How many believe in God

[ticktockclok]

Originally Posted by Lychee

How does there being an Intelligence/God detract from the fascinating characteristics of the universe?




The very existence of everything is a miracle. Again, science to some extent can explain how but can never explain why. We are all seeking the the answer to that question and God is the answer for many, while others choose to find answers in other things.

God isn't an answer; its a non-answer. When god becomes the reason for something, there's no way to understand it further. Saying god did it just makes only explains how something happens, not why.

[Maguru]

If there is a creator of all things, then the creator created god and devil. I have experience of them both. That is, the essence of both god and devil. My life experiences of that which god and the devil represent. Does this make sense to anyone?
I have experienced them only as a figment of my imagination, both residing within the confines of my mind. I have not experienced either of them in the flesh. Only I am in the flesh. I don't see them, but I see me.
If I dispense with all notions of god and devil, all prior learnings including ancient wisdom born from god beliefs and never have a thought of them ever again, who would I be?

[beautyscientist]

Originally Posted by Maguru

If I dispense with all notions of god and devil, all prior learnings including ancient wisdom born from god beliefs and never have a thought of them ever again, who would I be?

Maguru,

I suggest that if you dispense with all these notions of imaginary beings you will be a more rational and happier person. The human mind has come up with an army of troubling deities over its history. Most of them are now forgotten. Do we miss them? The days of the week in english are named after the old gods of England. Wodin and Thor must have commanded as much respect as the current set of gods in their day. Do we regret their passing? Forget them all. Trust to yourself. You won't look back.

[beautyscientist]

Originally Posted by AidanMatthews216

(Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only one rendered speechless by some mathematical equations...)

No you are not the only one Aidan. For me it is science's power to make predictions that is astonishing, whether or not they are mathematical. I think the reason that evolution is so destructive of a faith in an intelligent creator is the strength of its predictions.

There are some cliffs near where I grew up.

If you know about the theory of evoluation you know that you won't find a fossil rabbit in these cliffs, even though there are thousands of them hopping about on top of the cliffs. Every year the sea erodes the cliffs and reveals the rock that has never been seen before by another human. And it never brings to light anything contradictory to the laws of evolution. No religion comes anywhere near making such accurate predictions.

The fact is that science works. And it works whether or not you believe in it.

[AidanMatthews216]

Originally Posted by Lychee

How does there being an Intelligence/God detract from the fascinating characteristics of the universe?

Because it's unnecessary, messy, and anticlimactic. Nothing in the universe needs a divine creator; if you give it one, you're tearing down the whole simplicity and beauty of the physical universe by giving it an extra layer of meaningless explanation.

The fascinating characteristics of the universe are so fascinating because of how simple they are. God is anything but simple.

The very existence of everything is a miracle. Again, science to some extent can explain how but can never explain why. We are all seeking the the answer to that question and God is the answer for many, while others choose to find answers in other things.

Past a certain level, there are no why's or explanations. Things just are the way they are. For some, that basic reality is God. For others, it's the physical laws of the universe. Science can explain why, at least as far as the question "why" makes sense.

[Dragon]

Originally Posted by ticktockclok

God is an excuse, a replacement for not understanding.

So no, I don't believe in God.

You can also say that a lack of "understanding" causes a disbelief in God, as there are many real things in the world that aren't believed in just because of a lack of understanding. No one truely understands the universe, no matter what they claim. So no one can truely claim either/or by sheer understanding alone as fact. The thing I understand, is that we can't go around proclaiming our opinion as fact.

If you don't understand how I can create an oil painting that looks better than a photograph, it dosen't mean that I didn't create it.

[Matthew Shea]

Originally Posted by ticktockclok

God is an excuse, a replacement for not understanding.

So no, I don't believe in God.

In addition to what Dragon said, this sounds like you're confusing belief with science. God may very well be used to explain the unexplainable, but that's not the purpose of belief. The purpose of belief is to provide a moral compass, giving guidance to help people react properly to the world around them. Belief explains "why", science explains "how."

