10
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − Doesn't the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy (the 1980s miniseries, not the Disneyfied movie) say that once God is proven to exist, He won't? ;)--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 22:15, 7 June 2007 (EDT)+ − − :Thank you, but I'm not sure that would qualify as an argument ;-) [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 22:22, 7 June 2007 (EDT) − − I don't think Douglas Adams style theology will fly very far on this site. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:31, 7 June 2007 (EDT) − − :I don't expect it to. I was trying to make a funny. Apparently, I failed. :(--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 22:32, 7 June 2007 (EDT) − − 42. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:33, 7 June 2007 (EDT) − − :Ah, yes. Except the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything is actually 54... − − − − "Forty-two?!" − − "I always said there was something fundamentally wrong with the universe..." − --[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 22:36, 7 June 2007 (EDT) − − == Freewill == − − The "God exists because there is freewill" argument can be challenged by quantum mechanics. While it is not necessary, even impossible, to describe fully in an article such as this, it should be pointed out that quantum mechanics, due to the uncertainty principal, allows for freewill without God. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 13:24, 21 September 2007 (EDT) − : I don't know how the uncertainty principle allows for free will. It allows for ''randomness'', which is certainly different from ''determinism,'' but how does ''randomness'' imply that beings can make free, deliberate choices? [[User:Ungtss|Ungtss]] 19:35, 21 September 2007 (EDT) − ::It's up for debate in physics. Before quantum mechanics, physicists claimed that it would be possible, in principal, if you knew all the parameters of every particle in the universe and had enough processing power, to calculate and predict the future - therefore no free will. However, since the advent of quantum mechanics, we now know that we can't know all the parameters of even one particle let alone all of them. Now, of course, our ignorance doesn't necessarily mean that these particles don't have a determined future. But most physicists now believe that the probability in quantum mechanics means that the universe is not deterministic even in principal and so the door remains open for free will as a fundamental aspect of the universe. But as I said, it's still debated. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 14:33, 24 September 2007 (EDT) − ::: Agreed ... but I don't understand why the potential existence of ''random'' events implies that people have ''free will.'' If a choice I make is prompted by some random quantum event, it's not ''free'' -- it's partly random, and partly determined, but certainly no ''choice.'' For me to freely ''choose'' something, there must be something ''more'' than randomness and determinism ... there must be some force ... call it a ''soul'' ... that is at least somewhat free of physical causation and randomness, and ''chooses'' things ... [[User:Ungtss|Ungtss]] 15:36, 24 September 2007 (EDT) − ::::This is a controversial topic. However, there are plenty of examples where science attempts to explain how quantum events are used by the brain or consciousness to make choices. This is different to simple randomness. As you say, randomness doesn't imply free will - it simply implies ignorance of measuring techniques. But ideas such as the Quantum Mind, while not a fully formed theory, is an example of how science attempts to classify free will as a natural phenomenon without the need for the supernatural or God. Some theologians have also postulated that natural free will must exist because God would design a natural universe with the capacity for free will - His Creation is, after all, perfect. While naturalistic free will might not be correct, it should be added to your otherwise excellent list of objections. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 08:18, 25 September 2007 (EDT)
Talk:Arguments for the existence of God (view source)
Revision as of 12:22, September 25, 2007
, 12:22, September 25, 2007Replacing page with '"Woah - he exsists, point proved." - Not God'
"Woah - he exsists, point proved." - Not God
"Six by nine?"