This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The Grand Design...

#1Mike_StantonPosted 2/27/2013 2:39:04 PM
There's not enough talk about it on this board, but there absolutely should be. The fact that scientists have reached a consensus on the origin of the universe using applied knowledge of quantum mechanics clearly has strong religious and theological implications. I'm curious as to how theists, and even agnostics reconcile their positions with this relatively recent theory. I was already a gnostic atheist before The Grand Design was published, but this really seems like it should be a nail in the coffin for the notion that God is even a plausible idea.
---
RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009
Prove me wrong
#2Moorish_IdolPosted 2/27/2013 2:42:44 PM(edited)
I haven't read it, but I'll add it to my "To Read" list.

Since we're talking about reconciliation: you say you are a gnostic atheist, so I'm presuming you would say "God does not exist." How do you reconcile your belief with the lack of proof for your belief?

Edit: I don't mean to derail the topic with that question, so feel free to answer in PM or something if you want.
#3Mike_Stanton(Topic Creator)Posted 2/27/2013 2:52:14 PM
From: Moorish_Idol | #002
I haven't read it, but I'll add it to my "To Read" list.

I actually haven't read it either, but I sort of understand it in a nutshell.

Since we're talking about reconciliation: you say you are a gnostic atheist, so I'm presuming you would say "God does not exist." How do you reconcile your belief with the lack of proof for your belief?

There may not be "proof" so to speak, but I still think there's strong evidence against the existence of God. Normally I adhere to the following arguments...

-Argument from poor design (things are designed too poorly to have been designed by an supremely intelligent creator)
-Ultimate 747 Gambit (A higher being necessarily constitutes a specifically complex being, which therefore makes God's existence statistically unlikely.)
-Argument from parsimony (Occam's Razor makes the existence of a supernatural entity like God seem unlikely, considering science accounts for most of the reasons that people believe in God, which is primarily what this topic is about)
---
RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009
Prove me wrong
#4AynRandySavagePosted 2/27/2013 3:23:51 PM
But there isn't any consensus on the origin of the universe at all. And even Hawking's book doesn't explain where the laws that caused the creation of the universe ex nihilo came from
#5Faust_8Posted 2/27/2013 10:05:19 PM
AynRandySavage posted...
But there isn't any consensus on the origin of the universe at all. And even Hawking's book doesn't explain where the laws that caused the creation of the universe ex nihilo came from


True but it's never explained why/how God came to be ex nihilo either.

If they cop-out and say that God can just do that, I can say the framework of the universe/reality can just do that.
---
You are the universe
Expressing itself as a human, for a little while
#6AynRandySavagePosted 2/27/2013 11:13:27 PM
Faust_8 posted...
AynRandySavage posted...
But there isn't any consensus on the origin of the universe at all. And even Hawking's book doesn't explain where the laws that caused the creation of the universe ex nihilo came from


True but it's never explained why/how God came to be ex nihilo either.

If they cop-out and say that God can just do that, I can say the framework of the universe/reality can just do that.


And that's absolutely great. I just don't like when people say that they can prove how it all began, because it's inevitably self-defeating. In the end, all we have are guesses, and that's OK.
#7FingerpuppetPosted 2/27/2013 11:48:28 PM
AynRandySavage posted...
Faust_8 posted...
AynRandySavage posted...
But there isn't any consensus on the origin of the universe at all. And even Hawking's book doesn't explain where the laws that caused the creation of the universe ex nihilo came from


True but it's never explained why/how God came to be ex nihilo either.

If they cop-out and say that God can just do that, I can say the framework of the universe/reality can just do that.


And that's absolutely great. I just don't like when people say that they can prove how it all began, because it's inevitably self-defeating. In the end, all we have are guesses, and that's OK.


It's a shame that people have been saying that for years now and still Christians who debate atheists don't understand that principle.
---
I recently came back to this site. I don't have an interesting sig, so please say something interesting that I can put here.
#8Mike_Stanton(Topic Creator)Posted 3/5/2013 9:27:40 AM
From: AynRandySavage | #004
But there isn't any consensus on the origin of the universe at all.

It seems like there pretty much is a consensus now. The theory that Hawking proposed is based on known laws of quantum physics, and IIRC the large hadron collider and the search for the Higgs Boson is supposed to test that.
---
RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009
Prove me wrong
#9FingerpuppetPosted 3/5/2013 10:52:14 AM
Mike_Stanton posted...
From: AynRandySavage | #004
But there isn't any consensus on the origin of the universe at all.

It seems like there pretty much is a consensus now. The theory that Hawking proposed is based on known laws of quantum physics, and IIRC the large hadron collider and the search for the Higgs Boson is supposed to test that.


The Higgs Boson only confirms what we think about the Higgs Field, which explains spontaneous symmetry breaking when the electroweak force split into the electromagnetic and weak forces. It has nothing to do with the creation of the universe.
---
I recently came back to this site. I don't have an interesting sig, so please say something interesting that I can put here.
#10JonWood007Posted 3/5/2013 11:28:41 AM
The only consensus is on the big bang.....there's a lot of debate over its origins and the like...if it even had an origin.
---
Desktop: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/GNoz
Laptop: http://us.gateway.com/gw/en/US/content/model/LX.WY202.001