Yes, but more exactly a trial-and-errorist.
On Feb 15, 2013, at 10:47 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
In other words your God is an experimentalist., or what you call
"Nature".
Harry
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Edmund Storms
<stor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
I agree, but as has been noted many times before, Nature always
tests all
possibilities until the one that works is found. Presumably, our
universe is
here because it worked. We humans are here because we survived the
tests
used by Nature to determine what works. Presumably, many life-
forms having
greater awareness exist throughout the universe. Any life-form
that fails
the test is eliminated, both on a personal level as well as on a
planet-sized level without any consideration by a "Creator".
That's my
opinion.
On Feb 15, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote:
The laws of physics derive from a slight alteration of the perfect
symmetry
of nothing. Symmetry is the most fundamental principle of natural
law. No
much space for patchwork universe there.
Giovanni
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com
>
wrote:
I have always been interested in how people describe a "Creator".
Are you
claiming that the universe resulted from some super intelligent
life-form
getting the idea that a new universe would be an interesting
project and
then set about creating it? Or is the idea of a creator an abstract
simplification of a process that would have occurred regardless of
any
intent? Too often the idea is applied to mankind as a reason why
we are so
special. Or at a more childish level, that God is here to answer
our
requests for personal protection or to help win sporting events.
At which
level are you describing the "Creator" and what use is the concept
to
anyone?
Ed
On Feb 15, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Chris Zell wrote:
Dawkins is an example of 'atheist theology' (oxymoron). He seems to
desire a neat, ordered, understandable world without any Creator
behind it.
He extends traditional moral concerns to general society, as if
they still
had a Divine authority behind them. Why is objective truth
important? Why
aren't some lies better?
I prefer to think that the lack of a Creator suggests that we should
expect a sort of patchwork universe, full of paradoxes and
anomalies - such
as Feyerabend suggested. It would make a lot more sense - and
might lead us
into unexpected discoveries.
