Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 24, 2022, 9:32 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
An infinite progress
#11
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 1:18 am)FortyTwo Wrote: Yes! EXCELLENT!!!!!  

If everything designed requires a disigner more complex than itself, does that not imply an infinitely complex designer?

Well, in computer science you have simple algorithms that can design more complex ones, so I'm not sure it's a rule that simpler things never design more complex ones. You could take issue with the fact that an algorithm counts as the "designer" in that case, I suppose. I think it could count.
Reply
#12
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 12:50 am)FortyTwo Wrote: THAT being said . . . why? Why is your view of the universe, no, of the Cosmos correct?

The major objection you all seem to raise is the infinite regress. What about the infinite progress? If everything that is designed requires a designer more complex than itself, how does that not imply an infinitely and complex creator?

Infinite regress is the argument that theists use, not atheists.  They argue that infinite regress must end, and that end is a god. The complexity part only comes in because god is claimed to actually design and know and control everything, and therefore must be more complex than his creation -- therefore being a hugely complex thing itself. How did it come into being?

Atheists will have different views.  For myself, I'm not even sure that infinite regress is impossible, and I'm not sure that our logic even works when we don't understand what time is (does it go in circles?).  We don't even know if our view of causality makes sense before the Big Bang.

If there is something primeval at the start of time, my guess is that it is not infinitely complex, but rather extremely simple -- perhaps the simplest of all things that can propagate itself.  Complexity emerges from the simple.

Such a thing doesn't seem to be worth our time praying to.
Reply
#13
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 12:50 am)FortyTwo Wrote: I am a Christian. 

That being said, I am also a human. 

I have the same flaws as all the rest of you. 

THAT being said . . . why? Why is your view of the universe, no, of the Cosmos correct?

The major objection you all seem to raise is the infinite regress. What about the infinite progress? If everything that is designed requires a designer more complex than itself, how does that not imply an infinitely and complex creator?

Most of the matter in the Cosmos is hydrogen.  Astronomers who point their telescopes at more distant objects in the Cosmos see those objects as they were and not as they are; what they see is, mostly, hydrogen.  Heavier elements came later, and from abiogenesis, came molecules that could make copies of themselves, but with copies, came errors, most of which were either benign or deleterious to the molecules.  With a few molecules, however, those errors conferred advantage, and with advantage, those molecules were more successful at reproducing than their peers.  And, so, natural selection came on the scene, with mobility developing, and then, bigger bodies, and with those, brains, and then, bigger brains; and here we are, some 4 billion years later.

Point is that complexity existing or simply arising out of nothing has never been observed, by anyone; the narrative of science has been observing simpler things evolving into more complex things.
And without delay Peter went quickly out of the synagogue (assembly) and went unto the house of Marcellus, where Simon lodged: and much people followed him...And Peter turned unto the people that followed him and said: Ye shall now see a great and marvellous wonder. And Peter seeing a great dog bound with a strong chain, went to him and loosed him, and when he was loosed the dog received a man's voice and said unto Peter: What dost thou bid me to do, thou servant of the unspeakable and living God? Peter said unto him: Go in and say unto Simon in the midst of his company: Peter saith unto thee, Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And immediately the dog ran and entered in, and rushed into the midst of them that were with Simon, and lifted up his forefeet and in a loud voice said: Thou Simon, Peter the servant of Christ who standeth at the door saith unto thee: Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou most wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And when Simon heard it, and beheld the incredible sight, he lost the words wherewith he was deceiving them that stood by, and all of them were amazed. (The Acts of Peter, 9)
Reply
#14
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 1:18 am)FortyTwo Wrote: Yes! EXCELLENT!!!!!  

If everything designed requires a disigner more complex than itself, does that not imply an infinitely complex designer?

Complexity is additive in nature, something can always be made more complex than it is by adding to it, so nothing can ever be infinitely complex. Similarly, the universe is future eternal (it will change state but it will never be just completely gone unless we've misunderstood physics very badly) and will be around in some form forever, but it will never be infinitely old.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply
#15
RE: An infinite progress
I think it's a mistake to think of God as inifinite. Omnipotence implies that God is infinite in potential, not actuality.

As to regress, if God exists and is omniscient, then an actual infinite is possible. If an actual infinite is possible, then infinite regress is no longer a valid objection for either scenario.

