Noah -> RE: Everything Happens For A Reason. (4/1/2008 6:27:23 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Noah, I think you have me wrong. The idea I am discussing is called Determinism, you can look it up, it's not somehting I pulled out of my ass. Mmhmm. I understood you and I think I have a good basic grasp of the theory of Determinism as well as its current popularity. quote:
You really seemed to miss the qualifier of "If you have an Atheistic Universe", that proceded my point. No. I took note of it. quote:
If there is nothing but a scientific athiest univerise, every event, is caused by the preceding conditions with the laws of science (as they actually are, not our currently limited, incomplete understanding of them, I included this phrase in my post I don't know why you missed it). All the way back to the instant of creation. But don't you see the problems inherent in this presentation? First, there are an infinite number of possible atheistic theories of how things stand, which don't rely, as yours does, on your notion of Determinsim. Many have been propounded, many more could be. You happen to be someone who believes in the scientific theory of Cause and Effect. Others (within the orthodoxy of science) see it as superfluous. Cause and Effect can be stripped away from all the other scientific theories without sacrificing any part of the awesome power of Science to predict physical events to very high degrees of probability. This is what I take Science to be about. Your position also seems to rely on a theory of Time which is perfectly linear and unidirectional. It is a common enough theory, and useful to lots and lots of purposes, but there is empirical evidence which can reasonably be seen to refute this notion of Time. If Time isn't (as Science may show us very clearly at some point) then your whole edifice is in great peril, probably doomed to a thoroughgoing revision, at least. You, wisely, I think, make room for revision of scientific theories, but seemingly not enough room to allow for Science to revise things like your notions of Linear, Unidirectional Time and Causality. quote:
Science does not consider Chaotic systems to be random. They are deterministic, and goverened by unbreakable laws, as is everything. They are very complicated, and many things are affecting each other at the same time, so we can't predict the outcome precisely, but the cause is considered to be the laws of science, only. To review, this presents one set of scientific theories among many possible ones. Science is not a monolith speaking with one voice. It is an ongoing disputation. Speaking strictly, I don't think very many people impute "cause" to "the laws of science". The laws of science after all are after all no more than careful notations scientists have made about regularities observed. The "laws"--and the term is metaphorical at most--hardly cause things. Look a it this way. Even if you want to stick with Cause and Effect language (which is fine by me,) when you let go of your coffee cup in mid air, what causes it to drop? Gravity? Or the Law of Gravity? It is gravity, isn't it? This is almost completely a semantic issue, but not completely semantic once you realize what a formative effect on our thinking and perception is had by the ways we habitually characterize things. I think we would agree that a worthy scientist wants an unobstructed view. Poor habits of perception can obstruct the view of whatever it is that we behold. quote:
In an Athiestic paradigm, unless you have an Atheism that rejects science, which I haven't encountered yet. I don't follow you here. quote:
I guess I do consider that a philosphy has to have at least a large degree of interal cohesion to be considered reasonable I think that's a fine quality too. quote:
I am not an Athiest, nor a follower of any "religion", but I do think there is a spiritual aspect tot the universe. In an Atheist paradigm, every event (including the process that cause us to make choices) is caused by the playing out of the initial conditions of the universe with the laws of Science applied to it. So the reason for every event is the initial conditions(regardless of what caused them to be the way they were, presumably the same issue arrises, set by will or set by preceding conditions), with the laws of science applied. Very well said. "In AN atheistic paradigm ... " Meanwhile in any number of OTHER atheistic paradigms your limitations will not be seen to obtain in the same way, or whatsoever. There ar an unlimited number of paradigms and possible paradigms which your overview neglects to consider. I did give you a careful reading, luckydog, and I appreciate your giving the opportunity to clarify and explain a few things left unclear by my earlier attempt.
|
|
|
|