Does everything happen for a reason?

[RubyT]

Then if your god has all this mapped out and pre-planned and anticipated, let him explain it.

Until such time as this divine explanation is forthcoming, scientific investigation will continue to pursue what it ::can:: discern…

Who are we to demand such explainations from the creator?
God reveals what He wants to reveal.

You can revel in scientific process, God provided that gift to us also. If you have ever studied the THEORY of evolution it has many holes which are unexplained, yet the theory still exist. Why don’t we say to Darwin until you explain the holes we will continue to pursue a more reasonable scientific explaination?

 

[Sair]

Who are we to demand such explainations from the creator?
God reveals what He wants to reveal.

You can revel in scientific process, God provided that gift to us also. If you have ever studied the THEORY of evolution it has many holes which are unexplained, yet the theory still exist. Why don’t we say to Darwin until you explain the holes we will continue to pursue a more reasonable scientific explaination?

We are beings who are affected by the actions of God, if any god exists. As such, we have more than just a passing interest in what this deity’s reasons might be for subjecting many of its supposed creations to intolerable suffering, hardship and pain.

If you are going to claim that everything happens for a reason, it helps if you can actually pony up with said reasons. Thus far, the monotheistic God never has done so.

Compared with the evidence that supports the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection (do, please, look up the contextual definition of ‘theory’ here - the existence of gravity is also just a theory, but I don’t see too many evolution-deniers likewise hurling themselves from great heights without parachutes or bungee cords or the like, unless they are intent on suicide…), there is no evidence for the existence of any being fitting the usual description of the God of Classical Theism. We’re not talking mere holes in the theory here - we’re talking the absence of any body of evidence in which there could be holes!

 

[tonyrey]

We are beings who are affected by the actions of God, if any god exists. As such, we have more than just a passing interest in what this deity’s reasons might be for subjecting many of its supposed creations to intolerable suffering, hardship and pain.

There is no evidence that there could be development in a world devoid of suffering, hardship and pain.

If you are going to claim that everything happens for a reason, it helps if you can actually pony up with said reasons. Thus far, the monotheistic God never has done so.

If you are going to claim that everything happens for no reason, it would help if you produced reasons. Thus far you have never ever done so.

Compared with the evidence that supports the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection (do, please, look up the contextual definition of ‘theory’ here - the existence of gravity is also just a theory, but I don’t see too many evolution-deniers likewise hurling themselves from great heights without parachutes…), there is no evidence for the existence of any being fitting the usual description of the God of Classical Theism. We’re not talking mere holes here - we’re talking the absence of any body of evidence in which there could be holes to begin with!

There is no scientific theory of development from chaos - or from nothing - nor the existence of the laws of nature nor the increase in complexity nor the origin of life nor the origin of rational beings nor the existence of human rights…

 

[Sair]

There is no evidence that there could be development in a world devoid of suffering, hardship and pain.

I’m inclined to agree, but only if there’s no such thing as an omnipotent god that could make anything happen. You’re trying to claim there’s a logical contradiction involved in expecting development without suffering, but what you’re really referencing is the practical contradiction of development occurring in a physical, natural, disinterested universe without some inherent conflict through which said development could be influenced. You don’t get natural development without friction. Supernatural development is another matter entirely.

If you are going to claim that everything happens for no reason, it helps if you can produce reasons. Thus far you have never done so.

First of all, a simple reversal of the burden of proof doesn’t work here - there need be no reason for things to happen at all in order for them to just happen. Randomness is a demonstrable feature of the universe we inhabit.

Secondly, I have never claimed that there is nothing that happens for a reason, or that everything that does happen occurs for no reason at all. Please read my posts before responding.

There is no scientific theory of development from chaos - or nothing…

Cosmologists, amongst others, are working on it; in the meantime, do you really think it’s okay to simply assert, with no evidentiary support, a happy little narrative that validates human arrogance by claiming we are the central objects of some divine plan?

 

[Sair]

But who decides on who is “deserving” or not? Maybe it isn’t about “deserving.” Did I “deserve” to be diagnosed as mentally ill? I hate having it, but I have to learn to live with it. And I think it is helping me to know how weak I truly am without God in my life. Without Him, life would truly be not worth living.

I’m honestly not saying this to be cynical, but I really do feel for you and the way you’ve been treated. It’s one thing to know that you have particular issues or conditions or difficulties in life - it’s quite another to be coerced into thinking that because of these issues, you, as a person, are “inherently weak” (which is rubbish, more often than not - we all have strengths and coping mechanisms, whether we recognise them or not).

It’s classic cult practice, to induce people into a psychological breakdown and make them feel helpless so that they feel like the only things which can help them are the beliefs and practices and manipulations of the cult. Look at any Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous group and you’ll see exactly this pattern, the “break them down and then rebuild them in our image” approach. It’s not designed to make you healthier, only to make you a psychological slave to the beliefs of the cult.

