Philosophophophy...

[LiAM]

Alright, I just got back home from a Philosophy lesson at college, riiiiight.

And right know, were debating one of the BIGGEST issues known to man (dun dun duuun D=!!)

Kay, so were actually debating the existence of the Earth and how God comes into it all.

 

Don't worry, I'm not gonna bore you with rants and atheist or catholist stuffz ('cos Ima ossum leik dat).

 

So to start with, the first theory I really wanted to discuss and get you thinking about was 'Rare Earth Theory' (you can google/ wiki this to understand it a bit better).

 

So it essentially works like this;

• The Earth is so wonderful and unique from all other nearby planets in our solar system, and is so intricate compared to the other planets (existence of land and water).
  
• The pressure of gravity, force of water pressure, exact tilt of the Earths axis (for seasons), molecules in the air (0 + CO2) also some other extra little things which allow animal life.
  
• How can all these things be so unique to the Earth and be the right pressures and amounts to allow for humans, animals and plants to co-exist fairly, equally and successfully. Every species does something to benefit the greater world (bees remove pollen from plants and pollinate other plants, whales eat plankton to clear oceon, birds pick insects, trees inhale CO2 that we exhale and release O2... basically, every species does something to help everything else.
  

 

So the big question is, how come everything is so tied into each other and so exact that it has allowed humans to develop intelligence and superiority over other organisms, and the Earth, with the positioning of the moon and distance from other planets/ stars etc. etc.

 

You should get the point by now, so the question is:

-Was the Universe designed by a higher being such as God, or simply a complete act of coincidence.

(Don't bother getting into the argument of the Universe's creation, that's more complicated).

 

TL;DR?:

Why is the Earth so perfect and exact for existence, was it God or coincidence?

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Even if Earth was perfect and exact for existence (hint: it's not), that only applies to the existence that exists at this time. If the Earth was a different place, then life itself would be different, yet it would be as "perfectly" adapted to it, so it would appear that that Earth was the perfect and exact one.

[LiAM]

Well there is no definition to perfect as perfect is completely relative.

 

But the Earth is intricate, much more developed and designed than others, Jupiter's gravity is too strong, mars is too rocky etc.

 

This is just a theory to debate with, it's up to you how it evolves, I'm just hoping to get it out of infinite regression.

[Cin]

Oh the intelligent creator/Paley's Watch argument.

 

The Earth isn't perfect. Otherwise it wouldn't be so close to the sun.

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Well there is no definition to perfect as perfect is completely relative.

 

But the Earth is intricate' date=' much more developed and designed than others, Jupiter's gravity is too strong, mars is too rocky etc.

 

This is just a theory to debate with, it's up to you how it evolves, I'm just hoping to get it out of infinite regression.

[/quote']

 

Jupiter is huge. Why shouldn't it have a lot of gravity?

 

Mars isn't "too rocky", it's too far away from the Sun in order to keep liquid water on its surface.

 

The Earth only seems developed and designed because we live on it. Things that we assume were fate because life "as we know it" (note the quotation marks) could not exist without it doesn't realize that there's nothing about life that absolutely needs such things. About the only thing that you could argue that Earth has that is ideal for life to develop with is water, and even then it's not an absolute certainty that (absolute) life needs water.

 

And this entire discussion assumes that life isn't or hasn't already developing other places. We have no reason to assume that it isn't, and every reason to assume that it is.

 

So instead of arguing what you clearly want to argue, which would get into a religious debate and would force me to lock the topic (at least, before Icy got to it), I'm giving this topic a chance to survive by arguing against the very parameters you've set up.

[LiAM]

Yes the Paley's watch argument was part of this, I decided to not include it because it would have complicated the issue further.

 

But the Earth itself, with its distance from the sun, allows for a good balanced temperature which gives all life balanced existence. Any closer or further away, and life (human life anyway) wouldn't be.

 

But it just seems too odd that no other planet shares the same positives and negatives like Earth.

 

The Earths orbit is interesting too, for it not to interfere with any other planet/ satellite etc.

---

Well there is no definition to perfect as perfect is completely relative.

 

But the Earth is intricate' date=' much more developed and designed than others, Jupiter's gravity is too strong, mars is too rocky etc.

 

This is just a theory to debate with, it's up to you how it evolves, I'm just hoping to get it out of infinite regression.

[/quote']

 

Jupiter is huge. Why shouldn't it have a lot of gravity?

Exactly =)

 

Mars isn't "too rocky", it's too far away from the Sun in order to keep liquid water on its surface.

My point exactly ;D

 

The Earth only seems developed and designed because we live on it. Things that we assume were fate because life "as we know it" (note the quotation marks) could not exist without it doesn't realize that there's nothing about life that absolutely needs such things. About the only thing that you could argue that Earth has that is ideal for life to develop with is water, and even then it's not an absolute certainty that (absolute) life needs water.

Well it's developed naturally, fields, waterfalls, etc, current a posteriori life requires water+oxygen to produce energy anyway.

 

And this entire discussion assumes that life isn't or hasn't already developing other places. We have no reason to assume that it isn't, and every reason to assume that it is.

The level of evolution up to modern times is intricate to current existence, it still seems doubtable of coincidence

 

So instead of arguing what you clearly want to argue, which would get into a religious debate and would force me to lock the topic (at least, before Icy got to it), I'm giving this topic a chance to survive by arguing against the very parameters you've set up.

lol, it's just a 2 way balanced debate often referred to in philosophy, it just interests me to hear other views, so discussing here seemed like a good way to practice, and as for the rest of the argument, still, it seems way too complex

 

=D

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Yes the Paley's watch argument was part of this' date=' I decided to not include it because it would have complicated the issue further.

 

But the Earth itself, with its distance from the sun, allows for a good balanced temperature which gives all life balanced existence. Any closer or further away, and life (human life anyway) wouldn't be.

 

But it just seems too odd that no other planet shares the same positives and negatives like Earth.

 

The Earths orbit is interesting too, for it not to interfere with any other planet/ satellite etc.

[/quote']

 

1) "Paley's watch", again, assumes that the Earth is perfect for life, when it isn't.

 

2) So you allow for the reality that the Earth only appears "perfect" to humans because we can live her, yet you don't see that that inherently destroys your argument?

 

3) That we've observed yet. Realize that there are only 9 (I include Pluto because I'm sentimental like that) planets in our solar system, and literally countless others in the universe at large.

 

4) This just shows you don't know much about how the solar system works. It does interfere with other orbits, otherwise meteorites wouldn't strike the Earth, not to mention that early in Earth's history it was almost certainly sharing an orbit with countless particles, otherwise the Earth would not have formed.

---

And what the **** is a "level of evolution"?

[LiAM]

Yes the Paley's watch argument was part of this' date=' I decided to not include it because it would have complicated the issue further.

 

But the Earth itself, with its distance from the sun, allows for a good balanced temperature which gives all life balanced existence. Any closer or further away, and life (human life anyway) wouldn't be.

 

But it just seems too odd that no other planet shares the same positives and negatives like Earth.

 

The Earths orbit is interesting too, for it not to interfere with any other planet/ satellite etc.

[/quote']

 

1) "Paley's watch", again, assumes that the Earth is perfect for life, when it isn't.

Which is why I didn't incorporate it in this discussion

 

2) So you allow for the reality that the Earth only appears "perfect" to humans because we can live her, yet you don't see that that inherently destroys your argument?

Well it is different in all views, but still its intricate.

 

3) That we've observed yet. Realize that there are only 9 (I include Pluto because I'm sentimental like that) planets in our solar system, and literally countless others in the universe at large.

The limit to other existence is interesting and a good point, but as far as we know for certain, there is only one planet with intelligent life such as ours, whether a God did create one or multiple planets, or everything is coincidence.

 

4) This just shows you don't know much about how the solar system works. It does interfere with other orbits, otherwise meteorites wouldn't strike the Earth, not to mention that early in Earth's history it was almost certainly sharing an orbit with countless particles, otherwise the Earth would not have formed.

Well I'm not taking any sides, I'm neither religious or atheist, (kinda in-between but not agnostic) but it's still and interesting debate

---

And what the **** is a "level of evolution"?

