This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Para-naturalistic theories cannot lead to practical engineering

voxu's Avatar Jump to comment 21 by voxu

reply to: Comment 20 by jfmanning

I get the logic, but it doesn't satisfy. I'd ask: if you "get the logic" what condition is not satisfied. Do you mean that you aren't satisfied, or people in general aren't convinced?

How improbable can it be? It IS! You label this as a banal appeal, the improbability of which, you nearly define in your last paragraph, I quote: the workings of the deployed universe are mysterious enough to inspire awe, astonishment, and perhaps even reverence True enough, to be sure, and I'm not, maybe, understanding your tack. I think you're saying that the overwhelming majority of people aren't satisfied with the explanations given because the improbability is too much to wrap their heads around, even given the majesty of its emergence without "omnipotent" assistance. I, personally, find that less than banal. You seem convinced, I should say now. Could it be that your apologizing for those who can't (or won't) accept the theory?

With regard to your mention of entropy. I don't necessarily think that it bears much consideration given the timescales and magnitudes conceivable. There is still plenty of time for things to "level off" as it were. Localized (for us) areas of complexity are to be expected in any system. 2nd law states equilibrium will be reached magnitude and scale aside. We just aren't going to see it happen, I hope.

Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:12:11 UTC | #950754