Being able to separate the things in our lives that happen for intentional reasons (because conscious beings intend them to happen and work to bring them about) from the things that happen for unintentional reasons (progressive, often accidental occurrences leading to a given event) from the things that happen randomly, for no discernible reason whatsoever (in which category we can list things like the onset of radioactive decay, or genetic mutation) is an important part of the development of our understanding of the universe of which we are part, and also an important skill to shore up one’s mental health.

 

[tonyrey]

                             **Re: Does everything happen for a reason?**

There is no evidence that there could be development in a world devoid of suffering, hardship and pain.

One has to be omniscient to know the extent of omnipotence…

You’re trying to claim there’s a logical contradiction involved in expecting development without suffering, but what you’re really referencing is the practical contradiction of development occurring in a physical, natural, disinterested universe without some inherent conflict through which said development could be influenced.

“influenced” is insufficient to ensure the absence of suffering, hardship and pain.

You don’t get natural development without friction. Supernatural development is another matter entirely.

For human beings they are interdependent. We aren’t ghosts in machines!

If you are going to claim that everything

happens for no reason, it helps if you can produce reasons. Thus far you have never done so. First of all, a simple reversal of the burden of proof doesn’t work here - there need be no reason for things to happen at all in order for them to just happen. Randomness is a demonstrable feature of the universe we inhabit.

“a feature” does not imply “all features”.

Secondly, I have never claimed that there is nothing that happens for a reason, or that everything that does happen occurs for no reason at all. Please read my posts before responding.

Please give examples of things that happen for a reason rather than a physical cause…

There is no scientific theory of development from chaos - or nothing…

Cosmologists, amongst others, are working on it…

To extract everything and everyone from nothing is a metascientific rather than scientific project- unless one is a materialist.

… in the meantime, do you really think it’s okay to simply assert, with no evidentiary support, a happy little narrative that validates human arrogance by claiming we are the central objects of some divine plan?

There is far more evidence of purpose and design than the puerile, hubristic notion that reality consists solely of posits in human minds. It is the height of arrogance to believe scientists will eventually explain everything - including themselves and** their** theories.

In fact a theory produced by physical events is far more likely to be false than true - considering the countless ways of being mistaken. Chance is an unreliable source of information - particularly about everything…

 

[Sair]

I voted yes, but I should clarify. My belief is that every natural, “chance” event that occurs happens because God wants it to. He has some reason for making it happen. That being said, our free will allows us to commit actions that do not jive with God’s plan. So, I think that human actions are the only events that sometimes do not have a bigger purpose or plan behind them.

Blimey…that’s almost exactly the reverse of how I perceive the world…

 

[InJesusItrust]

Yes. The Holy Spirits speaks both in our conscience and through the signs around us. If we stepped outside of the modern mindset, we might see an interesting pattern of events and realize the God sends trials to purify us.

This does not mean that everything goes the way God desires it to. But it means that God is the Author of life and speaks to us in many ways which would make no sense unless He is in control. We just have to will to do His will.

I will give an example. One time when I was an atheist my Hindu father wanted to take us to church after a dream or vision. Of course I chalked it up to random dreams or drunkeness. But I am positive now that God was calling me.

Or when someone points out a flaw of yours in anger. You might learn something about how to repent if what the person says is true. Even now as I speak a disbeliever may wonder at my words. He can either accept that God spoke through me even as I willed it or believe that grace did not inspire me.

 

[Sair]

Can I first say, before launching into my more extensive response, how surprised I am at the extent of your unwitting support for my perspective?

One has to be omniscient to know the extent of omnipotence…
“influenced” is insufficient to ensure the absence of suffering, hardship and pain.

Why? ‘Omnipotent’ and ‘omniscient’ are words invented by humans to describe abilities beyond our comprehension, but which essentially mean ability and knowledge well beyond our own, such that we can’t even assume their extent. You can’t, after the fact, impose limits upon the implications of these terms just because it’s convenient to your notions of what your God is able to do.

I also did not even suggest that ‘influence’ was sufficient to avoid suffering, hardship and pain. Omnipotent supernatural power would be required for such a feat, and who could possibly have such power? Oh, wait - maybe the monotheistic God…

For human beings they are interdependent. We aren’t ghosts in machines!

I agree - there need be no ‘ghosts’ involved.

“a feature” does not imply “all features”.

Did I ever say it did? I think you may have missed the post in which I explained what could possibly be meant by the platitudinal phrase, “Everything happens for a reason.”

Please give examples of things that happen for a reason rather than a physical cause…

I can’t. That’s your job, as someone who believes in nonphysical causes and influences. I merely recognise the varieties of physical causation - intention, accident, randomness, etc…

To extract everything and everyone from nothing is a metascientific rather than scientific project- unless one is a materialist.

