If there is a God...

[sealybobo]

So you are saying that a rule that operates within a particular sphere, describing or prescribing what is possible or allowable is not a sign of intelligence or thought?

Have you ever made a rule?

That I have made a rule does not mean that all rules are created by an intelligence. Nor does it mean the use of the word rule must be the same in all contexts.

I think law is the more commonly used word. The physical laws, laws of the universe, etc. Humanity has created many different laws. Does that mean that the laws that govern the universe are the same as the laws created by man? Of course not. Nor do I think that most people, upon hearing the phrase "physical laws of the universe," assume that the use of the term laws implies that those laws must have been created by an intelligence, even if they believe they were created by such an intelligence.

Didn't the laws of nature produce intelligence?

Which laws of nature don't show intelligence behind them?

There may have been an intelligence behind them, but none of them inherently show intelligence.

At its base, your argument boils down to that any sort of order must come from intelligence.

No, my argument is that this specific order has come from intelligence. That the laws of nature are such that beings that know and create (i.e. intelligence) were predestined to exist by very specific laws of nature in a very rich and complex fashion and that signs of intelligence are everywhere given the right conditions and enough time.

Collectively all laws of nature show signs of intelligence. The exact same pattern can be seen at every stage of the evolution of matter from sub atomic particles to beings that know and create. You have to look at it from the creation of space and time until now. You were literally present for the birth of space and time and since that time the matter and energy in your body has merely changed form. The universe literally became aware of itself and you don't believe there is intelligence behind that?

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter, regardless of if or how they are connected. So, no, I was not literally present for the birth of space and time.

"The universe literally became aware of itself"? Just as I was not at the birth of space and time, I am not the universe. At most I am an almost inconceivably small part of the universe. A star is a part of the universe, as well; are you going to claim a star is self-aware? Or put another way, I am self-aware. One of my skin cells is a part of me. Is that skin cell me? Is that skin cell self aware because I am self aware?

Again, the order of the universe may have come from an intelligence. There is no reason I am aware of that it must have, however.

Makes sense

 

[sealybobo]

A bug was lucky enough to be born just like we were. Did god make the bug? Does god care what the bug does? Does god have a heaven for this bug?

How arrogant theists are. You just happen to be the smartest thing on one Little Rock in the universe. Seems impressive to us humans but they either don’t understand how small we are or how much life is out there.

So is the smartest animal on every other planet going to heaven too? Is that how it works? One creature per planet gets a soul?

Bro, I am the one arguing for something greater than man. Are you sure you are not the one being arrogant?

It’s greater than you but when you die you become the next best thing a god yourself who lives forever never sad or sick. And “you people” are cocky and tell people they’re going to hell.

And you call me who thinks when I die, that’s it. Who thru dumb luck was born in 1970. I’m related to every other living creature. Just an animal. That’s arrogant? Well I am only human.

 

[MaryL]

 

[ding]

A bug was lucky enough to be born just like we were. Did god make the bug? Does god care what the bug does? Does god have a heaven for this bug?

How arrogant theists are. You just happen to be the smartest thing on one Little Rock in the universe. Seems impressive to us humans but they either don’t understand how small we are or how much life is out there.

So is the smartest animal on every other planet going to heaven too? Is that how it works? One creature per planet gets a soul?

Bro, I am the one arguing for something greater than man. Are you sure you are not the one being arrogant?

It’s greater than you but when you die you become the next best thing a god yourself who lives forever never sad or sick. And “you people” are cocky and tell people they’re going to hell.

And you call me who thinks when I die, that’s it. Who thru dumb luck was born in 1970. I’m related to every other living creature. Just an animal. That’s arrogant? Well I am only human.

I have no idea what it will be like when I die, but I'm not afraid. Pull the stick out of your ass. I'm not the droid you are looking for.

 

[sealybobo]

That I have made a rule does not mean that all rules are created by an intelligence. Nor does it mean the use of the word rule must be the same in all contexts.

I think law is the more commonly used word. The physical laws, laws of the universe, etc. Humanity has created many different laws. Does that mean that the laws that govern the universe are the same as the laws created by man? Of course not. Nor do I think that most people, upon hearing the phrase "physical laws of the universe," assume that the use of the term laws implies that those laws must have been created by an intelligence, even if they believe they were created by such an intelligence.

