I Believe In Uh, Well, Something. Here's Why.
Now, before you get all uppity and in arms or whatever, I've got to clarify here so you don't crawl up my butt.
I was raised Baptist, and my mother is Baptist. I had a crisis of faith at about twelve, and when I sort of realized that maybe reading a book that men wrote was a bad idea, I dropped it, and started going with what logic had taught me. What we can percieve is about as real as it gets, and since there's no personal evidence for a divine, why in the world would I believe in anything? For the longest time, I was athiest. Then agnostic. And now I'm starting to think that there's something to this machination.
I don't really consider myself a philosopher, no, but whenever I start to ponder on exostential nonsense, I keep finding things either ending with a zero-sum(or nothing. Not like contemporary nothing. Literal nothing.) or infinity. Time is the real punk in all of this too, considering it's a human construct and kind of hard to uh, break, in terms of thought. In any event, with our current knowledge, our best bet at what the 'beginning' was was the big bang. And if you don't know what that is, you should probably be slapped. Right. So. The big bang. The creation of uh, everything. What happened before that? And what happened before that? And what happened before that? And what happened before that? And so forth. See where I'm goin' with this?
So look, sure, there's probably an explanation for that too, but it all comes down to there being at least some form of greater power to something. And I'm not just talking out of my ass. At least, really hope I'm not. I'm using a keyboard right now. That'd be... awkward. In so many ways. And I'm not insisting that whatever it is has benevolence, or is even capable of benevolence, but nothing doesn't just become something and play out like it has without that something being an audacious fuck.
So let's go back to that big bang point. The whole creation of the universe there. Let's assume, for argument, that this was indeed the initial point of creation. That this is where existance began. Now, the opposite of the universe existing is it not existing. And if the universe doesn't exist, by that logic, then nothing exists. And if nothing exists, then why would it suddenly spawn something? Not to mention a something that's so dirty and complex that it doesn't even make sense anymore. We can see, at some points or another that there are connections. Building blocks. Orbits. Mathematical equations for figuring things out, but everything is still, when taken from a different angle, complete and utter chaos. Now only something with a mind to, as simple or complex as it is, could ruin the perfection that nothing had going on so well. And let's say the big bang isn't the point of origin anyways. We can find another point of origin. And another.
Right so, my biggest flaw with this whole logic train I had here is mostly that uh, I do not understand the 'fourth dimension' or how quantum physics work at all. What with the whole infinity zen loop nonsense n' all. That might play in, I'm sure.
Good!
Side Score: 13
|
 |
Bad!
Side Score: 5
|
|
|
|
|
5
points
Mostly seemed pretty good, logical and all. And if nothing exists, then why would it suddenly spawn something? This is possibly one of the biggest questions in science, philosophy and theology, and probably will be for a long time. I wont' even begin to speculate on it, I simply can't say. Now only something with a mind to, as simple or complex as it is, could ruin the perfection that nothing had going on so well. This is the only bit I had a problem with. Are you insinuating that the only possible explanation for the above creation is a conscious effort? Not only is it insulting to academic integrity to seek such an easy, and weak answer, but it's also a contradiction unless you go the whole way and say that this being has and always will exist, therefore they are exempt from creation. Which just makes the point even more ridiculous. Side: Good!
This is the only bit I had a problem with. Are you insinuating that the only possible explanation for the above creation is a conscious effort? You know, it is a pretty weak point, and I don't have any defense against that, which kind of makes it more of a personal belief than anything(Oh god. Not that.), but let me reciprocate(Say nothing new at all, that is.) a little here. My logic isn't so much that there's no other explanation for the origin of everything as uh, a creator, or perhaps and inciter, but rather that only the irrational can cause something as flawless as nothing to become well... this mess. And as I've understood, the only irrational things are the things that have some form of consciousness. They always screw something up. I suppose that's applying the human condition universally, and it's unfair, but we work with what we have, right? Side: Good!
