Designed Universe

Hello Tanya8! First of all I am really sorry for coming late here. I tried to post a response in the evening but seemingly there was a glitch in the system which wasn't allowing me to open a discussion, not even my own. I tried for a while and then got offline. Now I see that I can open a discussion and post a response, so here I am:-) In fact even with cars and chairs, you will find many people who haven't seen their making but still they believe others who tell them that they are made by human hands. why they believe? because it makes a perfect sense that nothing can create itself automatically without some making behind it, at least nothing in this material world that we can see. If their is some flaw left in making a car, an airplane, a train or a space shuttle, you will see the devastation brought about by missing even some minor details. a fission or a fusion reaction just need error of control to convert itself from energy resource to a calamity. If you are engineer, you would know that how complicated a job becomes when variables increases. We are unable to treat a differential equation above 4th order. Even 4th order equations will take tremendous computational resources to work at. The design of universe requires millions of billions of order of a differential equation. This equation, if human race will ever be able to work it out in first place, can not be treated by millions of our high profile intelligent super computers working 24/7/365. It amazes me to ponder that who first worked out and then solved this equation? It is easy to deny that there isn't any "Being" existing, just because we can't see but it is impossible for me to even think that how "chance" can be successful here with billions of parameters involved. Science doesn't believe in chance per se even in as ordinary matter as involving a second order equation, then how can I be made believe in 'chance' when order of equation is billions of times higher? I quote: "If he made everything in the universe, what did he make it out of?" It's surprising that you should come up with this line of argument because this is the line of argument presented by theists against atheists. Theists ask atheists that if it came out of blue then from where the building blocks came? Theists have the answer that GOD brought them about but Atheists are silent over it? I was really surprised that this argument is being used as argumentative evidence against existence of GOD. In fact it proves that to bring something about we need somebody to bring it about:-) I'll come back after your response:-)

Wow that is very deep - I am going to give it some thought and get back to you if that is ok! x

I'm a little confused by your post, not sure what point you are making. But all your post seems to amount to is you can't see the point in the way things develop? all the best urban

"They just seem to develop on their own. There doesn't seem to be a point in the process where inserting a designer makes sense. If he made everything in the universe, what did he make it out of?" The answer to me seems pretty self-evident: himself. My logic flows thusly, do you choose that your heart beats? Can you choose when it will cease to beat, and your life is at an end? Of course not, scientists may call it organ failure or any other number of things but my point is science doesn't have all the answers and probably never will. What was once science fiction is now science fact, and it seems a bit arrogant to express the opinion that there is no creator because I cannot witness him, her or it. I also cannot see air, but that doesn't mean that it does not exist. This discussion seems to me to be about intelligent design vs evolution and as such seems to question the nature or very existence of a G-d, deity, or creator. It seems to me that intelligent design and evolution complement rather than detract for each other. Except of course for some of the silly notions in current intelligent design theory that seems to question that Dinosaurs ever existed, or the time period in which they did. People in favor of intelligent design seem to think that the creator made everything as in verse from the bible, which they are taking out of context to begin with. There are many hidden things in the original hewbrew book of Genesis that you have to literally decode. The world being created in 6 days is not a literal six days. The very notion that the creator would use something as silly and blasphemous as Science to achieve his goals seems ludicrious to most devout christians and believers of intelligent design. Conversely the scientist are just as pig-headed. Wanting absolute proof of a creator. It doesn't seem to occur to them that their beloved science could be created by and used by the creator to create everything. I rather think that common sense versions of both theories make much more sense. Personally, and speaking only for myself (redundantly so) life seems far to0 planned, to have happened by randomless alone. This star exploding randomly, temperature, air, carbon in just the right astronomical amounts randomlly form in a manner that can support life. A cell divides randomly, things evolve or happen again by random chance and I could go on, and on. I am no mathmatician, but even I can grasp a glimpse of the math and probabilities involved for life to just randomly happen. The notion of randomness in general strikes me as laughable, let alone on such a grand scale. Everything I have personally witnessed in life has had a purpose, I have never seen anything just happen randomly. Food for thought.

Hi Tanya! I am sorry I didn't notice this dicussion earlier, but you should have called me!! Ok here we are again with the blind watchmaker. I'll try to find some new arguments we have not discussed already. I think the key to understand a comparison between a chair creator and a person creator is hidden in the difference between a chair an a person (that would be a scientific method of analyzing the topic, right?). 1.The first thing is that a chair is not made by chairs, not even by a nice couch, so why would be persons made by a greater person? So in my scientific research for god, that means that god is not antropomorphic, god is just something else and not directly related or similar, like chairs have nothing to do with humans. 2.The second thing is what is the reason of being of a chair (or otherwise said, why did the creator created it). We can conclude chairs and everything else made by humans are tools, and their objective is making easier human life. The reason for a chair to exist, is someone to sit in. The reason for a car to exist, is someone to drive it. So we have to find the reason of existance of a human being in order to define why the creator created it. A simple mind would say that people are tools of god like chairs are tools of people, but for me this is a great mistake, since this way of thinking is forgeting what we stated in "1". Since god is not a human, we are not his chairs. If god was a human, chairs would be made by chairs. Or what is the same, all in the universe would be human and human creators at the same time. So from this second point, we can conclude humans have a reason to be, which is more interesting than the reason to be of a chair, since chairs create nothing and humans at least create chairs. We have now to research for what exactly is that "reason to be" and we can deduct what is god from the answer. For me our reason to be is precisely creating things (like chairs, or in a higher level, like art, life oportunities, dreams...). So for me god is Inspiration, the key of creativity. "What did he make it out of" I suppose you didn't use intentionally "he" lol. "What did god made people of" that is easy: Inspiration made human being of humanoid chimps or whatever. Inspiration is the reason why we are like we are instead of like sirens or faunos or minotaurs or something we couldn't even imagine (like a chair couldn't imagine how it would be if its creator decided to make it different). May Inspiration be with you ever.:)