Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-03-2013, 08:20 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 07:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 07:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I agree.

The question still remains why is the cosmological constant so precisely tuned to allow life? I only find two explanations credible. It is tuned by design, or there exist some sort of multi-verse. It didn't show it in the clip, but Susskind went on to say that if the multi verse were ever shown to be untenable physicists would be hard pressed to rebutt creationists.
You still have the cart before the horse.

If the universe weren't conducive to our kind of life, we wouldn't be here to wonder about it.

And only a tiny fraction of the universe is habitable. Not so finely tuned. Dodgy

Who is to say that only an tiny fraction of the universe is habitable? Suppose life arose around an undersea volcanic vent. When it first arose, only a tiny fraction of the ocean was habitable. Then life evolved to inhabit the rest of the ocean and at that time only a fraction of the planet was habitable. Then life evolved to live on land and the whole planet was habitable.

Life has tendency to make uninhabitable places habitable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 08:25 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:02 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 07:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  You still have the cart before the horse.
Had to...

Your looking at the roll of a hundred dice after the fact and saying, wow, look at how they landed!? Must be some divine intervention because the chances of that combination are so low!

No, there is only one combination I could ever see, and the roll happened to land on it.

Your argument only makes sense if you can credibly show that a wide range of values for the cosmological constant can yield life. The accepted belief amoung scientist is that were not the cosmological constant the precise value it is, it is not likely there would be life.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 08:35 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 08:02 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  Had to...

Your looking at the roll of a hundred dice after the fact and saying, wow, look at how they landed!? Must be some divine intervention because the chances of that combination are so low!

No, there is only one combination I could ever see, and the roll happened to land on it.

Your argument only makes sense if you can credibly show that a wide range of values for the cosmological constant can yield life. The accepted belief amoung scientist is that were not the cosmological constant the precise value it is, it is not likely there would be life.
No, my argument makes sense because there is no necessity for life to exist. Life as we know it is contingent on this kind of universe.
If the universe was very different, we wouldn't be here. There is nothing that says we are supposed to be here.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
14-03-2013, 08:41 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 08:02 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  Had to...

Your looking at the roll of a hundred dice after the fact and saying, wow, look at how they landed!? Must be some divine intervention because the chances of that combination are so low!

No, there is only one combination I could ever see, and the roll happened to land on it.


Your argument only makes sense if you can credibly show that a wide range of values for the cosmological constant can yield life. The accepted belief amoung scientist is that were not the cosmological constant the precise value it is, it is not likely there would be life.

So have you determined all the possible sets of universes, and you have an understanding of what these universes would consist of? (how strong are the forces, are there elements, if so how many, what are their properties)

Then you found all possible configurations the elements that universe could possible bond together to make sure there was absolutely no possibility that a system of self replicating molecules(or another universes equivalent) could form?

There is only one you can see, good for you, last I checked, your not all knowing.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Adenosis's post
14-03-2013, 08:43 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 08:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  No, there is only one combination I could ever see, and the roll happened to land on it.

Your argument only makes sense if you can credibly show that a wide range of values for the cosmological constant can yield life. The accepted belief amoung scientist is that were not the cosmological constant the precise value it is, it is not likely there would be life.


No, my argument makes sense because there is no necessity for life to exist. Life as we know it is contingent on this kind of universe.
If the universe was very different, we wouldn't be here. There is nothing that says we are supposed to be here.

Why are we here then? Happenstance? Is it happenstance that the cosmological constant just happened to be so precise(as in 120 decimal places) that it fell on the one value that allows for us to exist?

Like Susskind said in the clip, no one believes that, there has to be an explanation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 08:47 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 08:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, my argument makes sense because there is no necessity for life to exist. Life as we know it is contingent on this kind of universe.
If the universe was very different, we wouldn't be here. There is nothing that says we are supposed to be here.

Why are we here then? Happenstance? Is it happenstance that the cosmological constant just happened to be so precise(as in 120 decimal places) that it fell on the one value that allows for us to exist?

Like Susskind said in the clip, no one believes that, there has to be an explanation.



And here we can see the core of your delusion, incredulity. Your inability to accept that 'shit just happened' as an answer until we can come up with evidence to support a better conclusion. But NO! That isn't good enough for you, there HAD to be a CAUSE and you NEED to know it RIGHT NOW! And in the absence of evidence, you'll take whatever explanation makes you FEEL GOOD!

For fuck's sake, that is childish...

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
14-03-2013, 08:49 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:47 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And here we can see the core of your delusion, incredulity. Your inability to accept that 'shit just happened' as an answer until we can come up with evidence to support a better conclusion. But NO! That isn't good enough for you, there HAD to be a CAUSE and you NEED to know it RIGHT NOW! And in the absence of evidence, you'll take whatever explanation makes you FEEL GOOD!

For fuck's sake, that is childish...

And if he doesn't find one, then god did it.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 09:24 PM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2013 09:32 PM by cheapthrillseaker.)
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:49 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 08:47 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And here we can see the core of your delusion, incredulity. Your inability to accept that 'shit just happened' as an answer until we can come up with evidence to support a better conclusion. But NO! That isn't good enough for you, there HAD to be a CAUSE and you NEED to know it RIGHT NOW! And in the absence of evidence, you'll take whatever explanation makes you FEEL GOOD!

For fuck's sake, that is childish...

And if he doesn't find one, then god did it.
Which is a pity because this is a very old way of thinking. This is how gods where created by humans, in order to help cope with the unknown. The disregard of human advancement for the past 2000 years is... well...

Tim Minchin sang it so well...




[Image: 3d366d5c-72a0-4228-b835-f404c2970188_zps...1381867723]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cheapthrillseaker's post
14-03-2013, 09:34 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Like Susskind said in the clip, no one believes that, there has to be an explanation.

No there doesn't. If there are (approaching) an infinite number of universes, one of them would have "frozen out" the properties that led to ours, eventually. If there is something else going on, your god of the gaps is premature, and it's premature to speculate. No gods required. What you need, ("there HAS to be") is irrelevant. There HAS to be nothing. What god are you talking about, anyway ? Certainly not the Hebrew god of war - (the armies), (the 40th son of El Elyon from Sumeria), and the husband of the goddess Ashura, (the Hebrew god). What god ARE you talking about ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 09:40 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(14-03-2013 08:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 08:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, my argument makes sense because there is no necessity for life to exist. Life as we know it is contingent on this kind of universe.
If the universe was very different, we wouldn't be here. There is nothing that says we are supposed to be here.

Why are we here then? Happenstance? Is it happenstance that the cosmological constant just happened to be so precise(as in 120 decimal places) that it fell on the one value that allows for us to exist?

Like Susskind said in the clip, no one believes that, there has to be an explanation.
Where do you get "cosmological constant just happened to be so precise(as in 120 decimal places)"?

That is a mischaracterization of the issue.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: