Why does the universe exist at all?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by molly bloom
A hump-backed tecumseh as faithful Igor to your Dr. Praetorius ?



You mean a pat.

D'oh!

[Whaleboy]

If the guy that has not known society is alone, he must value his life and attribute meaning to it as he is alive yes? He may not engage in the question that Brian (Techumseh) posed but he does engage his thoughts in remaining alive.
It is inherent in all life to live.

Ah but what I'm suggesting is that he wouldn't ask the question of being alive, and the consequent questions of the meaning of life etc, firstly because of the lack of language, secondly because the lack of a sociological context that thirdly leads to a notion of "life" and "alive". His perceptions would, like a feral child, be animalistic, like a very young child who knows no language.

That thought is not exclusive to strong atheism

True. It is used as an indictment of atheism by the theists, however I don't think that stands up. I think that it is an interesting conclusion of atheism that follows if you accept the premises of atheism in a scientific fashion as opposed to a political fashion.

Unless you were all alone in the woods and a grizzly bear shows up. The comparison of being alive and not would be self evident then.
The grizz would probably be thinking "I wonder what he tastes like?".

True, but in the situation of our man on the island, his responses would be autonomic and animalistic, the fight-or-flight response that is necessary to the survival of his genome. I doubt very much that one expends much conscious energy in such a situation thinking of the philosophical implications of the predator, and the distinction between ones life and non-life, let alone the distinction between life and non-life of any others. In any case, the reaction between you or I, and our hypothetical man when faced with the same situation would probably not be very different.

Good question, Yes I mean that desire is inherent in existence in and of itself. The universe is, because of a desire to be.

I would take issue with that, I assumed you meant in terms of our consciousnesses. In a metaphysical sense then, the universe is because of a desire of a presumed creator? I'm afraid I can't see how that would boil down to anything more than the First Cause argument, and fall to its standard refutations. You might find more use here by looking into causality, in other words asking the question "does the whole require a cause?" The whole in this case would be necessary, composed of entirely contingent objects. Reminds me of the debate between Russell and Copleston, and with our understanding of chaos theory and determinism, I think Russell's position here is far stronger. That is to say of course, that the question itself "does the whole require a cause" is absurd, and the consequences are infinitely too demanding of the human experience.

Another way to look at egoism is a fundamental reaction to the belief in limited resources or the belief in a isolated existence in a threatening environment.
There is plenty of air to go around.

But what of altruism to egoistic ends, where altruism may be better for the individual in given situations?

Think in terms of the universe as you being the working model of the whole.
Fractals dude - fractals.

Intriguing idea... that we are all individual macrocosms? Would you say then that we are necessary in the "cogito ergo sum" sense, or that the universe is contingent as a result?

Still a function of your own awareness - just with a paradigm shift

Touché!

I do find however great satisfaction in caring about others. Not for their sake do I practice the wisdom of "love thy neighbor as thyself" it has nothing to do with the other person - it makes me OK with me if ya know what I mean.

Tis true. It's like the idea of the artificial model of God that we all carry suggests... to quote from the Simpsons,
"Some of us prefer illusion to despair".

And who can argue with that?

[child of Thor]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
edit...........

child of Thor: Did you enjoy seeing CJ get jiggy?

well i haven't played the game, but in real life i have a simular 'mod'

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/W/what_we_still_dont_know/textonly/to_arewealone.html

I found this a very well constructed program - and it does explain the theory of existence as good as i've heard it. In a mathmatical universe, why can't we(or better; why wouldn't we) all be part of a virtual construct?

[Whaleboy]

or better; why wouldn't we

It's a compelling idea, and the age-old philosophical problem is that one cannot truly eliminate that doubt that we're all just brains in a vat (sic). Perhaps, at the risk of sounding Gnostic, by constrast it illustrates the transient nature of our reality, and how our perceptions interplay with it.

Indeed it's a fascinating question but if we are to be purely rational and scientific about it, then Occam razor comes in, and lack of evidence against does not constitute evidence for.