[BettyBoo]

I (of course :-))) believe in God, and I think science just scratched a little on the surface of what really is. And that little scratch maybe proved wrong in a later discoveries.

Like our favorite scientist Albert Einstein once said:
"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind."

[AidanMatthews216]

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

In addition to what Dragon said, this sounds like you're confusing belief with science. God may very well be used to explain the unexplainable, but that's not the purpose of belief. The purpose of belief is to provide a moral compass, giving guidance to help people react properly to the world around them. Belief explains "why", science explains "how."

You don't think that gravitation, relativity, quantum mechanics, natural selection are all explanations of "why" things happen as they do?

As for the moral compass, why should you need to believe in a higher power in order to have morals? Morality comes from an individual--everyone creates their own values independently, which are unique to themselves. There are many ways to do this other than appealing to an imagined higher intelligence.

[Takuin Minamoto]

I wrote this post on my website a few days ago and thought it might add to the discussion here.

Questioning

Feel free to leave comments over there (or here, for that matter).

It is nice to see such healthy discussion.

[Matthew Shea]

Originally Posted by AidanMatthews216

You don't think that gravitation, relativity, quantum mechanics, natural selection are all explanations of "why" things happen as they do?

No. They all explain "how." "Why" involves detaching ourselves from our scientific understanding and coming to a judgement of the nature of that which we now understand the workings of.

As for the moral compass, why should you need to believe in a higher power in order to have morals? Morality comes from an individual--everyone creates their own values independently, which are unique to themselves. There are many ways to do this other than appealing to an imagined higher intelligence.

I never claimed that a higher power was necessary for morals (that's another debate). I merely claimed that such belief came about to explain why things are as they appear to be and to differentiate between right and wrong.

[beautyscientist]

Sorry Mathew, I don't think you have answered Aiden. The theory of gravity fully explains both how and why the Earth rotates around the Sun. It enables the past and future behaviour of the two bodies to be predicted to a very high degree of accuracy. It is useful. You can apply the insight from this to explore other aspects of the Universe.

When the theory of gravity was first formulated we made a great leap forward in our understanding of the world. The theory that it was all made by a being called God explains nothing.

[Akagi]

I think the entire concept of gods is a human construct. The first gods mankind ever worshipped were invented as a primitive explanation to what was at the time an unknown phenomena. We study these kinds of fictional entities in history classes. It was during that time that man invented the first gods ever worshipped, and hence the god concept itself.

The Greek and Roman gods, for instance, were just as if not moreso real to them as our modern gods are to today's adherents. The key difference here is that these ancient civilizations collapsed, and so there was nobody around that they could indoctrinate with their god. Now they've been relegated to the pages of history. The only real key differences between the believers back then and the ones today is time and scale. Gods people worship today could just as easily become a historical relic, given the right circumstances.

So no, I don't believe in or worship any gods. I think that it's largely a poison for your mind.

[AidanMatthews216]

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

No. They all explain "how." "Why" involves detaching ourselves from our scientific understanding and coming to a judgement of the nature of that which we now understand the workings of.

When you understand what something is, how it came about, how it works, how it can be useful, what is there left to understand? If you mean an understand of the ultimate purpose or meaning of something, apart from any human value, well then... there is none! The "why" of a physical object can't be understood the same way as the "why" of a human action.

[Lychee]

Because it's unnecessary, messy, and anticlimactic. Nothing in the universe needs a divine creator; if you give it one, you're tearing down the whole simplicity and beauty of the physical universe by giving it an extra layer of meaningless explanation.

So if the universe doesn't follow the storybook, simple plotlines, it must be incorrect?

God is anything but simple.

Telling an ant to do something probably won't yield the best results. Do you think it would act on your instruction? So how can it be that perhaps we also are that ant in some way and we cannot understand things completely, either?

Past a certain level, there are no why's or explanations. Things just are the way they are. For some, that basic reality is God. For others, it's the physical laws of the universe. Science can explain why, at least as far as the question "why" makes sense.

Science cannot explain why. That's where religion and philosophy comes in.

Evolution answers "why" in the sense of how it happens. One answer is natural selection. Why does natural selection exist? Why do the best survive? What is the point of survival? Why is death experienced? Why is the sky blue? Why do black holes exist? Science takes away the spiritual meaning for it and relies solely on the logical, left brain. It creates an imbalance.

Why are things the way they are?

You don't think that gravitation, relativity, quantum mechanics, natural selection are all explanations of "why" things happen as they do?

No. How does gravitation explain the necessity for it? What is the necessity of quantum mechanics? What is the necessity of our existence?

As for the moral compass, why should you need to believe in a higher power in order to have morals? Morality comes from an individual--everyone creates their own values independently, which are unique to themselves. There are many ways to do this other than appealing to an imagined higher intelligence.

If we're all going to die anyway, what's the point in morals? What's the point in treating people with kindness? We're all going to turn to dust someday so it really doesn't matter what we do in this world, does it? The complete cessation of our existence at the the time of death negates everything done in our lives. There would be no point to doing anything. Many religion acts as a motivation for doing good with promise of an afterlife.

Sorry Mathew, I don't think you have answered Aiden. The theory of gravity fully explains both how and why the Earth rotates around the Sun. It enables the past and future behaviour of the two bodies to be predicted to a very high degree of accuracy. It is useful. You can apply the insight from this to explore other aspects of the Universe.

When the theory of gravity was first formulated we made a great leap forward in our understanding of the world. The theory that it was all made by a being called God explains nothing.

Again, it all explains how. Why does it enable us to predict the past and future behavior? Why is it even predictable? Why is the sun and earth being moved so perfectly that we can predict it?

[AidanMatthews216]

Originally Posted by Lychee

So if the universe doesn't follow the storybook, simple plotlines, it must be incorrect?

No. Simplicity and complexity aren't at odds--our universe is both. But creating an explanation of the universe which is fundamentally more vague and complex than it needs to be is unnecessary and distorts our view of the universe.

Telling an ant to do something probably won't yield the best results. Do you think it would act on your instruction? So how can it be that perhaps we also are that ant in some way and we cannot understand things completely, either?

Of course we don't. But that doesn't mean we should invent the answers that we don't know.

Science cannot explain why. That's where religion and philosophy comes in.

Evolution answers "why" in the sense of how it happens. One answer is natural selection. Why does natural selection exist? Why do the best survive? What is the point of survival? Why is death experienced? Why is the sky blue? Why do black holes exist? Science takes away the spiritual meaning for it and relies solely on the logical, left brain. It creates an imbalance.

I disagree. Logical explanations are not at odds with deep emotions. For me, studying math and observing the world creates almost a religious ecstasy, that I wouldn't give up for any religion. The more rational, orderly, and complex the more at home I feel in the world. To me there is nothing more spiritual than the physical world.

Some people want to be one with God; I want to prove the Riemann hypothesis.

Why are things the way they are?

Does there always have to be a reason or a cause? What is the reason for the the most ultimate reason then? Somewhere there's a starting place, where the question "why" in the sense you mean it doesn't mean anything.

No. How does gravitation explain the necessity for it? What is the necessity of quantum mechanics? What is the necessity of our existence?

There is no "necessity" for gravitation; it just is. Our existence is necessitated by the physical laws that created us. There is no meaning inherent in that, but we as thinking organisms give it one.

If we're all going to die anyway, what's the point in morals? What's the point in treating people with kindness? We're all going to turn to dust someday so it really doesn't matter what we do in this world, does it? The complete cessation of our existence at the the time of death negates everything done in our lives. There would be no point to doing anything. Many religion acts as a motivation for doing good with promise of an afterlife.

I don't understand why death makes life meaningless. We simply have to deal with the fact that our lives are finite--but in a way that makes everything we do all the *more* meaningful. If we have only shot to do it, we had better do it right.

Maybe it has to do with how you perceive time. For some, the past is dead and lost no matter what. When they die, their lives instantly becoming meaningless bygones.

Again, it all explains how. Why does it enable us to predict the past and future behavior? Why is it even predictable? Why is the sun and earth being moved so perfectly that we can predict it?

I really think this question is meaningless. What do you mean exactly by "why" these things are? Do you mean who or what intended them? If you ask that way, you're setting itself up to believe in a personal God. Have you stopped beating your wife?

[beautyscientist]

Well put Aiden. You can always ask for a deeper level of explanation. Why is there gravity? Why is there a God? Does God ask himself why He exists? Would he need to posit the existence of a supergod to explain His own existence? It is just a pointless way of looking at things. Meanwhile the world is full of wonders, none of which point to any divine intervention.

[Akagi]

Originally Posted by beautyscientist

...the world is full of wonders, none of which point to any divine intervention.

[beautyscientist]

I love the Occam's razor animation. I have been thinking of bringing out a product called Occam's Aftershave.

[infinitethoughts]

Akagi
The animation you found......?

Wonderful.

Zen in it's purest form.

[Lychee]

No. Simplicity and complexity aren't at odds--our universe is both. But creating an explanation of the universe which is fundamentally more vague and complex than it needs to be is unnecessary and distorts our view of the universe.

Of course. But the existence of the Creator does not distort the universe. It just alter your own view in a way which you don't like.

Of course we don't. But that doesn't mean we should invent the answers that we don't know.

That's assuming that holy text (some of them, anyway) were fabricated by humans, creating a deity. What if it really was sent by God?

I disagree. Logical explanations are not at odds with deep emotions. For me, studying math and observing the world creates almost a religious ecstasy, that I wouldn't give up for any religion. The more rational, orderly, and complex the more at home I feel in the world.

Some people want to be one with God; I want to prove the Riemann hypothesis.

I understand. Some people find ecstasy in math, in art, in doing adventurous things. But haven't you ever wondered if there was something more out there, something beyond math? Who's to say that math is the end?

To me there is nothing more spiritual than the physical world.

We are living under blessed conditions where we don't have to worry about the basic necessities. I'm sure other people will disagree that this physical world is the most spiritual place to be. But regardless, we'll all leave the physical world so what would be the point in studying and proving the Rieman hypothesis? It might bring momentary satisfaction that may have some consequence on the world, but we'll die anyway, and I've read theories on how the world will end too. In the end, what would it matter?

Does there always have to be a reason or a cause? What is the reason for the the most ultimate reason then? Somewhere there's a starting place, where the question "why" in the sense you mean it doesn't mean anything.

You just said yourself that you feel at home in a rational world. Why is asking that question irrational? People discovered the fruits we enjoy today because they never stopped questioning.

There is no "necessity" for gravitation; it just is. Our existence is necessitated by the physical laws that created us. There is no meaning inherent in that, but we as thinking organisms give it one.

Nothing in this world exists without a reason. Anything superfluous and unharmonious is ousted by nature.

I don't understand why death makes life meaningless. We simply have to deal with the fact that our lives are finite--but in a way that makes everything we do all the *more* meaningful. If we have only shot to do it, we had better do it right.

Maybe it has to do with how you perceive time. For some, the past is dead and lost no matter what. When they die, their lives instantly becoming meaningless bygones.

You find meaning in proving the Riemann hypothesis. Others find meaning stealing from others, committing crimes, and causing injustice in the world. How are the two similar? How can they both reach the final destination without any discrimination between the way people lived their lives? That destroys the meaning and purpose that each person ever lived their lives for.

[AidanMatthews216]

Originally Posted by Lychee

Of course. But the existence of the Creator does not distort the universe. It just alter your own view in a way which you don't like.

It's not a matter of whether I like it or not, as it comes down to the plain fact that there is no evidence of God (that is what I mean by unnecessary.) The simplest explanation of the universe does not include a God, so he is unlikely to exist (Occam's razor.) I was only explaining why I don't find the idea of God awe-inspiring.

That's assuming that holy text (some of them, anyway) were fabricated by humans, creating a deity. What if it really was sent by God?

Unless we have seen evidence that it was sent by God the belief that it is is fabricated.

I understand. Some people find ecstasy in math, in art, in doing adventurous things. But haven't you ever wondered if there was something more out there, something beyond math? Who's to say that math is the end?

Math is (I think) the deepest human way of discovering truth--sure there's more out there, probably a lot more. As soon as we discover it, we will certainly invent numbers to describe it.

We are living under blessed conditions where we don't have to worry about the basic necessities. I'm sure other people will disagree that this physical world is the most spiritual place to be. But regardless, we'll all leave the physical world so what would be the point in studying and proving the Rieman hypothesis? It might bring momentary satisfaction that may have some consequence on the world, but we'll die anyway, and I've read theories on how the world will end too. In the end, what would it matter?

It doesn't matter how finite or how short my life is--I want it to be the best "momentary" happiness I can achieve because it is my life.

You just said yourself that you feel at home in a rational world. Why is asking that question irrational? People discovered the fruits we enjoy today because they never stopped questioning.

I didn't say it was irrational! I think it's a great question to ask, but people expect that there is always an answer, a deeper layer. Doesn't it have to stop somewhere? Not that we should stop searching--but we should not expect our searches to always yield fruit. Sometimes we must and will hit a wall.

Nothing in this world exists without a reason. Anything superfluous and unharmonious is ousted by nature.

Nature is the reason. It prefers stability and elegance. What I'm saying is that nature at it's deepest does not have an explanation.

You find meaning in proving the Riemann hypothesis.

Not yet. But someday... so if you want to cash in on that million dollar prize... (j/k)

Others find meaning stealing from others, committing crimes, and causing injustice in the world. How are the two similar? How can they both reach the final destination without any discrimination between the way people lived their lives? That destroys the meaning and purpose that each person ever lived their lives for.

Why? Other people have different purposes. That's another thing that must be accepted. If their purposes run contrary to yours, inhibit them. You still have a purpose to fulfill given a finite lifetime.

[AidanMatthews216]

Thank you, by the way, for making a great discussion and giving me a lot to think about!

[beautyscientist]

And good luck in proving the Riemann hypothesis. I think you may have set yourself a truly challenging goal there.

[Lychee]

It's not a matter of whether I like it or not, as it comes down to the plain fact that there is no evidence of God (that is what I mean by unnecessary.) The simplest explanation of the universe does not include a God, so he is unlikely to exist (Occam's razor.) I was only explaining why I don't find the idea of God awe-inspiring.

Our inability to physically see God does not exclude the presence of God. If you showed up in a library somewhere, it would only make sense to question what this library is, what books it carries, where it came from, and who built it. What were are seeing is the effect (the result of the action of the Big Bang). But doesn't the question "What caused the Big Bang?" linger in your mind?

Unless we have seen evidence that it was sent by God the belief that it is is fabricated.

What in your opinion would be put under the category of "evidence"?

Math is (I think) the deepest human way of discovering truth--sure there's more out there, probably a lot more. As soon as we discover it, we will certainly invent numbers to describe it.

What guarantee is there that we will even discover it?

It doesn't matter how finite or how short my life is--I want it to be the best "momentary" happiness I can achieve because it is my life.

It's not about length but about the meaning we attach to it. This life would be essentially meaningless if nothing were to ultimately result from our actions. Why would there even be the duality which is present today if Law is discriminate to it now, but where Law (aka God) is indiscriminate after death? Why would the differentiation occur in our lives anyway? Just because "it is"?

I didn't say it was irrational! I think it's a great question to ask, but people expect that there is always an answer, a deeper layer. Doesn't it have to stop somewhere? Not that we should stop searching--but we should not expect our searches to always yield fruit. Sometimes we must and will hit a wall.

If an equation has an answer, the questions of life must have one too.

Nature is the reason. It prefers stability and elegance. What I'm saying is that nature at it's deepest does not have an explanation.

How can you say for sure?

Why? Other people have different purposes. That's another thing that must be accepted. If their purposes run contrary to yours, inhibit them. You still have a purpose to fulfill given a finite lifetime.

If rape, murder, theft, and all society-debilitating activity were to overpower the good, then the people as a whole would die. How does that run in tune with nature's preference for growth? Should these crimes really be overlooked and accepted, then?

Thank you, by the way, for making a great discussion and giving me a lot to think about!

Likewise.

[AidanMatthews216]

Originally Posted by Lychee

Our inability to physically see God does not exclude the presence of God. If you showed up in a library somewhere, it would only make sense to question what this library is, what books it carries, where it came from, and who built it. What were are seeing is the effect (the result of the action of the Big Bang). But doesn't the question "What caused the Big Bang?" linger in your mind?

Yes it does. But I have no reason to believe the Big Bang was caused by an intelligence, especially since the only way I know for intelligence to come about is for it to evolve. I can't be certain that a God did *not* create the universe, but it's unlikely and incongruent with what I know.

What in your opinion would be put under the category of "evidence"?

Well, for example, if we found out that some holy document could not possibly have been written by a human, or that it made astoundingly accurate predictions of the future, that would be pretty strong evidence.

What guarantee is there that we will even discover it?

None. But why shouldn't we, unless these undiscovered somethings don't interact at all with the world we can observe?

It's not about length but about the meaning we attach to it. This life would be essentially meaningless if nothing were to ultimately result from our actions. Why would there even be the duality which is present today if Law is discriminate to it now, but where Law (aka God) is indiscriminate after death? Why would the differentiation occur in our lives anyway? Just because "it is"?

Every consequence of every action we take, and every moment we experience, is an "ultimate" result of our lives. I'm not sure what duality you're talking about...

If an equation has an answer, the questions of life must have one too.

Life isn't an equation. It's an inevitable result of the way the universe works. It's a fact, not a question.

How can you say for sure?

Because otherwise there is an infinite regress. Chicken and eggs all the way back to negative infinity... there can't be a meaning to explain every meaning, or there would be ultimately no meaning to anything at all. At the bottom of the pyramid things just... are.

If rape, murder, theft, and all society-debilitating activity were to overpower the good, then the people as a whole would die. How does that run in tune with nature's preference for growth? Should these crimes really be overlooked and accepted, then?

They should be accepted just as the reality of age and death should be accepted; not because they're good, but because they're there are somebody has to something about them.

Things grow and flourish in nature, sure. They also get sick, kill each other, and die.

[SeriousKidding.com]

Yes I believe in Him, It, She, They, The Force, The Mystery, The Creator, Spirit, Benevolence, Love, Compassion, You, Me, Dog, Mother Earth, Nature, The Universe, Music, Creativity, also known as GOD.

[Lychee]

Yes it does. But I have no reason to believe the Big Bang was caused by an intelligence, especially since the only way I know for intelligence to come about is for it to evolve. I can't be certain that a God did *not* create the universe, but it's unlikely and incongruent with what I know.

You cannot physically see the laws which govern the universe. Does that mean that they don't exist? We cannot hear sounds which run above the wavelength human ears are attuned to, yet dogs can hear sounds above that pitch. Obviously, the human sense are limited. We cannot hear sound at a particular wavelength, but it does not mean that there is no sound being made. We cannot see this force, but it does not mean it is not there. For there to be an effect, there must be a cause. We are seeing the effect, not the cause.

Well, for example, if we found out that some holy document could not possibly have been written by a human, or that it made astoundingly accurate predictions of the future, that would be pretty strong evidence.

This document is right in front of us. What could have made the systems of the human, the earth, the universe, and beyond work so perfectly that there is no conflict?

None. But why shouldn't we, unless these undiscovered somethings don't interact at all with the world we can observe?

You believe that people or mathematicians should seek to discover the undiscovered math. Could it be that in your world you should also seek to discover the undiscovered Creator?

Every consequence of every action we take, and every moment we experience, is an "ultimate" result of our lives. I'm not sure what duality you're talking about...

I mean the duality of light and darkness. Good and evil. Love and apathy/hatred. What is even the point of these dichotomies if they serve no purpose?

Life isn't an equation. It's an inevitable result of the way the universe works. It's a fact, not a question.

The answer that life is just the way it is puts an end to any questioning. If that is so, then why not answer the same for math? Aside from math dealing with equations, you could say math is just the way it is. Why should someone discover more math, but not discover more to life?

Because otherwise there is an infinite regress. Chicken and eggs all the way back to negative infinity... there can't be a meaning to explain every meaning, or there would be ultimately no meaning to anything at all. At the bottom of the pyramid things just... are.

Someone can't assign meaning to something and no meaning to something else. Why would applying meaning to things at all result in there being ultimately no meaning?

They should be accepted just as the reality of age and death should be accepted; not because they're good, but because they're there are somebody has to something about them.

This is what removes the meaning from life. Not by trying to assign meaning to things, but by devaluing constructs and ideals. Why should people do something about them if they are to just be accepted for what they are, good or bad? Why should the questioning stop at just "just because"?

[brandi]

I think i read it in the book Converstations with God:

the proper question is not if we believe in God...
but what do we believe about God?

my personal definition may differ from some one else,
yet we celbrate the concept...
of connection to the possibility of something more than ourselves.


I'm an emphatic believer...
I enjoy my conversations with God.
prayer is me talking to God
meditation is God talking to me.

I find it to be a delicious thought:
I may be elidgeble for grace and encouragement.

(& spell check!!! LOL!!!)

[AidanMatthews216]

Originally Posted by Lychee

You cannot physically see the laws which govern the universe. Does that mean that they don't exist? We cannot hear sounds which run above the wavelength human ears are attuned to, yet dogs can hear sounds above that pitch. Obviously, the human sense are limited. We cannot hear sound at a particular wavelength, but it does not mean that there is no sound being made. We cannot see this force, but it does not mean it is not there. For there to be an effect, there must be a cause. We are seeing the effect, not the cause.

I can physically sense the laws of the universe. Nothing humans sense is anything more than perception of the "effects" of things--but that doesn't make our knowledge worthless or unrelated to truth.

Causes and effects are just human labels for one thing that seems to consistently precede another. I don't think there's a fundamental difference between them that exists "out there."

This document is right in front of us. What could have made the systems of the human, the earth, the universe, and beyond work so perfectly that there is no conflict?

No, no human could have made this universe. But the alternative is not "God made it," but "the laws of the universe caused things to be this way."

You believe that people or mathematicians should seek to discover the undiscovered math. Could it be that in your world you should also seek to discover the undiscovered Creator?

I don't have any reason to believe there is a creator of the world.

I mean the duality of light and darkness. Good and evil. Love and apathy/hatred. What is even the point of these dichotomies if they serve no purpose?

They serve the purpose of telling us what values we should look for and what values we should avoid. But those things are completely individual choices. People create the purpose of their own existence--and they need some idea of "good" and "bad" to guide their actions; but these ideas are different for every individual.

There isn't any purpose but the purpose you make for yourself.

The answer that life is just the way it is puts an end to any questioning. If that is so, then why not answer the same for math? Aside from math dealing with equations, you could say math is just the way it is. Why should someone discover more math, but not discover more to life?

Life is "just the way it is," but it also isn't. Although it is an unchangeable fact, it has explanations and things to discover. I don't think life is a closed book--it's an open one and we should read, read, read! But that doesn't mean that in the end there's any higher guide than ourselves to what should be done with ourselves. Questions of "is" are discovered, but questions of "ought" have to decided.

Someone can't assign meaning to something and no meaning to something else. Why would applying meaning to things at all result in there being ultimately no meaning?

I don't think "applying meaning to things at all results in there being ultimately no meaning." I think there would be ultimately no meaning if you had to look further and further back indefinitely to find the deepest meaning, cause, or truth. Because there is a deepest meaning.

This is what removes the meaning from life. Not by trying to assign meaning to things, but by devaluing constructs and ideals. Why should people do something about them if they are to just be accepted for what they are, good or bad? Why should the questioning stop at just "just because"?

We should accept what they are, good or bad, and act accordingly! All I mean is there is no sense denying the existence or the nature of anything. People die. People do things that harmful to you and your values. Do something about it!