe or an alternative universe, or a realm that exists outside of the universe but influences or produces the material of the universe. Clearly, that includes all material things themselves, but might also encompass the non-material but very real and observable physical laws that govern how reality operates. How can there be something outside of that physical reality? Well ... the Greeks had a word for that: meta-physics. And generally, when it is posited that something necessary exists (whether it be God or something else), that necessary thing exists metaphysically. So yes, as you are suggesting, a distinction does need to be made between physical reality and metaphysical reality for it to make sense that the universe (comprising only physical reality) is contingent.

caloriesdont 4y ago

> Specifically, if the universe is everything that there ever is or ever will be, how can it be contingent upon something external to itself? It would be contingent upon a necessary foundation within the universe. So there is one specific part in the universe that is necessary, and everything else around that is contingent.

cpr 4y ago
It can't be contingent on something necessary within itself. Within means being part of the contingency.
- caloriesdont 4y ago
  Hmm, I don't see the problem - Everything in the universe is contingent, except for one thing which is necessary. Everything relies on that necessary foundation. What's the issue?
  - andyjohnson0 4y ago
    > Everything in the universe is contingent, except for one thing which is necessary. Everything relies on that necessary foundation. How do you know this?
    - smitty1e 4y ago
      How do we know anything, and how do we deem the human mind a suitable tool for ascertaining the result? At some point I understood that faith is orthogonal to the mind, and the tension was lowered.
      - kbelder 4y ago
        Fine, but don't go into conversation and state your object of faith is a fact.
        smitty1e 4y ago
        I repeat: > faith is orthogonal to the mind Conflating the two is intellectually dishonest, in addition to commonplace.

jawns 4y ago

I think "universe" is an ambiguous word that is not helpful when we talk about this stuff. Like, for instance, you've probably heard of multiverse theory, where there is not just one universe, but many. In which case, "universe" means the subset of physical reality that we are a part of. Maybe there are other universes that truly exist, but there's no door between ours and theirs. So maybe we can more precisely talk about all of physical reality, regardless of whether they exist in our universe or an alternative universe, or a realm that exists outside of the universe but influences or produces the material of the universe. Clearly, that includes all material things themselves, but might also encompass the non-material but very real and observable physical laws that govern how reality operates. How can there be something outside of that physical reality? Well ... the Greeks had a word for that: meta-physics. And generally, when it is posited that something necessary exists (whether it be God or something else), that necessary thing exists metaphysically. So yes, as you are suggesting, a distinction does need to be made between physical reality and metaphysical reality for it to make sense that the universe (comprising only physical reality) is contingent.