[child of Thor]

But we do have lots of evidence for such an existence.

1. Religion(and the uniformity behind the belief in a 'creator') which to use programming speak, could be like a left over 'comment' in the code, or an 'easter egg'.

2. Science, as our knowledge of science grows - cosomologicaly and biologicaly speaking, we see a development of pattern in the basics - patterns that look very simular to computer programs.

3. In an infinate universe(as far as we can tell), we are very unlikely to be the only intelligence, and its very possible to imagine the odds on thier being a 'hyper intelligence'. Still if we ae in the confines of our virtual petri-dish, then this wouldn't explain what this hyper intellignce is or that it inhabits the same relativity as our own.

In the articles i linked to, there is one in particular that deals with these, in particular the subjects under 'are we real'.

of course this all falls back to the question - why exist in the first place?

why do i play computer games is a good place to start maybe?

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by child of Thor
1. Religion(and the uniformity behind the belief in a 'creator') which to use programming speak, could be like a left over 'comment' in the code, or an 'easter egg'.

Could just be an artifact of ancient man trying to rationalise the universe around him that has somehow persisted due to a 'loophole' in the human psyche...

[child of Thor]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison

Could just be an artifact of ancient man trying to rationalise the universe around him that has somehow persisted due to a 'loophole' in the human psyche...

Yes thats where i get my religious belief from - still what if that is just a part of the program?

why is DNA like it is? why can we potentialy change it when our knowledge/technology is high enough?

In the hindu religion one of its fundimental tenants is 'That all life is an illusion' - and many others have this aspect in empersizing the meta-physical over the physical. If you want to look at it like this then you can find many clues i guess.

For me its the science stuff like DNA and things like the universe being too highly tuned etc.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by child of Thor
why is DNA like it is?

When you ask the question "why" you are looking for a reason/rationale. Yet reason only exist in the human sphere as far as we know, until we we discover another lifeform capable of, for want of a better word, reasoning.

Thus, to look for reason/rationale in places where it doesn't exist is either an exercise in furtility or a (sub)conscious acknowledgement of an intelligent creator. I don't blame you, this is an easy trap to fall into. Even Martin Gardner fell into this trap. You need a good grasp on philosophy to avoid it.

A better question to ask, I reckon, is "what is the cause of," for example, what is the cause of DNA shaped like a double helix?

[child of Thor]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

edit:

A better question to ask, I reckon, is "what is the cause of," for example, what is the cause of DNA shaped like a double helix?

ok but i still would like to know why its the shape it is, and why it has the properties it does. What purpose do they serve.

what is the cause of the purpose behind dna?

I'm not looking for the answers so much myself as i am the son of Thor and during my formative years have been shown some of the answers

And not quite related, but it might have a link - How does a Bumblebee fly? - we all know it does, but it shouldn't be able to using our methods of measuring things.

[Whaleboy]

But we do have lots of evidence for such an existence.

1. Religion(and the uniformity behind the belief in a 'creator') which to use programming speak, could be like a left over 'comment' in the code, or an 'easter egg'.

I think I dealt with the "creator" myth in my first post in this thread. Put simply, it is a product of our own "designer" mentality... early man designed and built tools, in order to do that he had to have had a preconception of the tool and an intent for function and design. He looks around and see's a world that seems very wonderfully suited to him and asks "who created this?", and the associated questions we're asking here today.

That the creator myth is so widespread is not positive evidence for a creator, but is instead demonstrative of the geocentric mentality of us humans.

2. Science, as our knowledge of science grows - cosomologicaly and biologicaly speaking, we see a development of pattern in the basics - patterns that look very simular to computer programs.

I should put it the other way around, that is to say that patterns in computer programmes look very similar to that which we see in cosmology and biology. Looking at it like that seems far more consistent don't you think?

3. In an infinate universe(as far as we can tell), we are very unlikely to be the only intelligence, and its very possible to imagine the odds on thier being a 'hyper intelligence'. Still if we ae in the confines of our virtual petri-dish, then this wouldn't explain what this hyper intellignce is or that it inhabits the same relativity as our own.

