Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-03-2013, 04:16 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
If you let us know what you read in your research, that left unanswered questions, I'm sure we can come up with recommendations for further reading.

"To hate man and worship God seems to be the sum of all creeds." — Robert Ingersoll
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2013, 04:24 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
To the very young or the very stupid, I like to explain why life flourishes here on earth.

Walking out to the sidewalk, I show them a crack in the sidewalk. Within that crack, blades of grass grow.
As we look around on the concrete, we don't find any grass growing on it. We only find it growing in places suitable for it to grow. Alternately we can look at the cracks along the concrete wall and depending on where the crack it, we may find some blades growing there, but usually. not every crack is suitable. Why is this ?

The cracks on the sidewalk can more easily contain and hold dirt that is wisked through the air by the wind.
The cracks on the wall aren't as suited to retain dirt and a good rain can wash away what little dirt was there.

Natural processes create cracks in the sidewalk. The instability of nature creates places where life can grow.
Not all places naturally made are suitable for life.

By examining the universe, we have really good information and evidence that shows the beginnings of the expansion that our universe is currently undergoing. We have seen how stars form. We have seen accretion disks. We can view other planetary solar systems. We have experiments that show how the early building blocks of life can form by recreating the conditions of the early atmosphere on earth.

So we can show that the building blocks of life can come from inorganic compounds that are mixed, heated, subjected to ultraviolet light and electricity.
We can show how evolution works as it is observed on this planet.
All life here has come from a common ancestor.

Life is no more fine tuned than a crack in the sidewalk.
Life grows where it can.

Simple as that.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Rahn127's post
13-03-2013, 04:55 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(13-03-2013 04:24 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  To the very young or the very stupid, I like to explain why life flourishes here on earth.

Walking out to the sidewalk, I show them a crack in the sidewalk. Within that crack, blades of grass grow.
As we look around on the concrete, we don't find any grass growing on it. We only find it growing in places suitable for it to grow. Alternately we can look at the cracks along the concrete wall and depending on where the crack it, we may find some blades growing there, but usually. not every crack is suitable. Why is this ?

The cracks on the sidewalk can more easily contain and hold dirt that is wisked through the air by the wind.
The cracks on the wall aren't as suited to retain dirt and a good rain can wash away what little dirt was there.

Natural processes create cracks in the sidewalk. The instability of nature creates places where life can grow.
Not all places naturally made are suitable for life.

By examining the universe, we have really good information and evidence that shows the beginnings of the expansion that our universe is currently undergoing. We have seen how stars form. We have seen accretion disks. We can view other planetary solar systems. We have experiments that show how the early building blocks of life can form by recreating the conditions of the early atmosphere on earth.

So we can show that the building blocks of life can come from inorganic compounds that are mixed, heated, subjected to ultraviolet light and electricity.
We can show how evolution works as it is observed on this planet.
All life here has come from a common ancestor.

Life is no more fine tuned than a crack in the sidewalk.
Life grows where it can.

Simple as that.

Very nice analogy.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2013, 05:04 PM (This post was last modified: 13-03-2013 05:08 PM by Adenosis.)
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(13-03-2013 03:13 PM)Godexists Wrote:  The universe is finely tuned to permit life on our planet. Over 120 fine tune constants are know up to know, and as more time pasts, more are discovered. This might be due to chance, to physical need, or to design. Chance is a very bad explanation. Some advocate a Multiverse. But to have just one life permitting universe, you need 1 to 10^500 attempts to get it done. Thats a 1 with 500 zeros. If we put it in comparison, that in our universe, there exist around 10^80 atoms, this shows how improbable it is, that a Multiverse could explain finetuning. Beside this, the Multiverse argument does not explain away God. A mechanism needs to be in place to trigger these multiverses. It could not be by physical need, since if so, why are there many planets, which are not life permitting, but our is ? So its best explained by design. Our earth/solar/moon system is a very strong evidence. Our solar system is embedded at the right position in our galaxy, neither too close, nor too far from the center of the galaxy. Its also the only location, which alouds us to explore the universe, In a other location, and we would not see more than stellar clouds. The earth has the right distance from the sun, and so has the moon from the earth. The size of the moon, and the earth, is the right one. Our planet has the needed minerals, and water. It has the right atmosphere, and a ozon protecting mantle. Jupiter attracts all asteroids , avoiding these to fall to the earth, and make life impossible. The earths magnetic field protects us from the deadly rays of the sun. The velocity of rotation of the earth is just right. And so is the axial tilt of the earth. Beside this, volcano activities, earth quakes, the size of the crust of the earth, and more over 70 different paramenters must be just right. To believe, all these are just right by chance, needs a big leap of faith. This is indeed maibe the strongest argument for theism.

And this is what results from someone trying to twist the evidence of reality to justify their beliefs. Life formed and evolved into we see today because it could. If the constants were different, perhaps different life would arise. Some things like the energy of empty space could not increase drastically or no stars, and in turn planets or life, could have formed.

String theory imples the way in which the dimensions are curled up or folded in on themselves, determines the constants or laws of that universe. This is not proven, and is not a graduated scientific theory (as far as I know). It is only one possibility. A possibility that we are not assuming to be the truth, unlike theists with the god hypothesis.

How does comparing the amount of possible universes given by string theory with the estimated particles in our universe get used to determine probability? This makes no sense.

What reason do you have to believe the solar system has to be in a specific part of the galaxy to have life?

Yes, our planet has the necessary elements. Much like any secondary star system would have after the primary star reaches iron in the core. The star then dies and explodes, spreading the heavier elements out which form a secondary star system that can have planets.

This is just a conglomeration of stupid. Doing research into such things, with the sole purpose of proving creation, will yield no net increase in understanding.

(13-03-2013 03:16 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(13-03-2013 01:04 PM)FlyingPizzaMonster Wrote:  There are quintillions of stars in the known universe, and planets are apparently extremely common. Earth is the only place CLOSE ENOUGH FOR US TO EXPLORE (i.e. a portion of our solar system-one out of 8 planets ) that has life. The rare earth hypothesis is an unfounded positive assertion.
no, its actually well founded.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t232-lif...ossibility


Quote:In the 1960s the odds that any given planet in the universe would possess the necessary conditions to support intelligent physical life were shown to be less than one in ten thousand.5 In 2001 those odds shrank to less than one in a number so large it might as well be infinity (10173)

No, it's not well founded. If you can demonstrate that every planet in the universe is void of life then yes it is, if not no. We aren't even aware of all the planets in the universe, so how could anyone say with certainty that there is no life anywhere but earth? this is a belief tied in with your belief in god. You think your special, that god made you, blah blah. Well, it's a nice fairy tale, but that's all it is. Substantiate your claims.

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
13-03-2013, 05:05 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(13-03-2013 04:24 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  To the very young or the very stupid, I like to explain why life flourishes here on earth.

Walking out to the sidewalk, I show them a crack in the sidewalk. Within that crack, blades of grass grow.
As we look around on the concrete, we don't find any grass growing on it. We only find it growing in places suitable for it to grow. Alternately we can look at the cracks along the concrete wall and depending on where the crack it, we may find some blades growing there, but usually. not every crack is suitable. Why is this ?

The cracks on the sidewalk can more easily contain and hold dirt that is wisked through the air by the wind.
The cracks on the wall aren't as suited to retain dirt and a good rain can wash away what little dirt was there.

Natural processes create cracks in the sidewalk. The instability of nature creates places where life can grow.
Not all places naturally made are suitable for life.

By examining the universe, we have really good information and evidence that shows the beginnings of the expansion that our universe is currently undergoing. We have seen how stars form. We have seen accretion disks. We can view other planetary solar systems. We have experiments that show how the early building blocks of life can form by recreating the conditions of the early atmosphere on earth.

So we can show that the building blocks of life can come from inorganic compounds that are mixed, heated, subjected to ultraviolet light and electricity.
We can show how evolution works as it is observed on this planet.
All life here has come from a common ancestor.

Life is no more fine tuned than a crack in the sidewalk.
Life grows where it can.

Simple as that.
Seconded. Thumbsup

[Image: 3d366d5c-72a0-4228-b835-f404c2970188_zps...1381867723]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2013, 05:13 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
Welcome to the forum, Godexists.

Enter TTA... god exits.

Drinking Beverage


ps, I adore the 'fine-tuning' argument.
It essentially says that if things were different... then... things would be different.

Awesome!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like DLJ's post
13-03-2013, 05:44 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(13-03-2013 03:13 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(13-03-2013 12:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  We don't know that there is life only on earth. We only know of life on earth. Those are entirely different statements.

And 'fine-tuning' is an anthropocentric delusion; it has the cart before the horse. We are fine-tuned to the universe, not the other way around.

The universe is finely tuned to permit life on our planet. Over 120 fine tune constants are know up to know, and as more time pasts, more are discovered.

