(March 12, 2017 at 3:01 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote:(March 12, 2017 at 11:55 am)vorlon13 Wrote: Empty universes are theoretically unstable, and there is some science behind that.
Before the start point, we can't put the name "universe" over any entity.
It won't "mean" anything.
"Universe" is just a reference to a "meaning" after all.
Quote:Also, you're not thinking about either anthropological (strong or weak) principle coming into play.
"anthropological" gives me "the study of human beings' similarity to and divergence from other animals." when written in google.
If I get your meaning right.
Humans started existing as assets of this current Big Bang.
Or more precisely: assets of this universe.
So before the start, their ideas, consciousness and thoughts are nothing but unknowns.
Quote:Scientific American even ran an article on your pre-start thing in the last couple years. Head to the library !!
http://gizmodo.com/what-was-our-universe...1791889926
http://science.howstuffworks.com/diction...-bang1.htm
No answer. Speculations.
Minimalist
Quote:What about empty heads?
At least, I think; Minimalist.
I don't take cover and hide from answers. Oh, empty minds love that !
Brian37
Quote:Word salad is about as polite as I can be about the OP. Like you Atlas, but this is merely what I have seen from countless others from just about every religion you can think of in 16 years of online debate. When you have no positive proof with independent peer review, you resort to pretending philosophy can replace a neutral science lab.
No, science labs would be in my agenda to build, after all I think they prove what I believe, even more.
Quote:How about anyone of any religion in the world consider that religion and god claims are merely the products of human's imaginations reflecting their own narcissism, fears, desires and insecurities based mostly on what the parents hand down to the youth of the world?
They provide an answer for unanswered question; one strong answer too.
All humans do bad, religious people are not different.
They do bad because they are humans; not because of religion.
Quote:Science explains nature and the universe, not religion.
I didn't shoot down the human brain, neither did I shoot down religion.
That's what you see here; Brian.
Minimalist
I'm not medieval missionary wearing a shining armor.
Brian37
Kudos for the opinion that comes in the center.
All are faith. All are beliefs.
The biggest disaster (even within Muslims themselves) is the double standards.
BrianSoddingBoru4
The special case is what I would go for, in terms of the existence.
That's why we can't define God; only he can define himself.
pocracas
The point before the Big Bang is itself meaningless, right.
The chance of the existence of a being outside the context of our own domain, deserves to be considered.
Minimalist
Please, they are pawns in the big economical game that businessmen love to play since WW2.
Um no Atlas, "atheist" is a "faith" like "off" is a TV channel. I simply see no evidence or good reason to buy any god claim. I also don't need faith to reject claims of unicorns or Apollo.
As far as your response to Pocracas no, we don't need to consider all possibilities about what came before the Big Bang. We don't need to consider a invisible pink unicorn farting our universe into existence either. A cognition is not a requirement to fill in the gaps. QM as science understands it now as far as our best data does not require a cognition as a starting point. "All this" can be either the rotting into nothing prior to our big bang that became the quantum twitch that lead to our big bang. Or our universe could have come from nothing. But a cognition as a prime first mover according to QM is not a requirement anymore than assuming a giant invisible pink unicorn could explain anything prior.
Your desire for a super cognition is a flawed perception reflecting your own human qualities. No different than when a dog mistakes it's own reflection in a door or mirror as to being a rival. The explanation as to why humans make god claims is that they are simply projecting their own qualities, desires, narcissism and insecurities on the world around them which become god claims and religions as arguments from ignorance.
A God/god/diety/super natural being is not required to explain the currently unknown. What science has yet to explain in the future about what came prior does not need a human like character with super powers to explain anything.
It also takes no faith to reject claims of Thor or Santa or Yoda. I'd suggest your belief is really your own desires and nothing more than that.
