How is the balance between boys and girls maintained?

[Kidlicious]

It's significant if you're attempting to explain the universe's fine-tuning as a result of God's work. If the universe were incredibly hostile to life (which much of it is), what would that say about God's involvement? If the universe were biophillic, and there were life everywhere, what would that say? And what about the fact that God expelled mankind from the perfect Eden into an imperfect world where we are meant to suffer? Does that put an upper bound on how fine-tuned the universe must be?

I don't think the way the universe is tells us about God like that. I will say that God doesn't make it known objectively that He even exists. It's a big mistake to try to figure God out by observing the universe.

Our experience is another matter.

Anyway, I'm talking about what's eithet likely or unlikely based on the evidence. I don't think we should make assumptions or try to figure out God's nature.

[Elok]

Honestly I don't know how it's possible to have different universes with different physical laws. I just figured that if you could have different logic. My view of logic is something created by God.

If the laws of physics are different there, our conception of what is "possible" is totally irrelevant. Why should it be impossible for the laws of physics to be different in another universe? Would that violate the laws of...metaphysics? Or something else entirely?

Hmmm... but when we see order don't we all believe in an intelligent creator? get you that it's possible for there to be order without a creator but it's just not nearly as likely.

I have pointed out before, in atheist vs. theist contests (yes, I got into them once, I gave up shortly before you converted), that in this context the word "likely" makes no sense and, if we think about it, means little beyond "what I have an easier time conceptualizing." However, this is the first time I've mentioned it in response to a theist.

[Kidlicious]

Still waiting for the verdict on Brother Legree...

I guess you missed it. I'm no longer entertaining trolls in this thread.

[Elok]

Troll, nothing. That was an honest question: does your "don't interfere with other Christians' attempts to proselytize" rule extend to all other Christians, including ones you personally find horribly offensive, or is it just for you? If I were just trolling I would have let it drop.

[loinburger]

A "troll" is anybody who asks him a question that he lacks the intellectual capacity to answer, which is why he now has over a dozen people on his ignore list

[Kidlicious]

If the laws of physics are different there, our conception of what is "possible" is totally irrelevant. Why should it be impossible for the laws of physics to be different in another universe? Would that violate the laws of...metaphysics? Or something else entirely?

That's why I'm asking why it might be impossible for there to be a different kind of logic in another universe.

I have pointed out before, in atheist vs. theist contests (yes, I got into them once, I gave up shortly before you converted), that in this context the word "likely" makes no sense and, if we think about it, means little beyond "what I have an easier time conceptualizing." However, this is the first time I've mentioned it in response to a theist.

Maybe, but I'm trying to figure out for myself how they think. It seems to me that all humans reduce to the likely. For example if we see a stack of papers we all automatically assume someone stacked them. That goes for atheists too.

[Kidlicious]

Troll, nothing. That was an honest question: does your "don't interfere with other Christians' attempts to proselytize" rule extend to all other Christians, including ones you personally find horribly offensive, or is it just for you? If I were just trolling I would have let it drop.

Christians teach a lot of things I disagree with. I don't think God gives us a right to interfere with those we disagree with beyond stating our own beliefs. The point is I think it's ridiculous to say that God gives you authority over others christians because they call your friends a poohead on an internet site where that behavior is the norm.

[loinburger]

Christians teach a lot of things I disagree with. I don't think God gives us a right to interfere with those we disagree with beyond stating our own beliefs. The point is I think it's ridiculous to say that God gives you authority over others christians because they call your friends a poohead on an internet site where that behavior is the norm.

Your behavior is well outside the norm. People don't normally behave so atrociously that others are prompted to start threads asking what the hell is wrong with them.

You also "interfere" with others to a ridiculous extent - you cry foul when somebody says that your reasoning is flawed, then turn around and say that people hate God for the crime of thinking that you're an *******. You've got delusions of grandeur, behaving as though you're some sort of prophet, even going so far as to make absurd interpretations about the Bible without actually reading it. You're applying a double standard in which you can level absurd insults against others, while anybody who disagrees with you is disagreeing with God.

[Elok]

That's why I'm asking why it might be impossible for there to be a different kind of logic in another universe.

I think you misunderstand me. In our universe, as we understand it, what is "possible" is determined by the laws of nature. It's not possible to have a perpetual motion machine because of thermodynamics, for example. When we're talking about whether those rules--ie the bounds of what is possible--are different in other universes, on what criteria do we determine which impossibility as we know it might exist in another universe where the rules are entirely different? Is it possible to have a universe where one plus one equals negative five? Well, what do you mean by possible?

Maybe, but I'm trying to figure out for myself how they think. It seems to me that all humans reduce to the likely. For example if we see a stack of papers we all automatically assume someone stacked them. That goes for atheists too.

Well, yes, but that assumption about the sheet of papers is based on our long experience with humans and their paper-stacking habits. It makes sense, from past data, to hypothesize that when you see a stack of papers, an intelligence of some sort put them in a stack. The same is not true of the universe and God. We don't have experience with universe-creating deities to draw on; God is a theory which happens to fit the facts, but there are any number of other theories which also do so, and which one you choose to believe is not based on eliminating the impossible ones, or even coming up with what's "likely."

[Elok]

Christians teach a lot of things I disagree with. I don't think God gives us a right to interfere with those we disagree with beyond stating our own beliefs. The point is I think it's ridiculous to say that God gives you authority over others christians because they call your friends a poohead on an internet site where that behavior is the norm.

I have never claimed authority. Please show a post where I have. What I have done is objected, vehemently, to your behavior. That has nothing to do with authority. Suppose a group of friends are hanging out at a bar and one of them keeps making lewd puns at the increasingly-disgusted female bartender. One of the friends cuts in and says, "dude, that's a dick thing to do." Is he "claiming authority" over the one he's criticizing?

Also, as I think you've told me yourself, Christian behavior is not supposed to be defined by the non-Christian norm.

[Kidlicious]

When we see a stack of paper we don't assume someone stacked it because of our experience with people. We do so because our brain automatically does so. The brain does a lot of things without any conscious effort. Bit the mind is a complex thing. If we have an agenda then it works different. Then we can imagine all sorts of other possibilities and even believe that no one stacked the papers.

[Kidlicious]

At any rate, there are a lot of atheist who see a problem with fine tuning. They aren't going to debate with you. Only the ones who brush it away as not significant are going to debate you.

[Provost Harrison]

When we see a stack of paper we don't assume someone stacked it because of our experience with people. We do so because our brain automatically does so. The brain does a lot of things without any conscious effort. Bit the mind is a complex thing. If we have an agenda then it works different. Then we can imagine all sorts of other possibilities and even believe that no one stacked the papers.

It's a learnt behaviour as Elok has pointed out...we recognise patterns and understand...those papers could not have been stacked through any other means because paper is a man-made product, ergo, man must have also stacked them.

[Provost Harrison]

At any rate, there are a lot of atheist who see a problem with fine tuning. They aren't going to debate with you. Only the ones who brush it away as not significant are going to debate you.

We don't make the same fundamental assumptions you do. Your deity is not a foundation we choose to try and figure out how the universe works, and that is what is leading you astray.

[Kidlicious]

We don't make the same fundamental assumptions you do. Your deity is not a foundation we choose to try and figure out how the universe works, and that is what is leading you astray.

Well of course. You've assumed God doesn't exist so all the evidence appears to you as showing that he doesn't.