Something I made up to sound clever

[Womi]

In 5 posts, everything was said. =/

[Niño]

Because God is God. God is the equivilent of saying "It be magic stoopid!" ;D

[LiAM]

In 5 posts' date=' everything was said. =/

[/quote']

 

XD

 

Well I'm sure you can mention something else on the debate, or add further insight to a previous point.

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Me: You don't know what you're talking about.

 

You: I'm not taking sides.

 

 

...wut?

[LiAM]

Because God is God. God is the equivilent of saying "It be magic stoopid!" ;D

 

lol' date=' if God is true, then it provides a much easier answer to everything, but as I said, I have no sides.[hr']

Me: You don't know what you're talking about.

 

You: I'm not taking sides.

 

 

...wut?

 

lol, I'm just discussing something I learnt today, don't blame me for not having a phd or any other qualification.

 

And I'm not taking a side on the discussion, christian or atheist... lol

[Niño]

Because God is God. God is the equivilent of saying "It be magic stoopid!" ;D

 

lol' date=' if God is true, then it provides a much easier answer to everything, but as I said, I have no sides.[hr']

Me: You don't know what you're talking about.

 

You: I'm not taking sides.

 

 

...wut?

 

lol' date=' I'm just discussing something I learnt today, don't blame me for not having a phd or any other qualification.

 

And I'm not taking a side on the discussion, christian or atheist... lol

[/quote']

True that, but how is it that our heads don't ache when trying to think about the existence of God whereas the idea of the Multiverse theory does.

 

However, if the Multiverse theory proves to be right that maybe proves the existence of God?

[LiAM]

Well all in all, I believe God to be a metaphor for a force or existence, and the Bible to be an analogy with morals in the new testament.

 

But it's only a difficult argument without God as it's so complex and open to discussion.

[Niño]

True, but the Bible has never percieved God to be a man, only all that is good, we just portray him as a man because rock n' roll can't be painted on a church window. ;D

[LiAM]

Well surely God is referred to as the 'Father'. And with a 'Son'. Also humans were designed in the image of God, first created was Adam, and Eve was created from Adam. So Adam is the image of God, Adam is male, God is the Father, who had the son Jesus. So yeah, he's a man, well male, but as a spirit or human form, he's still referred to as male.

[BehindTheMask]

God doesn't exist, ergo, it cannot be the reason why the earth is perfect.

[Niño]

But if you look around us, the earth is not perfect. =/

 

Besides, fux you Liam. ;D

[LiAM]

Lmao, I know the Earth isn't perfect, but the way it works is unique to all other nearby planets.

 

I know God doesn't exist, but for the sake of discussion, you have to reason both opinions.

[Niño]

You know it, for a fact? Hows this? I think you mean to say you have more evidence for the hand of evolution rather than God.

[LiAM]

As for the existence of God, that still leads to further argument.

 

He could exist just as equally as he couldn't exist.

 

Something MUST have created the Universe, a Prime Mover, the first chain in the link.

Either intelligent and animate or random and inanimate. Something designed or spawned the Universe and all reality, but what is it?

[BehindTheMask]

ID "logic" - Hurr Durr, the earf was made by gawd because the earf is perfeckt. Gawd exists and is perfect because a book said so!

 

Actual logic -> On the atomic level, certain elements reacted a certain way, because of Chemical and Physical laws, and there was no other possibilities.

[BehindTheMask]

As for the existence of God' date=' that still leads to further argument.

 

He could exist just as equally as he couldn't exist.

 

Something MUST have created the Universe, a Prime Mover, the first chain in the link.

Either intelligent and animate or random and inanimate. Something designed or spawned the Universe and all reality, but what is it?

[/quote']

 

If something "must have created the Universe" it must be a material thing.

 

If God is a material thing, then he must have been created after the universe was created.

 

If God is an immaterial thing, he cannot affect the material world.

[LiAM]

This is exactly the kind of discussion I like ;D

 

God is either a being or a force, either the Bible is truth or it is just an allegory or metaphor for an easier method of describing existence for existence.

 

You could bring in the Ethical argument for the creation, if God does exist, and believe for a while that he does and he is the exact reason for everything, then is all we know, and the commandments good because God made it good, or is it good because it is controlled by God?

-This can be based on the Universe too, does the Universe exist because of God or does God exist because of the Universe.