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

Mignostic's Profile

Mignostic's Avatar Joined over 2 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by Mignostic

More Discussions by Mignostic

Latest Comments by Mignostic

Go to: Against All Gods

Mignostic's Avatar Jump to comment 90 by Mignostic

Comment 87 by Steve Zara :

Even if something doesn't need to have an origin, it still doesn't explain why it exists.

True and that's because "origin" and "the explanation why something exists" is the same thing (at least according to my usage of those expressions). So if something has no origin, naturally we can't explain why it exists.

The point I'm trying to make is, if we assume something has no origin, the questions why it exists is (philosophically) senseless. It's not answerable. I guess that's what you mean, too, when you say you "suspect we can never know the answer to this."

I agree with your point about complexities and that we should search for ever-easier explanations. I think I was just confused by your earlier statement that the question should be about ultimate origins. Because that seems pretty moot to me.

Mon, 30 Jul 2012 23:04:32 UTC | #950322

Go to: Loss within the truth

Mignostic's Avatar Jump to comment 12 by Mignostic

Comment 11 by korben :

beyond this reality I will never see them again

Unless proven wrong by some new knowledge and evidence of the afterlife that I'm not aware of, at the risk of sounding harsh (certainly not my intention) I'll say that there will be no "I" to see anybody. The "you" that would miss them if they were to vanish today, won't exist anymore to do any missing. So enjoy and love and cherish your family and give them your very best now, you only have one shot at it.

Exactly, there is no "beyond this reality", at least not for "you". One could say, "your" children are part of "your" entire universe.

Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:27:12 UTC | #950321

Go to: Against All Gods

Mignostic's Avatar Jump to comment 85 by Mignostic

Comment 74 by Steve Zara : because there can't be one.

But only if we assume that everything needs to have an origin.

Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:46:25 UTC | #950294

Go to: Against All Gods

Mignostic's Avatar Jump to comment 68 by Mignostic

Comment 40 by Steve Zara :

This is, in my view, a very interesting point. It doesn't get rid of the "who created the creator" problem though, because the problem is one of complexity. If we want to try and explain some complexity in the universe by saying it was created, then we are stuck with having to explain the complexity of a creator. We still have the question of the creator even if that creator has been around for a very, very long time. The question is, or at least should be, about ultimate origins.

I do wonder why the question should be about ultimate origins. Maybe there is no ultimate origin? Maybe there doesn't have to be one?

The concept of "origin" is something we observe a lot in nature. Still, why do we assume there has to be a reason or origin for each and everything? We even do observe phenomena we dont't know the origin of. We don't know the origin of those particle-virtual particle pairs going in and out of existence in the quantum vacuum.

Sat, 28 Jul 2012 21:58:29 UTC | #950249

Go to: Against All Gods

Mignostic's Avatar Jump to comment 38 by Mignostic

and claims to solve it by introducing an arbitrary and even greater mystery (the existence of a deity), has exactly the same logical force of saying that the shapes of clouds are designed by Fred.

That's exactly the problem ignostics have: What deity is - any - discussion about? After all, "God" is just a word. Let's replace "God" with "Fred" everywhere.

Fri, 27 Jul 2012 19:49:20 UTC | #950180

More Comments by Mignostic