Agnostic belief
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-07-2015, 09:17 AM
RE: Agnostic belief
True, though perhaps we should not be afraid to make positive claims in reasonable confidence. I think we can be roughly as confident that Jesus didn't create the universe as we can be that pixies didn't create the universe.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 11:17 AM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 09:09 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(22-07-2015 11:41 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Therefore it is uncaused and eternal and to ask what or who caused it commits the fallacy of the stolen concept.

Are you saying that our universe always existed?

It was my understanding that our universe is about 13 billion years old....maybe I'm missing something.

No. Not the Universe as it is currently arranged but existence as a whole, yes. The Universe which is expanding, expanded from something that already existed. The fact that something exists is preconditional to all other facts so that it can not have a cause. What would that cause be if nothing existed. It would be nothing. The fact that something exists is a precondition for the existence of time as well. If nothing exists then neither does time. So there could be no time when something doesn't exist nor no time when nothing exists. Existence is eternal. That things exist is the most fundamental fact. Without this fact no others are possible. That is why the question "what caused the Universe" is fallacious. It posits a cause which preceded existence. But nothing can precede the fact that things exist.

I denfine the Universe as the sum total of what exists.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 12:11 PM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 11:17 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  No. Not the Universe as it is currently arranged but existence as a whole, yes. The Universe which is expanding, expanded from something that already existed. The fact that something exists is preconditional to all other facts so that it can not have a cause. What would that cause be if nothing existed. It would be nothing. The fact that something exists is a precondition for the existence of time as well. If nothing exists then neither does time. So there could be no time when something doesn't exist nor no time when nothing exists. Existence is eternal. That things exist is the most fundamental fact. Without this fact no others are possible. That is why the question "what caused the Universe" is fallacious. It posits a cause which preceded existence. But nothing can precede the fact that things exist.

I denfine the Universe as the sum total of what exists.

Just curious how you respond to guys like Hawking and Krauss who claim a universe can come from nothing.

I don't claim to know, just curious about your response.

http://bigthink.com/dr-kakus-universe/ca...of-nothing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 12:24 PM (This post was last modified: 23-07-2015 12:28 PM by true scotsman.)
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 12:11 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 11:17 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  No. Not the Universe as it is currently arranged but existence as a whole, yes. The Universe which is expanding, expanded from something that already existed. The fact that something exists is preconditional to all other facts so that it can not have a cause. What would that cause be if nothing existed. It would be nothing. The fact that something exists is a precondition for the existence of time as well. If nothing exists then neither does time. So there could be no time when something doesn't exist nor no time when nothing exists. Existence is eternal. That things exist is the most fundamental fact. Without this fact no others are possible. That is why the question "what caused the Universe" is fallacious. It posits a cause which preceded existence. But nothing can precede the fact that things exist.

I denfine the Universe as the sum total of what exists.

Just curious how you respond to guys like Hawking and Krauss who claim a universe can come from nothing.

I don't claim to know, just curious about your response.

http://bigthink.com/dr-kakus-universe/ca...of-nothing

They propose that the Universe came from a quantum fluctuation. Did this quantum fluctuation exist? You see there is no escape from the fact of existence. Whatever caused the big band had to first exist because non-existent things don't cause anything.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 12:31 PM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 12:24 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  They propose that the Universe began as a quantum fluctuation. Did this quantum fluctuation exist?

I'm certainly no expert lol!

But they seem very adamant about referring to it as nothing....

Why do they refer to it as nothing if it's something?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 12:39 PM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 12:31 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 12:24 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  They propose that the Universe began as a quantum fluctuation. Did this quantum fluctuation exist?

I'm certainly no expert lol!

But they seem very adamant about referring to it as nothing....

Why do they refer to it as nothing if it's something?

Age old terms of communication and improperly contextually started conversations. The problem is the language and metaphors for people to understand it began out of religious ideas and before people were able to better scientifically study it.

Though I don't agree with Scottsman thoughts of it had to first exist, we have no evidence non-existent things can cause anything, that's true but we don't know in that situations of beginnings of universes that it can't cause it. To say something can't come from nothing, isn't exactly true in either context of nothing. It's just a not quite provable claim.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 12:56 PM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 12:31 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 12:24 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  They propose that the Universe began as a quantum fluctuation. Did this quantum fluctuation exist?

I'm certainly no expert lol!

But they seem very adamant about referring to it as nothing....

Why do they refer to it as nothing if it's something?

Krauss explains that there may, in fact, never have been 'nothing'. He discusses various meanings of 'nothing', and goes on to say that maybe 'nothing' is unstable.

Krauss Wrote:I don’t make any claims to answer any questions that science cannot answer, and I have tried very carefully within the text to define what I mean by “nothing” and “something.” If those definitions differ from those you would like to adopt, so be it. Write your own book. But don’t discount the remarkable human adventure that is modern science because it doesn’t console you.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
23-07-2015, 01:24 PM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 12:31 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 12:24 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  They propose that the Universe began as a quantum fluctuation. Did this quantum fluctuation exist?

I'm certainly no expert lol!

But they seem very adamant about referring to it as nothing....

Why do they refer to it as nothing if it's something?
. Note the word "it" in your sentence. "It" denotes something. What is the "it" that they are naming nothing. Is it an absence. This would presuppose the abscence of something.even the concept nothing presupposes the concept something. When they refer to nothing to what are they referring? There's no escape from the primary fact of existence.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 02:32 PM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 01:24 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 12:31 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I'm certainly no expert lol!

But they seem very adamant about referring to it as nothing....

Why do they refer to it as nothing if it's something?
. Note the word "it" in your sentence. "It" denotes something. What is the "it" that they are naming nothing. Is it an absence. This would presuppose the abscence of something.even the concept nothing presupposes the concept something. When they refer to nothing to what are they referring? There's no escape from the primary fact of existence.

Don't ask me lo! You need to go after Hawking, Krauss, and all of the other physicists, who subscribe to a universe from nothing.

None of it really makes sense to me. It doesn't make sense that something could be caused by nothing, and it also doesn't make sense that something could exist eternally with no cause at all. That's partly why I'm agnostic. I don't have it all figured out, and don't claim to. I very simply "don't know".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2015, 04:04 PM
RE: Agnostic belief
(23-07-2015 02:32 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(23-07-2015 01:24 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  . Note the word "it" in your sentence. "It" denotes something. What is the "it" that they are naming nothing. Is it an absence. This would presuppose the abscence of something.even the concept nothing presupposes the concept something. When they refer to nothing to what are they referring? There's no escape from the primary fact of existence.

Don't ask me lo! You need to go after Hawking, Krauss, and all of the other physicists, who subscribe to a universe from nothing.

None of it really makes sense to me. It doesn't make sense that something could be caused by nothing, and it also doesn't make sense that something could exist eternally with no cause at all. That's partly why I'm agnostic. I don't have it all figured out, and don't claim to. I very simply "don't know".

Oh I'm not going after you. Just pointing out that these scientists in talking about nothing can not help but use concepts donating something. The concept nothing has no referents. It only has meaning in relation to the concept something.

This stuff doesn't make sense unless you have a firm grasp of the most fundamental concepts and their implications for the rest of knowledge. These concepts are simply taken for granted and left implicit by every philosophy except the one I follow.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: