Does complexity actually imply the lack of a creator?

[JaceDeanLove]

I don't know exactly how to word this, but I'll express my thought as clearly as possible. Assuming we are talking about a personal God, I think complexity may be a sign there isn't a personal God/gods. The world is undeniably complex and beautiful. However, people who believe in personal gods usually think their lives are the point of God creating the universe in the first place. If that's the case, what's the point of the countless number of life forms? Sure, we need meat and vegetables. All we would need is some mammals etc to eat. However, we have things such as blue-green algae, the Barreleye fish, and many other things that aren't necessary. And beyond that, there is the universe. Why create hundreds of billions of galaxies with hundreds of billions of stars if we are the reason of creation. Feel free to express your opinion. This didn't come out as I expected, but I hope you understand my thought process. And I apologize for posting twice in under an hour! Thanks!

[Alex K]

I've posted a somewhat similarish thing in the past, concerning fine tuning. Namely, that a Universe which appears fine tuned, where changing one parameter very little leads to catastrophe, should not be a sign for a creator, as is often claimed, but the opposite. It is precisely the kind of universe which one would observe if, by default, universes are hostile, and there has been a fluctuation towards barely livable. People have worked this out in multiverse scenarios and obtain the result that one should find onesolf on the edge of catastrophes in anthropically selected universes. A created universe on the other hand, should not be on the edge of catastrophe as far as its parameters of basic laws are concerned. Maybe, that's in a similar vein as your post.

[JaceDeanLove]

I've posted a somewhat similarish thing in the past, concerning fine tuning. Namely, that a Universe which appears fine tuned, where changing one parameter very little leads to catastrophe, should not be a sign for a creator, as is often claimed, but the opposite. It is precisely the kind of universe which one would observe if, by default, universes are hostile, and there has been a fluctuation towards barely livable. People have worked this out in multiverse scenarios and obtain the result that one should find onesolf on the edge of catastrophes in anthropically selected universes. A created universe on the other hand, should not be on the edge of catastrophe as far as its parameters of basic laws are concerned. Maybe, that's in a similar vein as your post.

That's spot on. Thanks!

[fojo]

In very simplistic terms, the problem in assuming that it was all created just for us means that you have used a method of thinking which takes you as far as a God. The counter religious argument to the big bang theory for example is what came before? Why not apply that same logic to a God? Surely the same logic applies or am I going crazy? What came before your God?

[dyresand]

I don't know exactly how to word this, but I'll express my thought as clearly as possible. Assuming we are talking about a personal God, I think complexity may be a sign there isn't a personal God/gods. The world is undeniably complex and beautiful. However, people who believe in personal gods usually think their lives are the point of God creating the universe in the first place. If that's the case, what's the point of the countless number of life forms? Sure, we need meat and vegetables. All we would need is some mammals etc to eat. However, we have things such as blue-green algae, the Barreleye fish, and many other things that aren't necessary. And beyond that, there is the universe. Why create hundreds of billions of galaxies with hundreds of billions of stars if we are the reason of creation. Feel free to express your opinion. This didn't come out as I expected, but I hope you understand my thought process. And I apologize for posting twice in under an hour! Thanks!

God is complex ergo he needs a creator and he cant be alpha or omega. so a creator without creator of a creator so on and so on could not exist.

[Astrogod07]

I believe that the type of complexity that we observe in the world implies that individual species are, indeed, not designed. The mechanisms of evolution by natural selection and random mutation would seem to preclude the possibility of a specific outcome based on an initial design. The layouts of our bodies and the bodies of other species are indicative of our long and winding evolution. If we were "created" by some higher power, then it could be stated with relative certainty that we are the outcome of an experiment in chance. There are many examples throughout nature of animals that have features that don't make sense on their own, but make perfect sense when considering how their body plans have changed over the last several million years. We have wonderful capabilities, but an intelligent designer could have done better. Our method of replicating genetic information is prone to error, eventually leading to cancer in many individuals. Our eyes have an unnecessary bind spot. We have a common orifice for breathing and eating, which leads to the possibility of choking. Viruses need not exist at all. We are plagued with genetic and developmental deformities that could easily be avoided if we were designed by an intelligent creator, especially an omnipotent one.

[dyresand]

I believe that the type of complexity that we observe in the world implies that individual species are, indeed, not designed. The mechanisms of evolution by natural selection and random mutation would seem to preclude the possibility of a specific outcome based on an initial design. The layouts of our bodies and the bodies of other species are indicative of our long and winding evolution. If we were "created" by some higher power, then it could be stated with relative certainty that we are the outcome of an experiment in chance. There are many examples throughout nature of animals that have features that don't make sense on their own, but make perfect sense when considering how their body plans have changed over the last several million years. We have wonderful capabilities, but an intelligent designer could have done better. Our method of replicating genetic information is prone to error, eventually leading to cancer in many individuals. Our eyes have an unnecessary bind spot. We have a common orifice for breathing and eating, which leads to the possibility of choking. Viruses need not exist at all. We are plagued with genetic and developmental deformities that could easily be avoided if we were designed by an intelligent creator, especially an omnipotent one.

Quite notably the human male testicles. one huge flaw even the slightest hit the person is going down.

[abaris]

Quite notably the human male testicles. one huge flaw even the slightest hit the person is going down.

You think a dog fares any better? Also, I've yet to find female testicles. Actually, I hope never to find them.

[dyresand]

Quite notably the human male testicles. one huge flaw even the slightest hit the person is going down.

You think a dog fares any better? Also, I've yet to find female testicles. Actually, I hope never to find them.

Kangaroos are a exception there junk goes up into them....

[Simon Moon]

Complexity is not a sign of design. We detect design when contrasted to things that occur naturally.

Any engineer will tell you that it is better to design things with the minimum amount of complexity able to get the job done.

It is obvious that we are kluged together with unnecessary remnants of our evolutionary past.