(March 12, 2016 at 2:46 am)snowtracks Wrote: Agree, shouldn't worry about it but God put eternity into every person (body, soul, spirit), higher animal (body, soul), lower animals (body) so everyone knows that spiritual beings don't die with the body, and they know who made them since they were made in his image.

Show one smidgeon of evidence for the existence of souls. Please, go on, I dare you.

You can't just say stuff and then it's true.

It's kind of an important point that a lot of people need to learn.

(March 12, 2016 at 6:15 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote:

(March 12, 2016 at 2:46 am)snowtracks Wrote: Agree, shouldn't worry about it but God put eternity into every person (body, soul, spirit), higher animal (body, soul), lower animals (body) so everyone knows that spiritual beings don't die with the body, and they know who made them since they were made in his image.

Show one smidgeon of evidence for the existence of souls. Please, go on, I dare you.

By inference to the data; universe has meaning which connotes a non-physical component. The best explanation of the Anthropic Principle is:
(A) There exists one possible Universe ‘designed’ with the goal of generating and sustaining ‘observers.’ *
An exclusively physical universe wouldn’t have meaning. But if anyone has the world viewpoint that the universe has no meaning, they should go with that thought.
*https://godandsoul.wordpress.com/tag/brandon-carter/

PS: Mind-your-manners.

Check-your-privilege.

(March 13, 2016 at 7:08 pm)snowtracks Wrote:

(March 12, 2016 at 6:15 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote: Show one smidgeon of evidence for the existence of souls. Please, go on, I dare you.

By inference to the data; universe has meaning which connotes a non-physical component. The best explanation of the Anthropic Principle is:
(A) There exists one possible Universe ‘designed’ with the goal of generating and sustaining ‘observers.’ *
An exclusively physical universe wouldn’t have meaning. But if anyone has the world viewpoint that the universe has no meaning, they should go with that thought.
*https://godandsoul.wordpress.com/tag/brandon-carter/

PS: Mind-your-manners.

No it certainly does not have  meaning

Isn't it funny how the thing they try to conclude is present in their premises?

(March 13, 2016 at 8:34 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Isn't it funny how the thing they try to conclude is present in their premises?

Yeah it really is.

(March 13, 2016 at 7:08 pm)snowtracks Wrote:

(March 12, 2016 at 6:15 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote: Show one smidgeon of evidence for the existence of souls. Please, go on, I dare you.

By inference to the data; universe has meaning which connotes a non-physical component. The best explanation of the Anthropic Principle is:
(A) There exists one possible Universe ‘designed’ with the goal of generating and sustaining ‘observers.’ *
An exclusively physical universe wouldn’t have meaning. But if anyone has the world viewpoint that the universe has no meaning, they should go with that thought.
*https://godandsoul.wordpress.com/tag/brandon-carter/

1) Your assertion that a physical universe would have no meaning, while accurate (meaning is something our storytelling brains try to fit ot events to make them comprehensible), is totally without relevance to the argument.

2) The anthropic principle is an assertion without evidence. It was made by people who wanted to ascribe unmerited importance to our existence. All available evidence suggests our universe is far more possible than previously thought, and even if it were the proverbial billion to one, that still doesn't show evidence for purpose, a creator or even the existence of souls. In fact you bringing up this tangenital argument shows the utter lack of evidence you have for your position.

Quote:PS: Mind-your-manners.

Showing up the gross lack of basis for your beliefs isn't a lack of manners. I'd suggest that if you don't like robust debate, that you stop interacting with educated people who'll likely disagree with you.

(March 14, 2016 at 6:17 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote:

(March 13, 2016 at 7:08 pm)snowtracks Wrote: By inference to the data; universe has meaning which connotes a non-physical component. The best explanation of the Anthropic Principle is:
(A) There exists one possible Universe ‘designed’ with the goal of generating and sustaining ‘observers.’ *
An exclusively physical universe wouldn’t have meaning. But if anyone has the world viewpoint that the universe has no meaning, they should go with that thought.
*https://godandsoul.wordpress.com/tag/brandon-carter/

1) Your assertion that a physical universe would have no meaning, while accurate (meaning is something our storytelling brains try to fit ot events to make them comprehensible), is totally without relevance to the argument.

2) The anthropic principle is an assertion without evidence. It was made by people who wanted to ascribe unmerited importance to our existence. All available evidence suggests our universe is far more possible than previously thought, and even if it were the proverbial billion to one, that still doesn't show evidence for purpose, a creator or even the existence of souls. In fact you bringing up this tangenital argument shows the utter lack of evidence you have for your position.

Quote:PS: Mind-your-manners.

Showing up the gross lack of basis for your beliefs isn't a lack of manners. I'd suggest that if you don't like robust debate, that you stop interacting with educated people who'll likely disagree with you.

If through your 'robust' debating and education have concluded that the universe has no meaning, that's perfectly fine. Information however does originates from intelligence. Matter doesn't have causal capabilities to impart information to itself.