RE: Products of Chance
September 18, 2012 at 2:02 pm
(This post was last modified: September 18, 2012 at 2:14 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(September 17, 2012 at 7:50 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote: I've heard atheists say,
“I believe that the universe was created out of nothing by chance.”
Can you provide a quote? Because I doubt you can.
(September 17, 2012 at 7:50 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote: But chance can’t create anything. It’s a word that we use to describe or talk about probabilities. If I flip a coin the chances of it landing heads up if flipped (assuming it doesn’t land on its side) is 50%. But if it does land heads up, chance didn't "cause" it to flip, I did. "Chance" doesn't stand in casual relation to things.
Since atheists don't really say 'I believe that the universe was created out of nothing by chance', you don't have a point.
(September 17, 2012 at 7:50 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote: “Chance” as the cause of the universe seems silly.
Well, if it seems silly to you, it must not be true. It's not like appeal to incredulity is a fallacy or anything.
(September 17, 2012 at 7:50 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote: What do you guys think?
That you guys have a striking tendency to preface your questions about what we think with a misrepresentation of what we think.
(September 18, 2012 at 2:44 am)Lion IRC Wrote:(September 17, 2012 at 7:50 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote: I've heard atheists say,
“I believe that the universe was created out of nothing by chance.”
But chance can’t create anything. It’s a word that we use to describe or talk about probabilities. If I flip a coin the chances of it landing heads up if flipped (assuming it doesn’t land on its side) is 50%. But if it does land heads up, chance didn't "cause" it to flip, I did. "Chance" doesn't stand in casual relation to things.
“Chance” as the cause of the universe seems silly.
What do you guys think?
I never heard any atheist use the word "created'' and universe in the same sentence.
And that whole...once upon a time there was nothing and then Bang, something...idea has really gone out of fashion with atheists.
So, for crying out loud, please get with the program will YA?
The past-eternal universe has always existed in one form or another, and one thing simply follows another and if something looks fine-tuned it's not really because there are an infinite number of multiverses out there somewhere and if you get enough of them eventually one will produce monkeys with the randomly evolved IQ gene, all typing out Shakespearean Sonnets backwards on their Ipads, and theres no such thing as a problem of suffering in this absurd little uni/multi/mega/whateververse because were atheists
...and thats just how we roll
![[Image: sisyphus-sign.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=absurdman.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2008%2F04%2Fsisyphus-sign.jpg)
I don't believe there is sufficient evidence to accept the multiple universe hypothesis as yet.
(September 18, 2012 at 12:03 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote:(September 18, 2012 at 11:30 am)Violet Lilly Blossom Wrote: I'm sorry, but the lack of true information in the OP is simply inexcusable.
You're right. Sorry about that guys, I'll try not to let that happen again.
That's very reasonable, Jeff.
Where the idea probably comes from is the hypothesis that a quantum vaccuum fluctuation could have jump-started the universe. Although no individual quantum fluctuation can be predicted, in Quantum Mechanics they're statistically inevitable. As to whether that's the true origin of the universe, until the hypothesis is tested it remains a hypothesis. There are many interesting possible natural causes for the universe that we just can't verify yet. Just because we entertain those notions and find them interesting doesn't mean we've embraced one in particular as THE ANSWER (echo effect).