Didn't the laws of nature produce intelligence?

Which laws of nature don't show intelligence behind them?

There may have been an intelligence behind them, but none of them inherently show intelligence.

At its base, your argument boils down to that any sort of order must come from intelligence.

No, my argument is that this specific order has come from intelligence. That the laws of nature are such that beings that know and create (i.e. intelligence) were predestined to exist by very specific laws of nature in a very rich and complex fashion and that signs of intelligence are everywhere given the right conditions and enough time.

Collectively all laws of nature show signs of intelligence. The exact same pattern can be seen at every stage of the evolution of matter from sub atomic particles to beings that know and create. You have to look at it from the creation of space and time until now. You were literally present for the birth of space and time and since that time the matter and energy in your body has merely changed form. The universe literally became aware of itself and you don't believe there is intelligence behind that?

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter, regardless of if or how they are connected. So, no, I was not literally present for the birth of space and time.

"The universe literally became aware of itself"? Just as I was not at the birth of space and time, I am not the universe. At most I am an almost inconceivably small part of the universe. A star is a part of the universe, as well; are you going to claim a star is self-aware? Or put another way, I am self-aware. One of my skin cells is a part of me. Is that skin cell me? Is that skin cell self aware because I am self aware?

Again, the order of the universe may have come from an intelligence. There is no reason I am aware of that it must have, however.

Were the matter and energy that make up who you are today created when space and time were created?

That is mind blowing stuff. To think the atoms in your left eye may have been cooked up in a different star than the right. I can’t really wrap my brain around it or explain it any further but if true it’s amazing.

 

[ding]

Didn't the laws of nature produce intelligence?

Which laws of nature don't show intelligence behind them?

There may have been an intelligence behind them, but none of them inherently show intelligence.

At its base, your argument boils down to that any sort of order must come from intelligence.

No, my argument is that this specific order has come from intelligence. That the laws of nature are such that beings that know and create (i.e. intelligence) were predestined to exist by very specific laws of nature in a very rich and complex fashion and that signs of intelligence are everywhere given the right conditions and enough time.

Collectively all laws of nature show signs of intelligence. The exact same pattern can be seen at every stage of the evolution of matter from sub atomic particles to beings that know and create. You have to look at it from the creation of space and time until now. You were literally present for the birth of space and time and since that time the matter and energy in your body has merely changed form. The universe literally became aware of itself and you don't believe there is intelligence behind that?

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter, regardless of if or how they are connected. So, no, I was not literally present for the birth of space and time.

"The universe literally became aware of itself"? Just as I was not at the birth of space and time, I am not the universe. At most I am an almost inconceivably small part of the universe. A star is a part of the universe, as well; are you going to claim a star is self-aware? Or put another way, I am self-aware. One of my skin cells is a part of me. Is that skin cell me? Is that skin cell self aware because I am self aware?

Again, the order of the universe may have come from an intelligence. There is no reason I am aware of that it must have, however.

Were the matter and energy that make up who you are today created when space and time were created?

That is mind blowing stuff. To think the atoms in your left eye may have been cooked up in a different star than the right. I can’t really wrap my brain around it or explain it any further but if true it’s amazing.

Or that it occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom.

 

[sealybobo]

So what do you think this suggests?

 

[MaryL]

Chaos and entropy, why do we fear it?

 

[ding]

 

[sealybobo]

There may have been an intelligence behind them, but none of them inherently show intelligence.

At its base, your argument boils down to that any sort of order must come from intelligence.

No, my argument is that this specific order has come from intelligence. That the laws of nature are such that beings that know and create (i.e. intelligence) were predestined to exist by very specific laws of nature in a very rich and complex fashion and that signs of intelligence are everywhere given the right conditions and enough time.

Collectively all laws of nature show signs of intelligence. The exact same pattern can be seen at every stage of the evolution of matter from sub atomic particles to beings that know and create. You have to look at it from the creation of space and time until now. You were literally present for the birth of space and time and since that time the matter and energy in your body has merely changed form. The universe literally became aware of itself and you don't believe there is intelligence behind that?

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter, regardless of if or how they are connected. So, no, I was not literally present for the birth of space and time.