The fuck?!? Someone must've been out sick that day in grade school where they taught the mathematical definition of the word "constant". Universal constants can't be "fine-tuned", like by definition. It is true that if any of them were different, things would be well, as DLJ points out, different. And we likely wouldn't be having this inane discussion. Everything must be this way. Everything must be this way, yeah. ... And now I'm gonna resist the temptation to post The Doors "Soft Parade" for like the umpteenth time.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
13-03-2013, 06:36 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(13-03-2013 03:13 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(13-03-2013 12:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  We don't know that there is life only on earth. We only know of life on earth. Those are entirely different statements.

And 'fine-tuning' is an anthropocentric delusion; it has the cart before the horse. We are fine-tuned to the universe, not the other way around.
The universe is finely tuned to permit life on our planet. Over 120 fine tune constants are know up to know, and as more time pasts, more are discovered. This might be due to chance, to physical need, or to design. Chance is a very bad explanation. Some advocate a Multiverse. But to have just one life permitting universe, you need 1 to 10^500 attempts to get it done. Thats a 1 with 500 zeros. If we put it in comparison, that in our universe, there exist around 10^80 atoms, this shows how improbable it is, that a Multiverse could explain finetuning. Beside this, the Multiverse argument does not explain away God. A mechanism needs to be in place to trigger these multiverses. It could not be by physical need, since if so, why are there many planets, which are not life permitting, but our is ? So its best explained by design. Our earth/solar/moon system is a very strong evidence. Our solar system is embedded at the right position in our galaxy, neither too close, nor too far from the center of the galaxy. Its also the only location, which alouds us to explore the universe, In a other location, and we would not see more than stellar clouds. The earth has the right distance from the sun, and so has the moon from the earth. The size of the moon, and the earth, is the right one. Our planet has the needed minerals, and water. It has the right atmosphere, and a ozon protecting mantle. Jupiter attracts all asteroids , avoiding these to fall to the earth, and make life impossible. The earths magnetic field protects us from the deadly rays of the sun. The velocity of rotation of the earth is just right. And so is the axial tilt of the earth. Beside this, volcano activities, earth quakes, the size of the crust of the earth, and more over 70 different paramenters must be just right. To believe, all these are just right by chance, needs a big leap of faith. This is indeed maibe the strongest argument for theism.

Anthropocentric hubris. Your hidden assumption is that the universe is here so that we can exist.

YOU HAVE IT ASS-BACKWARDS.

We evolved in the universe as it exists. If it were different, we wouldn't be here. Maybe something else would.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
13-03-2013, 07:15 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(13-03-2013 06:36 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-03-2013 03:13 PM)Godexists Wrote:  The universe is finely tuned to permit life on our planet. Over 120 fine tune constants are know up to know, and as more time pasts, more are discovered. This might be due to chance, to physical need, or to design. Chance is a very bad explanation. Some advocate a Multiverse. But to have just one life permitting universe, you need 1 to 10^500 attempts to get it done. Thats a 1 with 500 zeros. If we put it in comparison, that in our universe, there exist around 10^80 atoms, this shows how improbable it is, that a Multiverse could explain finetuning. Beside this, the Multiverse argument does not explain away God. A mechanism needs to be in place to trigger these multiverses. It could not be by physical need, since if so, why are there many planets, which are not life permitting, but our is ? So its best explained by design. Our earth/solar/moon system is a very strong evidence. Our solar system is embedded at the right position in our galaxy, neither too close, nor too far from the center of the galaxy. Its also the only location, which alouds us to explore the universe, In a other location, and we would not see more than stellar clouds. The earth has the right distance from the sun, and so has the moon from the earth. The size of the moon, and the earth, is the right one. Our planet has the needed minerals, and water. It has the right atmosphere, and a ozon protecting mantle. Jupiter attracts all asteroids , avoiding these to fall to the earth, and make life impossible. The earths magnetic field protects us from the deadly rays of the sun. The velocity of rotation of the earth is just right. And so is the axial tilt of the earth. Beside this, volcano activities, earth quakes, the size of the crust of the earth, and more over 70 different paramenters must be just right. To believe, all these are just right by chance, needs a big leap of faith. This is indeed maibe the strongest argument for theism.

Anthropocentric hubris. Your hidden assumption is that the universe is here so that we can exist.

YOU HAVE IT ASS-BACKWARDS.

We evolved in the universe as it exists. If it were different, we wouldn't be here. Maybe something else would.
If the fundamental constants like the atomic forces would be different, no universe would exist. That demands for a explanation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2013, 07:16 PM
RE: Please present explanations which make philosophical naturalism plausible
(13-03-2013 05:13 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Welcome to the forum, Godexists.

Enter TTA... god exits.

Drinking Beverage


ps, I adore the 'fine-tuning' argument.
It essentially says that if things were different... then... things would be different.

Awesome!
No, it says, no universe would exist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: