Question for athiests/agnostics

[jmac2112]

Hi,

I'm new to this forum, so my apologies if this horse has been beaten to death. What is the FIRST thought that occurs to you when faced with the seeming orderliness and purposefulness of the world? Not to put words into anyone's mouth, but how would you complete the sentence "Yes, there is much order evident in the workings of reality, but....."

I'm hoping to get single sentences for answers, but feel free to write a book if necessary!

Thanks,

John

[wrekk]

Hi,

I'm new to this forum, so my apologies if this horse has been beaten to death. What is the FIRST thought that occurs to you when faced with the seeming orderliness and purposefulness of the world? Not to put words into anyone's mouth, but how would you complete the sentence "Yes, there is much order evident in the workings of reality, but....."

I'm hoping to get single sentences for answers, but feel free to write a book if necessary!

Thanks,

John

Yes. Very simple answer.

No, there is much order and disorder evident in the workings of reality.

[Zzyzx]

.
Welcome to the forum Jmac.

What is the FIRST thought that occurs to you when faced with the seeming orderliness and purposefulness of the world?

I have no FIRST thought arising from “seeming orderliness and purposefulness” you mention because I do not make the required assumption of “creation” – and am therefore NOT faced with "purposefulness" of the world.

"Purpose" implies intent which implies intelligence -- i.e., a "creator".

No evidence to support the theories of a "creator" has come to my attention. If you have such evidence, please bring it forward. Once a "creator" has been established beyond reasonable doubt (by evidence, not conjecture), we can investigate "purpose".

Many who suggest “purpose” ASSUME a creator then look for evidence to support the assumption. That is the inverse of actual search for truth – which observes what exists and seeks cause and effect relationships.

“Creationism” does exactly the opposite – forms a conclusion then looks for evidence to support its already-formed conclusion. The difference in those approaches and their results are evident repeatedly in these threads.

Kindly define and identify "orderliness" as you use the term in the question – and demonstrate its prevalence.

[jmac2112]

Thanks to Zzyzx and Wrekk for the replies.

Zzyzx's reply that there is much order and disorder in the world is one reply that I was expecting. The existence of evil really seems to be the crux of the problem for many people. I suspect that an atheist/agnostic who is consistent will object to the use of the word "evil" to describe a state of affairs that happens to be inconsistent with human preferences. However you want to characterize this state of affairs, it still seems to me to be the sticky wicket.

To answer Wrekk's question, my notion of "orderliness" (I KNEW that word would draw fire ) comes from observation. I hardly know where to begin, but let's begin with me. I think about my senses, and the fact that light reflecting off of objects enters my eyes, goes through the lenses, is projected upside down onto my retinas, and somehow this image is carried by nerves to a part of my brain where it is turned right side up and gives me knowledge of my surroundings. I could say similar things about the other senses. All of my senses together give me a pretty accurate knowledge of my surroundings, which is very useful for things like staying alive. For some reason, I also have a memory, so that the information conveyed by my senses and my reasoning is carried with me through time, which makes learning possible, as well as things like relationships with others. I could go on and on, but a biology book would do a much better job than I can. My point is that there are many parts of my body doing many things, but they all seem to be conspiring toward the end of keeping me alive and well.

Expanding the search, I find that I live on a planet that contains all the plants, animals, gasses, minerals, etc. that are necessary to keep me alive. But after all, where ELSE would I live? Anyway, I find that this planet is just the right size and just the right distance from a flaming ball of gas that keeps me warm and makes things grow. And I could go on and on in this vein until we all get bored, but I won't.

There is clearly a lot wrong with the world, in spite of the way that so many things seem to be working together toward a common end. It almost seems like a science experiment gone awry. This is the great mystery that every theist has to grapple with. But I think we might be forgiven for at least forming a hypothesis that there might be an Intelligence behind all of it. Theists argue from effects to cause, even though the cause can't be perceived by the senses.

An opposing hypothesis would be that it is all a huge coincidence. As I understand it, the atheist position would be that since we can't use our senses to perceive any intelligent cause, it therefore cannot exist, because everything that exists can be sensed. The agnostic position would be that since we can't use our senses to percieve any intelligent cause, it may or may not exist, because maybe not all of reality is corporeal.

Anyway, I don't think I've responded to your whole request, but I've certainly said enough to keep the conversation going! I certainly want to know if I am misunderstanding or misrepresenting your positions.

John

[Goat]

Thanks to Zzyzx and Wrekk for the replies.

Zzyzx's reply that there is much order and disorder in the world is one reply that I was expecting. The existence of evil really seems to be the crux of the problem for many people. I suspect that an atheist/agnostic who is consistent will object to the use of the word "evil" to describe a state of affairs that happens to be inconsistent with human preferences. However you want to characterize this state of affairs, it still seems to me to be the sticky wicket.

To answer Wrekk's question, my notion of "orderliness" (I KNEW that word would draw fire ) comes from observation. I hardly know where to begin, but let's begin with me. I think about my senses, and the fact that light reflecting off of objects enters my eyes, goes through the lenses, is projected upside down onto my retinas, and somehow this image is carried by nerves to a part of my brain where it is turned right side up and gives me knowledge of my surroundings. I could say similar things about the other senses. All of my senses together give me a pretty accurate knowledge of my surroundings, which is very useful for things like staying alive. For some reason, I also have a memory, so that the information conveyed by my senses and my reasoning is carried with me through time, which makes learning possible, as well as things like relationships with others. I could go on and on, but a biology book would do a much better job than I can. My point is that there are many parts of my body doing many things, but they all seem to be conspiring toward the end of keeping me alive and well.

Expanding the search, I find that I live on a planet that contains all the plants, animals, gasses, minerals, etc. that are necessary to keep me alive. But after all, where ELSE would I live? Anyway, I find that this planet is just the right size and just the right distance from a flaming ball of gas that keeps me warm and makes things grow. And I could go on and on in this vein until we all get bored, but I won't.

There is clearly a lot wrong with the world, in spite of the way that so many things seem to be working together toward a common end. It almost seems like a science experiment gone awry. This is the great mystery that every theist has to grapple with. But I think we might be forgiven for at least forming a hypothesis that there might be an Intelligence behind all of it. Theists argue from effects to cause, even though the cause can't be perceived by the senses.

An opposing hypothesis would be that it is all a huge coincidence. As I understand it, the atheist position would be that since we can't use our senses to perceive any intelligent cause, it therefore cannot exist, because everything that exists can be sensed. The agnostic position would be that since we can't use our senses to percieve any intelligent cause, it may or may not exist, because maybe not all of reality is corporeal.

Anyway, I don't think I've responded to your whole request, but I've certainly said enough to keep the conversation going! I certainly want to know if I am misunderstanding or misrepresenting your positions.

John

Well, there are several things. there are many many many planets in the universe.
A certain percentage will be of the proper distance from their star. A certain percentage will be within the right size, and temperature. Other than that, we also
evolved to fit the planet, not the planet being made for us.

To use a cliche, we are the puddle in awe that the hole we are in exactly fits us.

[Zzyzx]

.

Thanks to Zzyzx and Wrekk for the replies.

Zzyzx's reply that there is much order and disorder in the world is one reply that I was expecting. The existence of evil really seems to be the crux of the problem for many people. I suspect that an atheist/agnostic who is consistent will object to the use of the word "evil" to describe a state of affairs that happens to be inconsistent with human preferences. However you want to characterize this state of affairs, it still seems to me to be the sticky wicket.

John,

Notice that almost all of my reply above was NOT concerned with order and disorder – only the last sentence mentioned that. The bulk of my reply related to “purposefulness” from the OP. Here, again, is what I said (bold added for emphasis):

I have no FIRST thought arising from “seeming orderliness and purposefulness” you mention because I do not make the required assumption of “creation” – and am therefore NOT faced with "purposefulness" of the world.

"Purpose" implies intent which implies intelligence -- i.e., a "creator".

No evidence to support the theories of a "creator" has come to my attention. If you have such evidence, please bring it forward. Once a "creator" has been established beyond reasonable doubt (by evidence, not conjecture), we can investigate "purpose".

Many who suggest “purpose” ASSUME a creator then look for evidence to support the assumption. That is the inverse of actual search for truth – which observes what exists and seeks cause and effect relationships.

“Creationism” does exactly the opposite – forms a conclusion then looks for evidence to support its already-formed conclusion. The difference in those approaches and their results are evident repeatedly in these threads.

I would appreciate learning your response to these issues.

[FidelCastro]

Hi,

I'm new to this forum, so my apologies if this horse has been beaten to death. What is the FIRST thought that occurs to you when faced with the seeming orderliness and purposefulness of the world? Not to put words into anyone's mouth, but how would you complete the sentence "Yes, there is much order evident in the workings of reality, but....."

I'm hoping to get single sentences for answers, but feel free to write a book if necessary!

Thanks,

John

My first thought? "I wonder how that works." And then I start trying to figure it out.

I mean really, I've never considered the universe as a whole. You'd have to simplify it quite a bit to do that.

"Yes, there is much order evident in the workings of reality, but" not understanding how something works doesn't mean God had to have done it. People used to think that seasons, weather, etc could all be attributed to gods, but we have scientific explanations now. Based on this pattern, I find it more likely that there are scientific explanations waiting to be found.

[realthinker]

Hi,

I'm new to this forum, so my apologies if this horse has been beaten to death. What is the FIRST thought that occurs to you when faced with the seeming orderliness and purposefulness of the world? Not to put words into anyone's mouth, but how would you complete the sentence "Yes, there is much order evident in the workings of reality, but....."

I'm hoping to get single sentences for answers, but feel free to write a book if necessary!

Thanks,

John

I think, "I am but a Man, thinking Man things because I am a Man."

And then I look at how indifferent the rest of the universe is to that fact. Man is no more nor no less significant than any other artifact of existence. Man cannot destroy the earth. He may make it uninhabitable, perhaps only for certain species and himself, but the Earth will carry on. The same forces that brought about mankind and all we have done will continue and it will be no better nor no worse. It will simply be different. To think that Man is entitled to anything, even to a purpose, in the face of everything else in the universe is hubris. Mankind and its history may be a flash in the pan, a remarkable blink in cosmic time, and I'm not saddened by that. The universe simply is. Mankind simply is. To say anything more is pretending.

[daedalus 2.0]

"Yes, there is much order evident in the workings of reality, but...

I wouldn't notice it if not for the overwhelming amount of chaos, randomness and disorder.

[SimonChoir]

Hi,

I'm new to this forum, so my apologies if this horse has been beaten to death. What is the FIRST thought that occurs to you when faced with the seeming orderliness and purposefulness of the world? Not to put words into anyone's mouth, but how would you complete the sentence "Yes, there is much order evident in the workings of reality, but....."

I'm hoping to get single sentences for answers, but feel free to write a book if necessary!

Thanks,

John

Order?

Order is subjective. What you may call order, others may call chaos. So your question is rather void. What "order" do you mean?



Humans exist BECAUSE of how the Universe is. The Universe does not exist BECAUSE of humans existence... Understand the difference?