"The universe literally became aware of itself"? Just as I was not at the birth of space and time, I am not the universe. At most I am an almost inconceivably small part of the universe. A star is a part of the universe, as well; are you going to claim a star is self-aware? Or put another way, I am self-aware. One of my skin cells is a part of me. Is that skin cell me? Is that skin cell self aware because I am self aware?

Again, the order of the universe may have come from an intelligence. There is no reason I am aware of that it must have, however.

Were the matter and energy that make up who you are today created when space and time were created?

That is mind blowing stuff. To think the atoms in your left eye may have been cooked up in a different star than the right. I can’t really wrap my brain around it or explain it any further but if true it’s amazing.

Or that it occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom.

Maybe. I don’t know why that has to be true. Maybe a black hole has something to do with it. What happens after all the stars die and all the black holes die out. A black dark universe for trillions of years.

And you say everything will condense to the size of a pea? That you accept as fact? Weird. That’s tough for me to swallow.

Maybe if science told me I’ll go to heaven if I believe I’ll change my tune. Or to hell with me if I can’t believe it

 

[Montrovant]

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter

That would not be the materialist's view (aka atheist view). Their view is that you are simply the particles which make up your matter.

I disagree. I would agree that an atheist would not believe I have a spirit or soul, but I do not think an atheist would consider any particle which is part of my body to be me. It would be a small part of me.

Again, a person is made up of the sum of their parts, each individual particle is not that person.

You would be wrong. Materialists do not ascribe any higher nature to man. You are nothing more than matter; material. Parts, particles it's all the same. You are just flesh and bones and chemical reactions.

You are misunderstanding. I am saying that you cannot look at one particle which is a part of me, and say that one particle is me. It is only a part of me. In the same way, you cannot look at a person and say that person is the universe. I don't think being a materialist in any way requires someone to claim that a single particle is a person. Nor would a materialist say that the particles which make up me are me, regardless of the form they take; after I die and decay, for example, the various particles that were once a part of me are me no longer.

So, while the particles that make up my body may have been present at the beginning of time and space, the combination of those particles which make me was not. Unless those particles are combined in a certain way, there is no me.

 

[sealybobo]

Alright I’ll watch one of your videos. Better be good

 

[sealybobo]

Boring

 

[ding]

Alright I’ll watch one of your videos. Better be good

It was so so.

 

[ding]

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter

That would not be the materialist's view (aka atheist view). Their view is that you are simply the particles which make up your matter.

I disagree. I would agree that an atheist would not believe I have a spirit or soul, but I do not think an atheist would consider any particle which is part of my body to be me. It would be a small part of me.

Again, a person is made up of the sum of their parts, each individual particle is not that person.

You would be wrong. Materialists do not ascribe any higher nature to man. You are nothing more than matter; material. Parts, particles it's all the same. You are just flesh and bones and chemical reactions.

You are misunderstanding. I am saying that you cannot look at one particle which is a part of me, and say that one particle is me. It is only a part of me. In the same way, you cannot look at a person and say that person is the universe. I don't think being a materialist in any way requires someone to claim that a single particle is a person. Nor would a materialist say that the particles which make up me are me, regardless of the form they take; after I die and decay, for example, the various particles that were once a part of me are me no longer.

So, while the particles that make up my body may have been present at the beginning of time and space, the combination of those particles which make me was not. Unless those particles are combined in a certain way, there is no me.

I think you missed what I was saying there. Materialist only believe in the material.

 

[Montrovant]

There may have been an intelligence behind them, but none of them inherently show intelligence.

At its base, your argument boils down to that any sort of order must come from intelligence.

No, my argument is that this specific order has come from intelligence. That the laws of nature are such that beings that know and create (i.e. intelligence) were predestined to exist by very specific laws of nature in a very rich and complex fashion and that signs of intelligence are everywhere given the right conditions and enough time.

Collectively all laws of nature show signs of intelligence. The exact same pattern can be seen at every stage of the evolution of matter from sub atomic particles to beings that know and create. You have to look at it from the creation of space and time until now. You were literally present for the birth of space and time and since that time the matter and energy in your body has merely changed form. The universe literally became aware of itself and you don't believe there is intelligence behind that?

