The Key to the Universe

António Pedro Marques · 15 Aug 2010, 00:35 · from 2010-August.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: entonio at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ant=F3nio_Pedro_Marques?=)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 01:35:57 +0100
Subject: (urth) The Key to the Universe
In-Reply-To: <B1FABBCB-F459-4406-B053-B56C30F3EB79 at liftingfaces.com>
References: <SNT123-W18321445B4F9D92C8EA14BCF980 at phx.gbl>	<4C65AB94.5090503 at io.com>	<4C65BDDE.6060204 at gmail.com>	<4C65C9C3.5050708 at io.com>	<AANLkTikX8RU1uTy6w-ebd7coqLPuYM2_ZuQ5uCaS+Pcz at mail.gmail.com>	<4C6707A4.1020104 at gmail.com>
	<B1FABBCB-F459-4406-B053-B56C30F3EB79 at liftingfaces.com>
Message-ID: <4C67366D.3080608 at gmail.com>

Ryan Dunn wrote:
>
> On Aug 14, 2010, at 5:16 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
>
>>>> That's begging the question, in the original sense. Somehow
>>>> intelligence had arise for the first time in the universe, unless
>>>> you have a steady state universe where intelligence has always
>>>> existed. There is very strong support for the Big Bang, so the
>>>> steady state model is not convincing locally.
>>>
>>> Of course, theism begs the question in an isomoprhic way; it ignores
>>> the question, "And where did God come from?"
>>
>> It doesn't, because it posits something extraneous to the universe(s)
>> and hence not accountable to observed processes such as space, time and
>> causality. Or as it's usually put, 'not contigent'. Whereas 'scientism'
>> makes a leap of methodological faith and says contigent things may
>> ultimately need no justification. That's why the idea of infinite
>> universes appeared: rather than overcome contingency by justification,
>> one tries to overcome it by infinite supply.
>
> If you are Pantheist, then you believe the Universe is equivalent to God.
> If you are Panenthiest, you believe the Universe is connected to God, and
> that God is above the substantive Universe.

And those are other ways out for scientism, albeit uncomfy ones.

> I find these trains of thought more appealing in terms of "religions"
> myself.

I certainly agree they may be appealing, but personally I find them 
unfulfilling.

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net