While I am open to the idea of some kind of finite uber-life being what we perceive as God (after all, advanced forms of technology will appear to the unaware as magic), such a being would have to exist contingently in the universe and not be responsible for the creation of the universe, and as such would not be useful here. If such a lifeform designed the human race (highly implausible of course but, unlike the Intelligent Design by God hypothesis, physically possible), then we might ask of it "why?", but the woeful inconsistencies of the human condition would seem to deny some kind of wilful linear intent.

Perhaps, like in the Hitchhikers Guide, Earth is itself the computer . But then, it's a ****e hypothesis to begin with.

As for such beings occupying the same "relativity" as our own, it’s a little more complex than that. If you imagine this universe (internally contingent, essentially necessary) as operating on "real time" (the premise for causality and logic, thus limiting those two to this universe), and anything above that operating on another dimension perpendicular to "real time" that Hawking called "imaginary time" in that you could have normal numbers on an X axis and imaginary numbers on a Y axis… any communication or information is lost upon the event horizon between RT and IT. In other words, the hand of God could not have extended from IT to RT in order to create the universe.

of course this all falls back to the question - why exist in the first place?

Not at all, rather it renders the question meaningless, absurd and irrelevant; like asking what the sky tastes like.

why do i play computer games is a good place to start maybe?

Methinks not. If there is a God, it would be highly unlikely, and frankly worrying, if it was made in your graven image .

why is DNA like it is? why can we potentialy change it when our knowledge/technology is high enough?

The anthropic principle dictates that if it were any different, you wouldn't be here to ask the question. The probability therefore, of DNA being the way it is, is 1. At the beginning of the universe, the probability was fantastically small of course, but a weak deterministic solution can easily be found for that, and will also destroy the intelligent design nonsense too!

For me its the science stuff like DNA and things like the universe being too highly tuned etc.

Well you see again to being a simple measure of complexity in support of design or intent is simplistic. Remember that wonderfully simple causes can lead to fantastically complex outcomes, and given a set of causes, a given consequence will arise. You can reduce any complex system down like that, and see that while life was unlikely at the beginning, at each step it becomes less surprising.

what is the cause of the purpose behind dna?

Methinks you're going to fall foul of the holes in the first cause argument. A cause for the purpose is not needed because it is us that define "purpose". Remember that we're just a set of objects... would you argue that some anonymous asteroid has some purpose? Are we any different from a cosmological viewpoint?

How does a Bumblebee fly? - we all know it does, but it shouldn't be able to using our methods of measuring things.

The spherical motion of its wings creates a region of low pressure above its thorax which generates lift, and is able to adjust this vortex, as well as the gyroscopic influence of the counterweights on its wings. On the scale of the bumblebee, air is like water to us anyway.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by child of Thor
but i still would like to know why its the shape it is, and why it has the properties it does. What purpose do they serve.

I am not going to touch any of your silly "why" questions

The purpose of DNA is to act as a carrier of genetic information.

Originally posted by child of Thor
what is the cause of the purpose behind dna?

The cause is evolution.

Originally posted by child of Thor
And not quite related, but it might have a link - How does a Bumblebee fly? - we all know it does, but it shouldn't be able to using our methods of measuring things.

As Ben said to insects air behaves more like water to us.

[Gary]

If the universe really is expanding, can it be expanding faster than the speed of light ?

[St Leo]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
I would admit that if I see another coughed-up first cause argument, I will personally die.

Over Three Hundred Proofs of God's Existence

[Whaleboy]

If the universe really is expanding, can it be expanding faster than the speed of light ?

In short, no it isn't. It's why the inflation theory was brought in to solve the Horizon problem.

Speed is just an internal measure of course, to use it in relation to the universe as an expanding "bubble" is fraught with problems.

[Whaleboy]

@ St Leo

ARGUMENT FROM CREATION
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable
(3) Therefore, God exists.