Absolute chance vs. architect

[tonyrey]

Well I think that if you believe that your important decisions don’t include chance, you are fooling yourself. Sure, you look at your choices as you perceive them to be with your limited mind, and take your best shot at a decision from your paradigm of experience + predilections + habit. Usually the outcome approximates what you intend. But perhaps you have heard the dictum “If you want to make God laugh, make plans?”

You are fooling yourself if you think we are incapable of allowing for the element of chance in our decisions. The success of science is not due to reliance on chance but to the use of reason…

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Intelligent design cannot be accepted so long as the scientific method exists.

Also, even if science could prove that everything happen by chance and explain how it all works, that would not amount to a full explanation of reality. The laws of physics cannot exist by chance, and the laws of physics cannot be explained by anything that has potentiality in its being. And if physical reality began to exist in the big bang, then physical law is not necessary and should be differentiated from logical law, that is, the question of possibility and impossibility. Even if there was no big bang, the problem remains as to why the laws of physics exist and why they are what they are.

 

[Ranklyfrank]

Intelligent design cannot be accepted so long as the scientific method exists.

Thank God then, for scientific method!

Also, even if science could prove that everything happen by chance and explain how it all works, that would not amount to a full explanation of reality.

Yes, this is true. Science deals only with quantifiables, and therefore with surfaces only. It deals strictly in the subject/object mode int its present form of industrial ontology.

The laws of physics cannot exist by chance, and the laws of physics cannot be explained by anything that has potentiality in its being.

Not sure what you mean by “potentiality.”

And if physical reality began to exist in the big bang, then physical law is not necessary and should be differentiated from logical law, that is, the question of possibility and impossibility.

And you make that differentiation how?

Even if there was no big bang, the problem remains as to why the laws of physics exist and why they are what they are.

Why then we can just enjoy and pursue them as a source of wonder! But as things stand, as far as measurability goes, it did happen. The what and how of it are yet a mystery. Enjoy! It’s just God being God as God. Did God design Himself?

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Did God design Himself?

Depends what you mean by God. Does God have a grey beard and lives in a cloud?

That’s what my mom keeps telling me before i go to bed, and she thinks that just because i am only five years old i would be fooled by that crud.

Christian children unite against ignorance and the lies of our parents!!!

 

[Jim_Baur]

I am the OP.

I am still with all of you, and, thank you.

I am still reading and thinking.

 

[tonyrey]

I am the OP.

I am still with all of you, and, thank you.

I am still reading and thinking.

Don’t forget the success of science is not due to reliance on chance but to the use of reason… What more could one ask?

 

[Jim_Baur]

I have not forgotten!