There is no conflict between religion and science. Never has been.

[ding]

I fundamentally disagree with "serves a purpose". Unless that "purpose" is to simply be what something is which is impossible to avoid.

You’ve never studied the evolution of space and time. You’ve never made an objective assessment. The purpose of the universe is to create intelligence.

 

[ding]

I don't see how they point to "purpose".

Ummmm… I told you. Everything happens for a reason to serve a purpose. The purpose is to create life and intelligence.

It’s not a coincidence the universe popped into existence with structure of matter and the laws of nature predestining beings that know and create.

What kills me is you literally won the cosmic lottery and don’t even know it.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

I would seriously question the intelligence of anyone who questioned cause and effect.

It's a pretty extreme end of "empiricism".

Not only can it be taken on authority through the work of others, we experience it daily in our lives in a myriad of ways.

The point of the lightswitch example was to show you that you don't honestly "know" that there is ever cause and effect. You INFER IT. Quite rationally I believe, but it is still an inference.

In fact, right now we are engaged in a series of cause and effects in this very discussion.

Nope. That's the point: it could be (ie a non-zero probability) that I was just going to be typing these things out.

Now, of course, that is absurd in the extreme and really points out the silliness of this argumentum ad absurdum, but it is still not perfectly IMPOSSIBLE.

That you don’t see deeper meaning in existence baffles me.

Why should I? Does my dog have a "deeper meaning"? I don't think so. Why should I? Why should ANYTHING?

I don’t see how anyone could study the evolution of space and time and not see deeper meaning.

I don't see the NEED for meaning. I can fully appreciate the universe and the world without it having any meaning at all.

The universe is literally an intelligence producing machine

I don't know what that means. I assume that "intelligence" is little more than coordinated neural interactions.

which by all accounts is unnatural in and of itself.

That's a patently absurd statement. If it is part of nature it is inherently NOT "unnatural".

Again, you seem to have this view of "intelligence" and "thoughts" that indicates you have seen these things completely independent of a brain. You talk like you have experienced them in a pure vacuum. Of course you haven't.

Small changes to the structure of matter could have allowed a universe to be created in exactly the same way it was created but it would be impossible for life to exist anywhere. This isn’t an accident. It’s intentional.

How on earth can you suggest it is "intentional"???? There's nothing other than your wish for that to be true.

And WHO'S INTENTION? (I've asked this twice now...WHO is the one with the INTENT?)

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

You’ve never studied the evolution of space and time. You’ve never made an objective assessment. The purpose of the universe is to create intelligence.

You keep making ex cathedra statements like you're god almighty.

That's why your posts are now religious.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

What kills me is you literally won the cosmic lottery and don’t even know it.

I didn't "win" the cosmic lottery. I never asked to exist. As such it's not like I was waiting around in non-space hoping I would one day exist! LOL.

Why would you think I "won" anything? If the universe didn't have the ability to support life I am 100% sure I wouldn't mind.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

In all seriousness, ding , I am impressed to see a faith-based side of you. It's kinda neat. You seem less 1 dimensional.

 

[ding]

So reality wouldn't exist if YOU weren't experiencing it?

No. The universe would exist as a probability state if no living thing existed. Say if the size of an electron was larger or not exactly opposite in charge of a proton or had a closer or farther away orbit from the nucleus. Or freezing water didn’t expand or any number of other minute changes to the structure and behavior of matter.

 

[ding]

And how, praytell, do you know this? Have you EVER seen a "thought" outside of space and time?

Seriously?

The presence of matter and energy creates its space and time. What part of that don’t you understand?

It’s interesting that someone like you who always makes moral arguments never gave any thought as to why you do it.

 

[ding]

or are you just GUESSING? (hint: you are just guessing. It's your "religion" if you will)

I’m just following the science to its logical conclusion. I’ve been thinking about this for 25 years. I’ve actually made an objective analysis. I don’t see how it can be any other way.

 

[ding]

Is anyone OTHER THAN YOU "real"? If so, how do you know? Are you just "manifesting everyone" through your mind?

Don’t know. For all I know there are an infinite number of universes with each universe existing for a specific reason. For all I know I’m in the universe that was created for you and I’m the npc. Or maybe you are in my universe and you’re the npc. Or maybe we are both npc’s in someone else’s universe. Or maybe this is the only one. What I do know is that everything works for good even when we can’t see it or understand it. And like every stage of evolution before it consciousness is being progressed. Not always in a straight line but on a positive trend.

 

[BreezeWood]

I assume consciousness is on a siding scale with variation across the animal kingdom

no, there is no variation of consciousness, all physiological life being the same, their unique spiritual content that pilots their physical presence.

all beings have evolved from the initial life form generated on planet earth from the heavens, metaphysical forces of the universe.

 

[ding]

Actually I am. Because their claims are not falsifiable they are not scientific claims. As such they are nothing but "guesses" and my guess is as good as theirs.

It's like figuring out who is MORE RIGHT in a debate over unicorn biology.

Again… science, mathematics, etc. is mind stuff. Everything can be numerically simulated. How can you not see that everything is information?

 

[ding]

That doesn't feel like it means anything.

Because you reject QM. Without observers everything exists in a probability state.

Everything is made manifest by mind.

 

[ding]

I don't even know how you'd support that claim

By assessing intentionality. Which I have done.

So if you were going to assess whether or not the universe was created intentionally or is an accidental happenstance of matter and energy doing what matter and energy do, how would you do it? What would you study?

 

[ding]

You seem to "know" a lot of things. None of which you could possibly "know" per se. It just feels like a religious dogma.

Spoken like someone who has never made a serious objective assessment of the origin question. You don’t even know the right question to ask.

 

[ding]

I will grant you a nice set up and denouement, but it's just more guessing. In a sense you have replaced "that being than which none greater can be conceived" with a sui generis definition of "natural laws".

The laws of nature existing before space and time is a given so to speak. How does the creation of the universe (aka space and time) which followed the law of conservation and QM get created following those laws if the laws were not already in existence?

 

[ding]

Not really. You introduced "consciousness" all of a sudden from out of nowhere. It does not follow from your previous syllogistic claims.

By process of elimination. Matter and energy were eliminated as being an eternal cause of creating universes as matter and energy are not eternal (aka unchanging) and the presence of matter/energy creates its own space and time. So what is left is no thing. Consciousness without form (aka God) is no thing and the only option left.

 

[BreezeWood]

There is no conflict between religion and science. Never has been.​

So now, when God answers the prayers of millions and provides a safe and readily available life-saving vaccine, many who bear the Christian brand are skeptical or downright oppositional — asking why they should believe science and scientists at this particular time.

Personal attacks are a sign of lack of intelligence and knowledge. To quote truth, one has to have an IQ of at least 100 in which doesn't exists in your posts. Just answer the questions. You can't.

the unyielding, centuries of groundless religious dogma, in light of scientific advances have been proven by the above example and throughout history - to quote the truth - as the typical and blind servitude without reason, driven by the desert religions to deny the very proof they deliberately, fail to recognize and the peril to society it causes.

 

[ding]

Now you're wholly off in religious discussion. Which is fine. This thread is about the possible disjunct between science and religion. But that's pure ol' religion.

Actually I’m not. I’m not making a case for a specific God. As near as I can tell religions teach about specific gods.

I’m good with whatever name you wish to give consciousness without form.

 

[ding]

Intentional by whom?

By whatever name you wish to call consciousness without form.

Or you could explain to me how everything is just a happy coincidence.