DogmaHunter
Code Monkey
Here is the question, when looking at creation such as the Earth the Water and studying science, I really have to ask myself what kind of odds would have to play out for all of creation to come into existence by only natural processes? Really what kind of odds would have to play out for that to happen? Because over a fourteen billion year period for all the atoms to be created and put into just the right place, so that the one sperm of your Father or my Father would go to the one egg of your or my Mother, is totally astronomical.
Any other outcome would have been equally improbable.
Having said that, trying to figure out probabilities after the facts and with a sample set of exactly 1, is literally setting yourself up for failure.
Also, even if we assume you could actually calculate such odds and suppose these odds are like 1 in a gazitrillion-billion... how does that figure get you any closer to "therefor, god dun it"?
Yes it is a circular argument to say a creator made it, but if it were only natural processes to make it then there is randomness involved.
Why is it a problem that there is (or might be) randomness evolved in the "free" development of a system?
So, could existence be like looking at quadrillions and quadrillions of doors and opening the one door that leads to existence?
Are you of the opinion that every event that happened from the beginning of time till the moment of your birth, happened only so that you could be born?
It sure sounds like it, when I read that question.
Sure all the other doors you don't even know what they could lead to, and you only get to know about one door, one possibility. However our knowledge is incomplete, because there could be a creator, who is even omnipresent or not we just don't know.
Or perhaps there are no doors at all, and the universe with all its contents was created 5 seconds ago, with all our memories implanted.
Just because we can "imagine" such a possibility, doesn't mean that such things are also plausible.
Still though, it seems to me like a good argument for there being a creator or higher power of some kind.
I see no argument here whatseover, except a fallacious argument from ignorance.
I have no idea how you got from "improbable" to "god".
Replace "god" with "extra dimensional, undetectable pixies" and the merrit of the argument remains the exact same. In fact, you could replace "god" with any unfalsifiable idea your imagination can produce.
In reality, there isn't a single reason to bring any gods (or other unfalsifiable entities) into this, at all.
So what are your thoughts on this?
It's fallacious reasoning.
Upvote
0