So... you believe nature manifesrs intelligence? If so, please provide your justification for believing that.It seems to me that this intelligence which is manifested in nature must be pre-existing and has been expressed through evolution reasons unknown. — kindred
It's trivially true that "something cannot come from nothing", but that does not entail an infinite past.There are bigger mysteries too. Something cannot come from nothing which implies that something has always existed ad infinitum in one form or another and whether this something through the aeons of time could produce a God is highly plausible. — kindred
We may never figure out how life began. That doesn't justify believing it was not natural abiogenesis.Abiogenesis which still largely confounds scientists has no logical explanation and certainly giving rise to complex organisms means we have barely scratched the surface when it comes to explanation. — kindred
This implies that IF there is a God, he probably doesn't give a shit whether we believe in him.If God wanted to prove to anyone that he exists he could easily do that but he doesn’t and in this way he remains mysterious to his beings who are free to doubt, deny or affirm his existence. — kindred
That's logically possible. So is solipsism. Possibility (alone) does not justify belief.existence itself [is] perhaps a manifestation of his being — kindred
Abiogenesis which still largely confounds scientists — kindred
Where outside of the heads of its believers is anything affirmed? — ENOAH
I hypothesize that the "flaw" in proving God is not necessarily to be focused on God, but rather on the proving, and the idea that our flaws in proving "X" somehow seal the fate of "X". — ENOAH
What is a "logical" explanation? You seem to be making a categorical distinction: how does an explanation differ from a logical explanation? - Assuming that by "explanation" we mean something that makes sense as opposed to something that does not or cannot make sense.has no logical explanation — kindred
What is a "logical" explanation? You seem to be making a categorical distinction: how does an explanation differ from a logical explanation? - Assuming that by "explanation" we mean something that makes sense as opposed to something that does not or cannot make sense. — tim wood
When you say the universe is inevitable, how do you mean? Do you mean it is non-contingent or metaphysically necessary? — Bodhy
I think the only way to get to "nothing nothing" might be using zero. — javi2541997
:100:How could there possibly be nothing? [ ... ] Not even a quantum vacuum. What does that even mean? — T Clark
I will be clear: when you think in absolute nothing, what comes to your mind? Everything white? A sparkle? A very deep, dark, and cold ambient? — javi2541997
Fyi: I derive 'necessary non-contingency' of existence (i.e. no-things) from the "metaphysics" of classical atomism (re: void) that predates Aristotlean 'substance' by a few centuries, Christianity by several centuries, and Anselm's 'necessary being' by about a millennium and a half.Christian metaphysics — Bodhy
You are imagining something. Nothing is the absence of any qualities or attributes. It can't be imagined because by that very act you are imagining something. — Tom Storm
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.