I don't have a hypothesis regarding the laws of nature. It isn't necessary for everyone to have one. I have no idea.
It could simply be the case that they have always been the way they are, and that's it. It's our natural obsession with assigning agency to everything that is leading to the assumption that something must have made everything.
It's obviously flawed, because if an intelligence must be behind the laws, then an intelligence must have made that intelligence, and an intelligence must have made that intelligence...
To just arbitrarily say that this stops at some point is to admit the very rule you're using isn't valid.
It could simply be the case that they have always been the way they are, and that's it. It's our natural obsession with assigning agency to everything that is leading to the assumption that something must have made everything.
It's obviously flawed, because if an intelligence must be behind the laws, then an intelligence must have made that intelligence, and an intelligence must have made that intelligence...
To just arbitrarily say that this stops at some point is to admit the very rule you're using isn't valid.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum