so..................

Ok... I'll let you know how it turns out. Hold your breath.

 

libertine:

'Uncaused cause' isn't the weakest and most overused notion. That would be examining one's mind to find the truths of the universe (a la Descartes). Also, 'uncaused casue' does NOT equal the Christian (or any other) God for me.

Second, you happen to be talking to an atheist, so don't try to saddle me with any assumptions about 'order' that are due to God's existence. I'm trying put the theist's position as clearly as possible so that we'll better be able to reply to this contrary position. Thus, a theist WOULD say that there is a first uncaused cause, and a theist WOULD say that there is an order about the universe which is a direct result of God's existence (among other claims).

The notion of an uncaused cause is useful because it keeps us from having to say that something came from nothing. How else did the universe originate, were it not for an uncaused cause? Like I said previously, the parameters of the problem point to a first uncaused cause (or Aristotle's unmoved mover, if you like). Unscientific? Sure, and only a fool would say otherwise. Nevertheless (and I think this is where I came into this conversation in the first place), we're not outside logic in talking about this.

What is an uncaused cause? I wouldn't know one if I came across it out in the world (and I most certainly wouldn't claim that a 2000 year-old dead philosopher was its direct descendant), but without this uncaused cause, then

1) the universe is eternal (I don't like that because I can't explain how there was a "time" when there was no time, but now there is time. I mean, I ate breakfast BEFORE coming to the office)

OR

2) I'm stuck having to claim that something (the universe) came from nothing. That looks to be more absurd than an uncaused cause.

While I may believe in a first uncaused cause, I wouldn't pray to it.

 

If you are an atheist, then why in hell are you arguing with ME?

An uncaused cause IS, indeed, weak. Rene or no Rene...

Furthermore, if you are an atheist, I am extremely interested in knowing what you consider to be this "uncaused cause"?

Energy has always existed. E=MC2...energy = matter. Thus, it is easy for me to believe that matter always existed than in an "uncaused cause" for which there is NO evidence.

 

sigh. its not that easy is it?

 

Excuse me? Please explain to me what in the hell you are talking about.

Really, if you want me to do something, stop being so vague. Just spell it out!

 

I just asked you to go out of your box... but you just ignore me. For once is it so hard for you to think outside of your little box and accept the fact that God does exist?

 

No, I cannot JUST ACCEPT anything like that. If it is a "FACT", prove it.

I am an atheist. That means that I LACK BELIEF in "gods" because I LACK EVIDENCE to belief in such entities.

Now, can you provide evidence or not?

 

see you just can't go out of your box. lol

 

try going outside your little box for once, it helps to get the bigger picture . lol

 

and you just can't go outside of yours. What a pity!

 

no no, i can, and i have, I accept that you cannot prove that God exists through logic, how bad or good that logic might be. but I can see the bigger picture and you cannot.

 

Trying growing up and thinking outside YOUR world of fairy tales and bullshit.

 

And which faculties did you use to determine this, o' great and wise one?

 

sigh, see again, you just have to try harder.

 

You're a joke. And if you cannot explain yourself, I will place you on my ignore list for being a complete moron.

 

see, keep trying, you will get better at it and finally maybe hopefully you will come out of the box and see the bigger picture.

 

*sigh* --- IGNORED.

Reason: VAGUE, REDUNDANT, & LACK OF COHERENT ARGUMENT.

 

libertine:

I didn't think I was arguing with you. I thought we were clarifying our positions. This all started because someone (not you) was talking about God being outside logic which is a nonsensical claim.

As I said previously, I wouldn't know the uncaused cause if I came across it. Could energy fit that bill? I don't see why not. Where, though, did it come from? Energy exists, but how did it come into being?

Like I said, if we're talking about the origin of the universe, I can only see three alternatives:

1) an uncaused cause
2) the universe is eternal
3) something coming from nothing [at least, that's all I can suppose without (1) and (2)]

Remember, these are KINDS of explanations for the universe's origin. As far as the particulars or principal players (e.g. God, energy, aliens, etc.), I don't know.
Where would you say energy fits into these three? Or is there a fourth alternative? Again, I affirm (1) because it looks like the least troublesome of the three (though it has its faults). Give me a reason to prefer some other explanation.

 

Matter cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change form.
E=MC2, I propose the energy(matter) always existed. Time is relative.
I would likely choose option #2 from your alternatives list, if I had to choose.

If the universe is the "whole of existing things", it is natural and made up of energy/matter--thus, it is reasonable to believe it always existed in some form rather than some "uncaused cause" (especially anything which fits the attributes of "god").

 

You're all fucking insane. Period. So what the fuck are you going to say to each other?