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter, regardless of if or how they are connected. So, no, I was not literally present for the birth of space and time.

"The universe literally became aware of itself"? Just as I was not at the birth of space and time, I am not the universe. At most I am an almost inconceivably small part of the universe. A star is a part of the universe, as well; are you going to claim a star is self-aware? Or put another way, I am self-aware. One of my skin cells is a part of me. Is that skin cell me? Is that skin cell self aware because I am self aware?

Again, the order of the universe may have come from an intelligence. There is no reason I am aware of that it must have, however.

Were the matter and energy that make up who you are today created when space and time were created?

Maybe. I don't claim to know what happened at the beginning of space and time (assuming they have a beginning; assuming that word even applies). Whether they were or not in no way changes that the matter I am made up of is not me when it is not connected in a particular way. I am not simply my individual parts, but the sum of them.

There is no maybe about it. It is called the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, the conservation of matter and energy. Since that time matter and energy have merely changed form.

You do understand that you are part of space and time, right?

So with 100% accuracy can you tell me if any part of space and time is conscious and has intelligence? The answer is yes, BTW.

So, I go back to if a universe that was governed by rules created intelligence wouldn't it make sense that intelligence was behind the rules? Especially since rules are a sign of intelligence and it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence?

Rules, at least in the context of this conversation (in the context of the way reality functions) are not a sign of intelligence. They are simply a way to describe how reality works.

Not knowing how (or if) the universe began, I cannot say with any surety that the matter and energy which make me up today were created when space and time were created. It assumes that space and time were created, and that the matter and energy that make me up could not exist before space and time were created, and that the universe is a closed system.

Again, even if these things are all true, and the energy that is me now were around at the beginning of the universe, so what? That does not mean that *I* was around then, merely the material that makes up me was there. Without being put together a particular way, it is not me.

 

[ding]

No, my argument is that this specific order has come from intelligence. That the laws of nature are such that beings that know and create (i.e. intelligence) were predestined to exist by very specific laws of nature in a very rich and complex fashion and that signs of intelligence are everywhere given the right conditions and enough time.

Collectively all laws of nature show signs of intelligence. The exact same pattern can be seen at every stage of the evolution of matter from sub atomic particles to beings that know and create. You have to look at it from the creation of space and time until now. You were literally present for the birth of space and time and since that time the matter and energy in your body has merely changed form. The universe literally became aware of itself and you don't believe there is intelligence behind that?

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter, regardless of if or how they are connected. So, no, I was not literally present for the birth of space and time.

"The universe literally became aware of itself"? Just as I was not at the birth of space and time, I am not the universe. At most I am an almost inconceivably small part of the universe. A star is a part of the universe, as well; are you going to claim a star is self-aware? Or put another way, I am self-aware. One of my skin cells is a part of me. Is that skin cell me? Is that skin cell self aware because I am self aware?

Again, the order of the universe may have come from an intelligence. There is no reason I am aware of that it must have, however.

Were the matter and energy that make up who you are today created when space and time were created?

Maybe. I don't claim to know what happened at the beginning of space and time (assuming they have a beginning; assuming that word even applies). Whether they were or not in no way changes that the matter I am made up of is not me when it is not connected in a particular way. I am not simply my individual parts, but the sum of them.

There is no maybe about it. It is called the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, the conservation of matter and energy. Since that time matter and energy have merely changed form.

You do understand that you are part of space and time, right?

So with 100% accuracy can you tell me if any part of space and time is conscious and has intelligence? The answer is yes, BTW.

So, I go back to if a universe that was governed by rules created intelligence wouldn't it make sense that intelligence was behind the rules? Especially since rules are a sign of intelligence and it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence?

Rules, at least in the context of this conversation (in the context of the way reality functions) are not a sign of intelligence. They are simply a way to describe how reality works.

Not knowing how (or if) the universe began, I cannot say with any surety that the matter and energy which make me up today were created when space and time were created. It assumes that space and time were created, and that the matter and energy that make me up could not exist before space and time were created, and that the universe is a closed system.

Again, even if these things are all true, and the energy that is me now were around at the beginning of the universe, so what? That does not mean that *I* was around then, merely the material that makes up me was there. Without being put together a particular way, it is not me.

