The Origin of Life and the Universe

[Peregrine]

First, this debate is between Incanus and I for now. Any other posts will be moved/deleted as appropriate. I want a chance to argue his points before 15 more ideas appear here.

 

Now, Incanus. I quote from your post in the evolution thread:

I would also like to start a discussion on the origin of the universe. I have a pretty solid argument that our universe must have been created by a willful entity

 

Present your arguments.

[Switch]

Er Peregrine... dare I ask what the point is of making a thread of you versus Incanus? Couldn't this be done via PM? :huh: Really a thread has to be something the public can discuss... otherwise it may as well just be done via PM.

[Peregrine]

Well, I'll open it to anyone after a few posts. Call me selfish, but I want the first shot at his arguments, and he did post a challenge.

[Albareth]

Besides - debate-duels are fun to watch. :P

[Pikeman85]

As much as I'd like to argue as soon as Icanus posts, I will respect your wishes and refrain. However if I notice a point you miss Peregrine, I'll PM you ;)

[Incanus]

I don't know why this is "Peregrine vs. Incanus". Personally, I try to take a more open-minded approach to discussion, but...

 

Assume all of the known universe, and call it Entity A.

 

The possible explanations for Entity A are 4:

 

1) Entity A exists alone, and had a beginning.

 

2) Entity A exists alone, and is itself eternal.

 

3) Entity A exists alongside an infinite number of other entities, without God.

 

4) Entity A exists alongside an infinite number of other entities, with God.

 

You may think there are other possibilities for Entity A, but I think the complete argument will encompass all other possitilities. If you think of something I haven't thought of, just post it.

 

Explanation 1 is not possible. Assuming Entity A exists alone, it would have never had a beginning, because Entity A can not appear out of absolute nothingness.

 

Explanation 2 is not possible. The probability of Entity A existing alone is 0. Think of a hat full of infinite possitilities, but only one truly exists. It can not be possible that Entity A, with the laws that define its "somethingness" could be the only entity in existence.

 

Explanation 3 is not possible. If there are an infinite number of entities existing in the realm of infinite possibilites, one of them is God.

 

Explanation 4 is all that remains.

 

Let me know if you think I've missed anything. :blink:

[Daerk]

I don't like the idea of a moderator posting a duel thread with a forum member... much less a forum member who has been recently in such an issue concerning the nature of his/her/it's posts... and received a Strike for his dealings with a moderator.

 

Hmm...

 

-- D

[Peregrine]

First, let me say this: I have challenged him not because of who he is, but the point he wants to make. I don't see the problem with 1v1 debates, as Albareth said, they're fun to watch. I wouldn't mind seeing more of them actually, as long as its a discussion of the issue, not a flame war. If this turns into a flame war, I'll lock it without hesitation, but until then I don't see anything wrong with it.

 

Incanus, I have a question for you. Do you intend to argue that God still exists, or merely that a higher power was involved in the creation of our universe?

 

Now your arguments, point by point:

 

Explanation 1 is not possible. Assuming Entity A exists alone, it would have never had a beginning, because Entity A can not appear out of absolute nothingness.

 

Agreed. There must be at least one additional entity before our universe. I do not apply the same statement to anything before that, however. Since as of now we have exactly zero ways of making more than a guess at what came before us, the possibility of the universe immediately before ours coming into existence out of nothing can not be eliminated.

 

Explanation 2 is not possible. The probability of Entity A existing alone is 0. Think of a hat full of infinite possitilities, but only one truly exists. It can not be possible that Entity A, with the laws that define its "somethingness" could be the only entity in existence.

 

Agreed. Evidence has been found that our universe in this form has a beginning, and therefore can not be eternal. Again and for the same reason, my previous argument applies here as well. The same "this can not be a single eternal entity" rule does not necessarily apply to anything beyond our universe. Since nothing is known about the previous universe, no statements may be made about it. The laws of our universe can not be assumed true, therefore probability is irrelevant.

 

3) Entity A exists alongside an infinite number of other entities, without God.

 

Possible, but unprovable. The most reasonable option of your four points, in my opinion.

 

Explanation 3 is not possible. If there are an infinite number of entities existing in the realm of infinite possibilites, one of them is God.

 

Wrong. You misunderstand the concept of infinity. Nowhere does it say that every one of the infinite entities are different. If I have infinite atoms, for example, that does not mean that one of my atoms is God. The existence of infinite entites does not disprove the existence of God, but it does not prove it.

 

Explanation 4 is all that remains.

 

Wrong. Since explanation 3 is not necessarily incorrect, explanation 4 can not be assumed true.

 

 

Your basic argument is flawed. When presented with no other way of deciding something, the simplest (working) explanation is usually true. Lets look at the possibilities:

 

1) Infinite entities.

2) The same infinite entities + God.

 

Now case 2) has the extra variable of God. Without more evidence to show that a God is necessary, including one increases the complexity of the theory for no reason. Therefore, without that additional evidence, 1) is the best choice.

 

Note: if additional evidence for God can be found and proved true, this argument might not be true. But for the facts as you have presented them, it is.

 

Finally, you still fail to address one of the key points in your initial statement.

I would also like to start a discussion on the origin of the universe. I have a pretty solid argument that our universe must have been created by a WILLFUL ENTITY

 

The existence of entities other than our universe as we know it does not prove this. The key difference between your view and mine is the existence of a willful entity fitting the usual definition of god. Something capable of deliberate thought and action, etc. As of right now, your theory requirement is easily met by an inanimate force.

[Incanus]

Peregrine:

 

Let's dig some more into scenario 3. The exception you provided, as I understand it, is that each of the infinite number of entities not be different. Were that the case, I would apply the rule of scenario 2:

 

  Explanation 2 is not possible. The probability of Entity A existing alone is 0. Think of a hat full of infinite possitilities, but only one truly exists. It can not be possible that Entity A, with the laws that define its "somethingness" could be the only entity in existence. 

 

I think that the assumption of an infinite number of universes being the same has to be ruled out because, again, we are picking entity A out of a hat full of infinite possibilities, the probability of which is 0.

 

Let me know what you think.

[Peregrine]

As I said, the laws of probablity and such only apply in our universe. Since we have no idea what came before ours, we can not say that any of the laws as we know them apply.

 

And you still avoid the main point here, that a willful God was responsible. Your point 4) still involves all these infinte universes and any problems you say go along with them. Only now one of them has to be a God.