Is life so complex that it requires a designer?

[Blindside]

Even the ones published in Nature?

Very cool, I hadn't realized they got published, and unfortunately I can't view that article because I don't have a subscription.

An abstract of an alternate hypothesis for a non-biological source of methane production: here

Lamont

 

[Blindside]

So an extraordinary claim, like "Out of the Billions of planets out there, we are the only intellegent life" would require extraordinary proof?

Depending on how you enter the parameters of the Drake equation you get alot of different results for the probability of encountering intelligent life. Personally, I think the idea that we are alone in the galaxy is nuts, but thats just me. A friend of mine (who is an avid Star Trek fan BTW) is convinced that if there is other intelligent life in the universe then it looks just like us (humans) because "god created us in his image."

Oy.

Lamont

 

[Makalakumu]

It looks like a lot of people on MT do not see the need for a designer...according to the poll. If this is the case, how does this affect your view of god? Do you believe in god? How does this affect your view of humanities place in the universe?

For those of you who do believe in a designer, think about and answer the same questions...

 

[Blindside]

I'm one of those who voted "no" on the poll. I don't believe in God or a god or gods, and that as humans we are an extremely lucky and well equipped species. As for humanities place in this universe, if we continue to be lucky we will get off this rock, expand into this end of the spiral arm and continue to the human race will continue to split into different species, likely self induced. If we are unlucky we will end up self-destructing or not leaving Earth, and the species ends when the sun goes nova.

Boom.

The universe however, will go on quite unaware and uncaring.

Lamont

 

[Cryozombie]

I said yes, and I believe strongly in god, and sadly, he isnt, IMHO, the Spaghetti Monster.

 

[Marginal]

It looks like a lot of people on MT do not see the need for a designer...according to the poll. If this is the case, how does this affect your view of god? Do you believe in god? How does this affect your view of humanities place in the universe?

I voted no. I don't beleive that humanity occupies a signifigant place or purpose in the universe. Even with a creator in the equation, this doesn't change, and it makes no sense to claim that it does.

The two claims I routinely see (which are sometimes linked/offered together, sometimes not)
1) Humanity is here to understand the universe.
2) Humanity is here to worship God.

Why does the universe need to understand itself? Why does God need worshippers? Neither makes a lick of sense.

 

[arnisador]

I said yes, and I believe strongly in god, and sadly, he isnt, IMHO, the Spaghetti Monster.

I can't decide if this is a sacrilegious statement or not!

 

[Cryozombie]

I can't decide if this is a sacrilegious statement or not!

*Shrug* me either. I think god has a sense of humor... look how long George Burns lived.

Besides, if god was to appear to mankind as a big spaghetti monster, I think that would really make people stop and think. About lunch, mostly... but stop and think nonetheless.

 

[Andrew Green]

1. God is in every thing
2. Spaghetti is a thing
3. God is spaghetti

 

[7starmantis]

1. God is in every thing
2. Spaghetti is a thing
3. God is spaghetti

Aside from humor, this is completely incorrect. To be correct you would have to say:

1. God is in everything
2. Spaghetti is a thing
3. God is in spaghetti

7sm

 

[Andrew Green]

Since when have logical fallacy's not been allowed in god debates?

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

Since when have logical fallacy's not been allowed in god debates?

Ippon!

 

[tradrockrat]

Aside from humor, this is completely incorrect. To be correct you would have to say:

1. God is in everything
2. Spaghetti is a thing
3. God is in spaghetti

7sm

Actually, it should be

1. Gos IS everything
2. Spaghetti is a thing
3. God is spaghetti

:wink:

 

[heretic888]

It looks like a lot of people on MT do not see the need for a designer...according to the poll.

I have yet to vote on the poll, mostly because none of the answers adequately reflect my own thoughts on this subject.

If this is the case, how does this affect your view of god? Do you believe in god?

Honestly, it depends on how you define 'God'.

If you are referring to a personal deity, then I am inclined to look upon such a figure as little more than a projection of the superego or conscience. In essence, a psychosocial construction whose purpose is to validate and reinforce the values, ideals, and mores that the psyche holds to be 'true' --- this is why the particular character of any given personal 'god' vary considerably from person to person, and culture to culture. This is abundantly obvious whenever such a deity simply 'commands' or 'ordains' rules and precepts that are clearly culture-specific or historically-contingent.

Such a figure is 'real' insofar as it is phenomenologically verifiable structure of the individual's psyche (whether conscious or unconscious), but lacks any empirical or 'objective' reality of its own.

I do, however, accept the reality of 'God' as postulated within the various perennial and mystical traditions. Namely, that 'God' is fundamentally shunyata --- formless, unqualifiable, ineffable, indescribable, transcendent. The quotations from St. Dionysius I posted on another thread are pretty much an approximation of my view, as well.

Such an understanding of Deity, however, necessarily entails that it is not a 'he' separate from 'us' that is concerned with 'designing' or 'protecting' anything. Rather, all of existence or 'creation' is a manifetation or expression of said Deity, with the underlying 'urge' or 'impulse' to know Itself (so to speak).

Like I said, I am rather neo-Hegelian in my views.

How does this affect your view of humanities place in the universe?

I think human beings are a product of evolution and, as such, confined within its various constraints. At the same time, however, I think nature is 'hard-wired' for the increasing emergence of intelligence and creativity (so to speak).

I hope I expressed my views well on this post. If not, I can further clarify.

Laterz. :asian:

 

[Cryozombie]

I hope I expressed my views well on this post. If not, I can further clarify.

Laterz. :asian:

So what you are saying is that God is a Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

[Makalakumu]

Such a figure is 'real' insofar as it is phenomenologically verifiable structure of the individual's psyche (whether conscious or unconscious), but lacks any empirical or 'objective' reality of its own.

Would it be incorrect to assume that you think that "god" is the product of our minds and does not exist outside of own psyche?

 

[heretic888]

So what you are saying is that God is a Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Yup. Exactly. :boing2:

 

[heretic888]

Would it be incorrect to assume that you think that "god" is the product of our minds and does not exist outside of own psyche?

In the context I used, a personal deity is as 'real' to the devout as emotion and reason is to you and me. To the individual, it is phenomenologically real experience --- regardless of its lack of empirical or 'objective' validity.

The mind is tricky that way. 'Imaginary companions' are as real to pre-operational thinkers as the 'law' of cause and effect are to formal-operational thinkers. Its not a simple matter of truth vs untruth, as the mind is in no way a 'flat' structure. Its full of curves, swirls, bumps, and hills.

Not to mention, the delineation between the psyche of the individual and the psyche of the culture he or she is raised within is, at best, fluid.

Lastly, I also made clearly I believe in Godhead as Emptiness, as unqualifiable Spirit, a sort of nondual panentheism.

Laterz. :asian:

 

[RandomPhantom700]

I think human beings are a product of evolution and, as such, confined within its various constraints. At the same time, however, I think nature is 'hard-wired' for the increasing emergence of intelligence and creativity (so to speak).

I hope I expressed my views well on this post. If not, I can further clarify.

Laterz. :asian:

You expressed your views on humanity and God with your usual long-winded clarity. I fail, however, to see an account on your perspective concerning randomness v. design (or whatever other explanations are involved).

In short, what's all this human psyche and God discussion have to do with how the world came about?

 

[Cryozombie]

You expressed your views on humanity and God with your usual long-winded clarity. I fail, however, to see an account on your perspective concerning randomness v. design (or whatever other explanations are involved).

In short, what's all this human psyche and God discussion have to do with how the world came about?

Not that I need to speak for Heretic... but it was pretty clear to me that his post was a reply to this one just a few scant posts above it:

It looks like a lot of people on MT do not see the need for a designer...according to the poll. If this is the case, how does this affect your view of god? Do you believe in god? How does this affect your view of humanities place in the universe?

For those of you who do believe in a designer, think about and answer the same questions...