Ockham's Razor (sharpening it)

[Iacchus]

I dont know what you are implying when you use the word "meaning", its a bit vaguely defined.

Actually absolute meaning doesn't exist, so you can pretty much think what you like. This is what I mean by arbitrary by the way Tricky.

 

[RandFan]

How can a Universe which is non-existent come about on its own whim? Not much of an alternative now is it?

Questions don't answers make.

I don't know, I guess we should just assume that god did it. Why you think "god did it" is an answer?

 

[Yahweh]

Actually absolute meaning doesn't exist, so you can pretty much think what you like.

So we agree meaning doesnt have anything to do with a god's existence if I choose to take it that way?

 

[RandFan]

How can a Universe which is non-existent come about on its own whim? Not much of an alternative now is it?

This is called "god of the gaps". Throughout history when something could not be explained people remarked "god did it".

Why did the Volcano explode? God did it.

Why is there a drought? God did it.

Why does the Sun move in the sky? God did it.

Why are we not able to synthesize carbon molecules? Because god created carbon molecules.

All of these things have been resolved and there are natural explanations to all of them. Scientists didn't simply accept the god of the gaps argument. God's realm is shrinking. The gaps of science are getting smaller and smaller all of the time.

You can still make the claim that "god did it" but it is unnecessary. We can understand many before unknown phenomenon without appealing to an intelligent designer.

 

[Iacchus]

Questions don't answers make.

Wasn't this Socrates' approach?

I don't know, I guess we should just assume that god did it. Why you think "god did it" is an answer?

I'm not asking you to assume anything, just question it.

This is called "god of the gaps". Throughout history when something could not be explained people remarked "god did it".

This is called your "god of the gaps," not mine.

 

[Iacchus]

So we agree meaning doesnt have anything to do with a god's existence if I choose to take it that way?

No, I don't agree with that at all. I'm saying that if absolute meaning doesn't exist, we can pretty much make it up as we go. Which, doesn't sound the least bit scientific if you ask me.

 

[LostAngeles]

Why is meaning so necessary though? This I don't understand.

A la Moore's Watchmen, creation by a God and by chance are equally miraculous to me.

 

[Iacchus]

Why is meaning so necessary though? This I don't understand.

A la Moore's Watchmen, creation by a God and by chance are equally miraculous to me.

What is a boat without a rudder? Where exactly do you plan to go?

 

[LostAngeles]

What is a boat without a rudder? Where exactly do you plan to go?

A rowboat? I don't follow. That has to do with "meaning", why?

 

[Iacchus]

A rowboat? I don't follow. That has to do with "meaning", why?

Funny!

I'm just wondering how you're going to steer the boat and maintain a sense of direction, that's all.

 

[LostAngeles]

Funny!

I'm just wondering how you're going to steer the boat and maintain a sense of direction, that's all.

With the paddles, of course!

To continue the analogy then, I choose my direction. It is by my strength and rowing skill that I move in that direction. My sight will help me to process where I am going and what my direction is in relation to where I want to go.

If meaning = direction, then ... it's all about vectors?

The boating analogy is nice, but it just doesn't jibe with my world view, it seems.

 

[dmarker]

1) Which is the simpler hypothesis: God, as Creator of the Universe, or an eternal Universe without a God? The first one, since God is simpler than any extense thing. An eternal Universe, on the other hand, would imply an unnecessary multiplication of entities in space and time.

We must apply the Razor: "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem".

2) You can ask yourselves the following questions: Why should cease existing that which has started to exist? And why should never start to exist that which exists contingently? There are no reasons at all.

We must apply the Razor: "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem".

3) Does an eternal Universe explain something? No. Then, does the hypothesis of God enrich our knowledge? Yes, by stating that nothing is without a reason or, in other words, that everything which exists can be known.

We must apply the Razor: "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem".

Greetings.

Daniel.

But bringing up a deity brings up more questions, Dan.

Where did it come from? Who created it? Which deity are we talking about? Are we speaking of a bronze age desert war god that has Mithra grafted onto it or we talking about the Brahman of the Hindu faith? Or are we talking about a deity yet undiscovered?

Occam's razor doesn't apply to deities, Dan. This doesn't simplify things, just obscures them.