2
points
Let's assume, for argument, that [the big bang] was indeed the initial point of creation ... if nothing exists, then why would it suddenly spawn something? ... And let's say the big bang isn't the point of origin anyways. We can find another point of origin. And another. Yeah. Like you've hit on, the problem is either the universe has a starting point or it doesn't, and neither make much sense. We feel the need to attribute a starting point to the universe because that's how we understand things. Hence Big Bang. So we either have to accept that the universe just sorta started there, or we have to accept that there is a force that caused the Big Bang to emerge from nothingness, and this force is itself beyond the necessity for creation. Cuz, if you say "Well, whatever created the Big Bang must have been created by something and so forth," it seems like the only solution to the problem is to posit that whatever force or cause propelled the Big Bang exists outside of the constraints of the universe as we know it. And, of course, since science only deals with the reason and logic we can investigate here in the universe, I don't think it's the job of science to speculate over what happened before the Big Bang. .... what was the question again? lol sorry. Side: Good!
|
1
point
The universe is ultimately absurd; for either something always was, or something came from nothing; both don't make much sense. Perhaps one day we'll be able to reason away our considerations of time and the absurdity of the beginning, but time is such a part of our daily experience from birth and makes up much of our conception of the world being able to understand what ever math shows us our concerns are unwarranted likely would be difficult to intuitively understand. Side: Bad!
1
point
Firstly, your beliefs aren't bad at all. I'm just posting to clarify things. Time is the real punk in all of this too, considering it's a human construct Time exists without humanity. It's our perception and measurement of it that is purely subjective. So. The big bang. The creation of uh, everything. What happened before that? And what happened before that? And what happened before that? And what happened before that? And so forth. See where I'm goin' with this? We believe that the Big Bang is what brought our space and time into existence. So asking what happened "before" is like asking what is north of the North Pole? It's not a good question, though it is a natural one. As for what caused the Big Bang, we simply don't know. But I am a strong advocate of M-theory, or Brane theory. It may seem a bit boggling at first, but read this, it may help. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory but it all comes down to there being at least some form of greater power to something. Bear in mind that a deity would be subject to the same regress that you proposed, unless otherwise specified. And if nothing exists, then why would it suddenly spawn something? This is where shiz gets complicated. Would I be correct in assuming that my definition of nothing is very different to yours? I'm guessing you believe that nothing is synonymous with non-existence. But, in quantum mechanics, nothing is actually what you would call something. Because if you strip away all matter and radiation from a space, you will notice that there is something. Nothing is actually like a big soup of what we call "virtual particles". These are particles that exist for limited space and time, and are linked to what are known as quantum fluctuations. A quantum fluctuation is where the laws of conservation are briefly violated, and the energy of a given point can spike dramatically. This allows the creation of pairs of virtual particles, for example, electrons and positrons. The former is regular matter, but the latter is anti-matter. The two will annihilate each other, and the energy produced is great, leading to speculation that our universe could have come from this. So there, that's my definition of "nothing"! I recommend Lawrence Krauss for more information.
Side: Bad!
I don't quite understand your definition of nothing. if you strip away all matter and radiation from a space, you will notice that there is something. Okay. Well, personally, I believe if you take away all matter and radiation and are still left with something, you obviously have not yet reached the state of nothing. In order to be nothing, you'd have to take away the particles as well. The question would then become, "How did these particles come into existence?" Unless I just totally missed something. Side: Good!
1
point
I don't quite understand your definition of nothing. Lol, no-one does! As I said, nothing takes a very different meaning in quantum mechanics. I can try to summarize it as: the state of space without conventional matter, leaving only dark and virtual matter. Okay. Well, personally, I believe if you take away all matter and radiation and are still left with something, you obviously have not yet reached the state of nothing. In order to be nothing, you'd have to take away the particles as well. The question would then become, "How did these particles come into existence?" Unless I just totally missed something. No, you'd be somewhat correct. But what I'm saying is that the universe wasn't created from your nothing, it was probably created from my nothing. I'm not talking about you here, but when theist debaters say "something from nothing", they tend to ignore that nothing has different meanings. Side: Bad!
|
