(November 20, 2017 at 2:29 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: That assumes the cosmos must come from something.And even if it needs to their is no need for the supernatural . And your whole statement is a possibler fallacy not to mention an argument from ignorance.
Theist far to often confuse a magical cognition as being the argument for infinity.
It is a mistake to assume on their part that that is what modern science is arguing either way.
The issue isn't for modern scientists a cognition. Hawking said "A God is not required".
The only answer scientists at his level and that of Krauss isn't something vs nothing or nothing vs something, that part everyone is still trying to figure out. BUT what scientists at their level are saying is a magical super cognition is not required.
Me personally, the more I read science, I have no problem with infinity, or nothing. I see it as an cycle, from off to on to off to on and back and forth, much like the seasons on our planet change over and over. What I don't see as needed is a super cognition as a starting point.
Krauss has famously said "nothing is unstable'. In laypersons terms, a state of "off" cannot be forever. But neither can the state of "on".
So to me, the fluctuation between off and on is infinite. But I see no cognition being a requirement for that to happen. I only see cognition as local, small, temporary and finite. Much like acorns don't grow to become tree gods.
Up and down and on and off can happen over and over, but neither have to have a magical cause because they are just fluctuations between states.