 

[ReasonableDoubt]

Re: Re: Re: Ockham's Razor (sharpening it)

Inane rubbish. There is neither warrant nor method for mapping terms such a simplicity to the supernatural and, therefore, not the slightest reason to presume the applicability of Occam's Razor.

I second that. A God who makes an entire universe, is concerned with the slightest actions and thoughts of his creations, will damn or reward them can not be simple. Ineffable, but not simple. [/QUOTE]That is not my point at all. Talking about the simplicity of God is like talking about the color of Wednesdays.

 

[TAILGUNNER]

I thought (and i may be wrong) that the whole big bang that created the universe is a re-occuring event with the current universe expanding ultimately to be destroyed but out of that occurs yet another big bang with yet another universe

if and again its entirely possible the theories wrong that happens then in some way the universe is eternal

anybody heard the same theory?

 

[Anders]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ockham's Razor (sharpening it)

That is not my point at all. Talking about the simplicity of God is like talking about the color of Wednesdays.

What god? I guess you're talking about the christian god, and he, as descibed in the bible does not exist. Please notice that I havn't said anything about all gods; there could be gods out there that we don't know about, sure. But all gods that has been described by humans having a set of properties, save the mighty Invisible Pink Unicorn, can't exist, and do not exist. Period. But, that has nothing to do with Occam's razor: you have to put god against something in order to use Occam's razor.

 

[Anders]

I thought (and i may be wrong) that the whole big bang that created the universe is a re-occuring event with the current universe expanding ultimately to be destroyed but out of that occurs yet another big bang with yet another universe

if and again its entirely possible the theories wrong that happens then in some way the universe is eternal

anybody heard the same theory?

Well, the theory of a for ever inflating universe could be true, the astonomers are not sure about that. Anyway, we know that the universe is not eternal as we know when it was created, some 13-14 billion years ago. Well, created is perhaps the wrong word...

 

[Iacchus]

With the paddles, of course!

To continue the analogy then, I choose my direction. It is by my strength and rowing skill that I move in that direction. My sight will help me to process where I am going and what my direction is in relation to where I want to go.

If meaning = direction, then ... it's all about vectors?

The boating analogy is nice, but it just doesn't jibe with my world view, it seems.

Although I may believe in God, I don't wish to be cast in with all the other religious nuts, albeit I may be a nut in my own right. Indeed, I have had my moments. However, regarding the notion of absolute truth, I don't think the guy upstairs is looking for "good little comformists." Not to say He would reject them outright, since this is part of the humanity which He created (with its accompanying frailty) and, I believe God understands.

And yet to worship Him in the absolute sense (informal is okay) kind of defeats the whole purpose of a rich and diverse Universe which, if nothing else allows Him the opportunity to hide behind many things. In what way? Because it provides us with the appearance -- at the very least -- that we're in charge of our lives and indeed have a life of our own. In fact how else can we truly appreciate God if not from the standpoint of being separate beings? If we were merely robots, where is the acknowledgment? In which case I would suggest the quest for meaning, with all its inquisitiveness (Tricky), is none other than our search for God. Aside from that, there really isn't much more to be said about it, as far as I'm concerned and, it's pretty much business as usual ... with the possible exception of understanding our moral guidelines a little better. But, that's about it.

Recommended reading: The Masks of God, by Joseph Campbell.

 

[Iacchus]

Well, the theory of a for ever inflating universe could be true, the astonomers are not sure about that. Anyway, we know that the universe is not eternal as we know when it was created, some 13-14 billion years ago. Well, created is perhaps the wrong word...

Eternity is not contingent upon time and space by the way. Eternity exists right here and now in the moment. So who's to say the moment has not always been?

 

[ReasonableDoubt]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ockham's Razor (sharpening it)

What god? I guess you're talking about the christian god, ...

Then I guess you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

 

[The Don]

What is a boat without a rudder? Where exactly do you plan to go?

There is no *plan*. Basing your entire life on the hope for eternal resurrection does seem a little extreme when you don't know for sure that; there is a god; that there is an afterlife; that you're devoting your life to the correct god(s); that you're following the correct rule set for that particular god (set of gods).

Why not instead try to live your life as a good humanist ? That's far more device agnostic