BF2S Forums Free Will vs. Predestination

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

I don't believe it, just trying to justify why some do.

(I personally believe that the earth is just one of many, nothing special...)

(one of my favorite pics btw, puts everything in perspective)
http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/06-07/art/ … -09-18.jpg

It's from the Hubble. It's looking at just a spec of the sky. There is something like three thousand galaxies in that image.

Which means we are no big deal or anything "special". Only in our eyes are we masters of the universe. To nature we are simply another result of cause and effect.

Or possibly a result of the universe trying to understand itself? We are to my knowledge unique in that effect.

S.Lythberg wrote:

I think some people just strive for simplicity and meaning, rather than knowing that they are one of billions on a small blue and brown sphere.

They also find some security (even if it is false) in believing that the human race is protected, rather than at the mercy of random probability.

Belief in religion is much like patriotism.  Most people have a need to attach themselves to a symbol or ideology in order to feel secure or that they have a purpose.

Quite frankly, I rather enjoy the freedom of not having a purpose....

SenorToenails wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

This is basically inconsistent with the idea that God is omniscient, because it implies that God does not know what actions we will choose.

It is explained by saying god does not exist in time, so he knows what will, what has, what can happen, etc...  At least, that is my understanding.

Yes, but that knowledge is an implication in and of itself.  See, logically, this is a problem because the accompanying assumption is that God made everything.  So, in the act of making everything, it knew exactly how everything set into motion would turn out -- thereby making everything at least indirectly the result of God's will.

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

It's from the Hubble. It's looking at just a spec of the sky. There is something like three thousand galaxies in that image.

Which means we are no big deal or anything "special". Only in our eyes are we masters of the universe. To nature we are simply another result of cause and effect.

Or possibly a result of the universe trying to understand itself? We are to my knowledge unique in that effect.

Ahhhh the key phrase being, "To my knowledge", if all mysteries were revealed and all obsticles breached we may be heart broken to find out we are not all that unique after all. This I would be willing to bet on.

S.Lythberg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Isn't it because we are still on the outward leg of the "bang"? Won't we then come to a stop, then start moving backwards toward the center of the bang?

Should. But to answer this we would need to know the forces behind the bang. To understand this we must be able to grasp what caused the expansion. We don't.

based on the visible mass of the universe, it should have stopped expanding millenia ago, but it is currently exhibiting rapid acceleration, for reasons unknown

I left that out. I couldn't remember when the expansion should have stopped. But I do remember hearing the quandary.

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

It's from the Hubble. It's looking at just a spec of the sky. There is something like three thousand galaxies in that image.

Which means we are no big deal or anything "special". Only in our eyes are we masters of the universe. To nature we are simply another result of cause and effect.

Or possibly a result of the universe trying to understand itself? We are to my knowledge unique in that effect.

So, do you believe that the entirety of the universe is kind of like an infinitely large organism?

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Which means we are no big deal or anything "special". Only in our eyes are we masters of the universe. To nature we are simply another result of cause and effect.

Or possibly a result of the universe trying to understand itself? We are to my knowledge unique in that effect.

So, do you believe that the entirety of the universe is kind of like an infinitely large organism?

our whole universe could be inside an atom in another universe for all we know....

(let's hope they don't experiment with nuclear fission)

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Which means we are no big deal or anything "special". Only in our eyes are we masters of the universe. To nature we are simply another result of cause and effect.

Or possibly a result of the universe trying to understand itself? We are to my knowledge unique in that effect.

Ahhhh the key phrase being, "To my knowledge", if all mysteries were revealed and all obsticles breached we may be heart broken to find out we are not all that unique after all. This I would be willing to bet on.

I would as well, but technically, your belief in this unknown being a certain way is much like faith.  We do not yet know if there is more to this life because of our limited perspectives.

We are left with 4 options:

1)belief in life having more than what we perceive in a divine sense (religion)
2)belief in life having no divinity whatsoever (strong atheism)
3)belief in life possibly having no divinity whatsoever and sticking with the negative position as a default rather than a true belief (passive atheism)
4)no belief either way due to lack of evidence (agnostic)

I take option #3, because it appeals to the principle of Occam's Razor, which often seems to be the most logical way of approaching things.  Sure, there's an extremely small possibility of there being a God, but it's so small that there doesn't seem much of a point to believing in it.

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Or possibly a result of the universe trying to understand itself? We are to my knowledge unique in that effect.

Ahhhh the key phrase being, "To my knowledge", if all mysteries were revealed and all obsticles breached we may be heart broken to find out we are not all that unique after all. This I would be willing to bet on.

The ultimate goal of science is a theory for everything. Of course anything stated here would be based on my knowledge . Again both sides of the argument will leave you with unanswered question and demanding faith in the unknown. Or in your case betting .. gambling on the outcome.

Well the rest of nature seems to get along just fine without faith or pre-determained destiny, in fact the rest of nature will still be here when we turn to dust.

Are we that arrogant to think that faith and Gods are the only things we have to answer to? That we are something special with our own God to look after us, while the rest of the universe spins into the unknown future? We must because every other aspect of nature is oblivious to God or religion.

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ahhhh the key phrase being, "To my knowledge", if all mysteries were revealed and all obsticles breached we may be heart broken to find out we are not all that unique after all. This I would be willing to bet on.

The ultimate goal of science is a theory for everything. Of course anything stated here would be based on my knowledge . Again both sides of the argument will leave you with unanswered question and demanding faith in the unknown. Or in your case betting .. gambling on the outcome.

Well the rest of nature seems to get along just fine without faith or pre-determained destiny, in fact the rest of nature will still be here when we turn to dust.

Are we that arrogant to think that faith and Gods are the only things we have to answer to? That we are something special with our own God to look after us, while the rest of the universe spins into the unknown future? We must because every other aspect of nature is oblivious to God or religion.

One of the logical failings of human perception is the ego.  We do have a tendency to put ourselves at the center of everything, and I would argue religion is largely a result of that.

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ahhhh the key phrase being, "To my knowledge", if all mysteries were revealed and all obsticles breached we may be heart broken to find out we are not all that unique after all. This I would be willing to bet on.

The ultimate goal of science is a theory for everything. Of course anything stated here would be based on my knowledge . Again both sides of the argument will leave you with unanswered questions and demanding faith in the unknown. Or in your case betting .. gambling on the outcome.

Well the rest of nature seems to get along just fine without faith or pre-determained destiny, in fact the rest of nature will still be here when we turn to dust.

Are we that arrogant to think that faith and Gods are the only things we have to answer to? That we are something special with our own God to look after us, while the rest of the universe spins into the unknown future? We must because every other aspect of nature is oblivious to God or religion.

If we are a product of nature and we have been trying to answer these question from the start it is not entirely unreasonable to believe that understanding the universe might just be our role. In fact it makes the most sense to me. We must follow the path that come naturally to us as humans, part of that is exploring creation. My dog is on the floor licking it's ass but I'm not about to join in. I guess thats just me being arrogant.

They will adapt.. like they have for thousands of years.

tuckergustav wrote:

and what if we are not really having this e-conversation right now...what if this is just you remembering this e-conversation 20 years in the future?  What would you think of that?  are you remembering it correctly though?

..and I might just be a figment in your imagination as well.  The possibilities are endless....