And I don't think I hold the views you attribute to us. I don't imagine the cosmos with a god, but neither do I assume there isn't one. The main reason being the impossibility of evidence for God beyond ontological arguments.
[Image: Fenrir-sign.jpg]
Reply
#16
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 9:02 am)HappySkeptic Wrote: Infinite regress is the argument that theists use, not atheists.  They argue that infinite regress must end, and that end is a god.

And they do so with complete disregard to the fact that they are replacing one infinite regress with another. If their gawd is eternal, then it had eternity to plan and create create the universe. And, it still managed to fuck it up. [Image: Eye_Roll.gif]
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Reply
#17
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 8:57 am)vulcanlogician Wrote: Well, in computer science you have simple algorithms that can design more complex ones, so I'm not sure it's a rule that simpler things never design more complex ones. You could take issue with the fact that an algorithm counts as the "designer" in that case, I suppose. I think it could count.
-another example, equally profound as a god to people with a religion of nature....to add to yours (and spongebobs)

Genetic material is simpler, by itself, than the animal it creates...but, biology in general is more complex than any one individual or species.  Whether we think nature or god establish(es/ed) the Rules of The Cosmos, causality et al, the possibility of design... the relationship can observably flow in both directions from the complex to the simpler, or the simpler to the complex.
It's bad for the rest of the world when americans are paid so little they can only afford chocolate mined by child slaves and clothes made in overseas sweatshops. - Robyn Pennacchia
Reply
#18
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 12:50 am)FortyTwo Wrote: I am a Christian. 

That being said, I am also a human. 

I have the same flaws as all the rest of you. 

THAT being said . . . why? Why is your view of the universe, no, of the Cosmos correct?

The major objection you all seem to raise is the infinite regress. What about the infinite progress? If everything that is designed requires a designer more complex than itself, how does that not imply an infinitely and complex creator?

For one thing, 42, you should know all things since your very username is the answer to everything.

For another, you must understand the position of a science-minded person.  We base our understanding of the cosmos on observations, theories that have been developed and supporting data for those theories.  The concept of an all powerful god is not scientific, so far as we understand it today, therefore it cannot be observed or evaluated other than through philosophy.  There are numerous gods that people worship and with them numerous ideas of existence and the universe.  So if you reject the scientific approach to understanding the universe, you are still left with many, many possible explanations.  Where religion is concerned, you can't rely on theories, observations and data to evaluate the nature of existence, so I see no real advantage in such an approach.  Most people don't spend the necessary time in philosophical thought to truly evaluate religion; they merely accept what they were taught to believe.  So expecting those of us who have challenged that sort of indoctrination to simply go back to it and accept it is rather irrational.
Why is it so?
~Julius Sumner Miller
Reply
#19
RE: An infinite progress
Holy word of God, Bible, offer people to believe, without concrete evidence. Leap of faith. This mental masturbation you attempting, isn't supported by the bible. Faith. 2000 years passed and scientists just say "we don't know how that stuff happened". You can thank God for making this so hard for you.
[Image: keep-calm-and-praise-the-sun.jpg]
Reply
#20
RE: An infinite progress
(September 2, 2021 at 9:02 am)HappySkeptic Wrote: Infinite regress is the argument that theists use, not atheists. 

But only because theists have an Aristotle fetish. The idea that an infinite regress is absurd comes from him.

I can see why he thought that, though. It doesn't really make sense. The big issue, though, is that Aristotle's prime mover nor God explains away an infinite regress. Because "How did God get there?" We are told God is self-caused, but that seems ad hoc to me. I could just as easily imagine God being created by "proto-God." Can anyone prove otherwise?
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  3 Questions For Believers (A work in progress.) topher 187 23988 April 20, 2015 at 7:56 am
Last Post: Mudhammam
  Progress Minimalist 15 2690 December 20, 2013 at 8:36 pm
Last Post: JesusHChrist
  Formulating a rational defense of skepticism (a work in progress) Vincenzo Vinny G. 49 13315 September 4, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Last Post: JohnDG
  "The Judeo-Christian God Is Infinite"-Einstein michaelsherlock 7 2645 April 13, 2012 at 8:25 am
Last Post: Phil



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)