I don't think you can parse the argument like that. Rules are a sign of intelligence especially when those rules lead to intelligence and our own experiences tells us that it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence.

 

[Montrovant]

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter

That would not be the materialist's view (aka atheist view). Their view is that you are simply the particles which make up your matter.

I disagree. I would agree that an atheist would not believe I have a spirit or soul, but I do not think an atheist would consider any particle which is part of my body to be me. It would be a small part of me.

Again, a person is made up of the sum of their parts, each individual particle is not that person.

You would be wrong. Materialists do not ascribe any higher nature to man. You are nothing more than matter; material. Parts, particles it's all the same. You are just flesh and bones and chemical reactions.

You are misunderstanding. I am saying that you cannot look at one particle which is a part of me, and say that one particle is me. It is only a part of me. In the same way, you cannot look at a person and say that person is the universe. I don't think being a materialist in any way requires someone to claim that a single particle is a person. Nor would a materialist say that the particles which make up me are me, regardless of the form they take; after I die and decay, for example, the various particles that were once a part of me are me no longer.

So, while the particles that make up my body may have been present at the beginning of time and space, the combination of those particles which make me was not. Unless those particles are combined in a certain way, there is no me.

I think you missed what I was saying there. Materialist only believe in the material.

That does not mean that the material is without form, or that every material is exactly the same as every other material.

Let me give an analogy. Just because the words 'dog' and 'god' have the same letters does not grant them the same meaning. A materialist does not have to believe that just because a thing contains matter or energy, it is exactly the same as any other thing containing matter or energy. In a broader, philosophical sense, perhaps, but not in the ways you have been describing (that I was around for the beginning of space and time, that the universe has literally become self aware). There may be some who believe that way, but I do not think it is a mandatory part of materialism.

 

[Montrovant]

*I* am not simply the particles which make up my matter, regardless of if or how they are connected. So, no, I was not literally present for the birth of space and time.

"The universe literally became aware of itself"? Just as I was not at the birth of space and time, I am not the universe. At most I am an almost inconceivably small part of the universe. A star is a part of the universe, as well; are you going to claim a star is self-aware? Or put another way, I am self-aware. One of my skin cells is a part of me. Is that skin cell me? Is that skin cell self aware because I am self aware?

Again, the order of the universe may have come from an intelligence. There is no reason I am aware of that it must have, however.

Were the matter and energy that make up who you are today created when space and time were created?

Maybe. I don't claim to know what happened at the beginning of space and time (assuming they have a beginning; assuming that word even applies). Whether they were or not in no way changes that the matter I am made up of is not me when it is not connected in a particular way. I am not simply my individual parts, but the sum of them.

There is no maybe about it. It is called the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, the conservation of matter and energy. Since that time matter and energy have merely changed form.

You do understand that you are part of space and time, right?

So with 100% accuracy can you tell me if any part of space and time is conscious and has intelligence? The answer is yes, BTW.

So, I go back to if a universe that was governed by rules created intelligence wouldn't it make sense that intelligence was behind the rules? Especially since rules are a sign of intelligence and it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence?

Rules, at least in the context of this conversation (in the context of the way reality functions) are not a sign of intelligence. They are simply a way to describe how reality works.

Not knowing how (or if) the universe began, I cannot say with any surety that the matter and energy which make me up today were created when space and time were created. It assumes that space and time were created, and that the matter and energy that make me up could not exist before space and time were created, and that the universe is a closed system.

Again, even if these things are all true, and the energy that is me now were around at the beginning of the universe, so what? That does not mean that *I* was around then, merely the material that makes up me was there. Without being put together a particular way, it is not me.

I don't think you can parse the argument like that. Rules are a sign of intelligence especially when those rules lead to intelligence and our own experiences tells us that it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence.

Then use a word other than rules, if that word is an issue for you. If I call them laws, does that avoid the implication of intelligence? If I call them the structures of reality, would that avoid the implication of intelligence?

 

[ding]

Not knowing how (or if) the universe began, I cannot say with any surety that the matter and energy which make me up today were created when space and time were created. It assumes that space and time were created, and that the matter and energy that make me up could not exist before space and time were created, and that the universe is a closed system.

If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning.

The best explanation for how the universe began is the inflation model. It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.