And you already know I am a metaphysical naturalist. Why should the metascience need to step in before the science is exhausted? Or do you think we’ve already discovered everything about the universe that we possibly can discover through science?

There is far more evidence of purpose and design than the puerile, hubristic notion that reality consists solely of posits in human minds. It is the height of arrogance to believe scientists will eventually explain everything - including themselves and** their** theories.

Again, whence this purpose and design except via the biological mechanism of intelligent organisms? I’m not sure how, but you seem to have also missed the notion that these ‘posits in human minds’ are a result of perception of and interaction with the external world, which imposes both its limits and its possibilities upon us, all the time, even without any conscious intention of doing so. I would have thought that your professed perspective, in which everything exists primarily in the mind, would be more guilty than the likes of I, of supposing that reality exists only in the mind. I can assure you, I am no solipsist.

And as I’ve endeavoured to explain before, scientific endeavour will persist as long as it can, on the assumption that any perceivable phenomena are explicable in scientific terms. Considering the success of scientific investigation thus far, I woud say this is merely a confident expectation, not a hubristic one.

The hubris comes in the form of those who pick up on particular scientific pronouncements without fully understanding them, and try to impose them upon others. It also comes in the form of those who think that because scientific endeavour has not yet explained the entirety of the universe in all its intricate complexity, that it’s perfectly acceptable to ignore and denigrate scientific research in favour of stories that reference supernatural beings whose existence, if such it is, cannot be accessible to science, yet is somehow accessible to those who merely invest ‘faith’ in said beings.

In fact a theory produced by physical events is far more likely to be false than true - considering the countless ways of being mistaken. Chance is an unreliable source of information - particularly about everything…

Two things - firstly, why are physical events more unreliable than those supposedly supernatural events that people claim happen, but for which they can produce no evidence other than “just a feeling” or “because I believe it’s true”? I think you’ll find that these numerous ways of being mistaken have actually been described by scientists, rather than by adherents of supernatural faith - the latter demands far, far more credulity than the former, after all.

Secondly, you’re peddling the creationist chestnut that anything which does not happen through conscious intent happens by ‘chance’. This isn’t true. Cause and effect relationships occur all the time, in which there are discernible reasons for ensuing phenomena. These are not ‘chance’, even though they may be completely independent of conscious intent. A river in flood is not obeying any conscious commands (unless you believe in a cruel and capricious deity, of course). ‘Chance’ is distinct from ‘unintentional’. Please try to employ precise language - I thought this was an important consideration in philosophy, after all.

 

[tonyrey]

Can I first say, before launching into my more extensive response, how surprised I am at the extent of your unwitting support for my perspective?

That could well be because my perspective is not so simplistic: the truth is rarely black and white, especially with regard to purpose…

Why? ‘Omnipotent’ and ‘omniscient’ are words invented by humans to describe abilities beyond our comprehension, but which essentially mean ability and knowledge well beyond our own, such that we can’t even assume their extent. You can’t, after the fact, impose limits upon the implications of these terms just because it’s convenient to your notions of what your God is able to do.

Limits are not imposed arbitrarily but by the need for consistency. It doesn’t make sense to create an orderly system and then wreck it by constant intervention.

I also did not even suggest that ‘influence’ was sufficient to avoid suffering, hardship and pain. Omnipotent supernatural power would be required for such a feat, and who could possibly have such power?

A demand that is both illogical and unrealistic: it doesn’t make sense to create an orderly system and then wreck it by constant intervention.

I agree - there need be no ‘ghosts’ involved.

Only minds functioning robotically?

I think you may have missed the post in which I explained what could possibly be meant by the platitudinal phrase, “Everything happens for a reason.”

You supported your statement:

there need be no reason for things to happen at all in order for them to just happen

with

Randomness is a demonstrable feature of the universe we inhabit.

implying that randomness is evidence of purposelessness.

Please give examples of things that happen for a reason rather than a physical cause…

I can’t. That’s your job, as someone who believes in nonphysical causes and influences. I merely recognise the varieties of physical causation - intention, accident, randomness, etc…

Thereby confirming that you believe nothing happens for a reason.

Why should the metascience need to step in before the science is exhausted?

Metascience doesn’t need to step in because it is the** foundation** of science.

Again, whence this purpose and design except via the biological mechanism of intelligent organisms?

Purpose and design are evident in the organization and intelligibility of the universe which enable you to deny it is designed and purposeful.

I’m not sure how, but you seem to have also missed the notion that these ‘posits in human minds’ are a result of perception of and interaction with the external world, which imposes both its limits and its possibilities upon us, all the time, even without any conscious intention of doing so.

Posits are not the result of perception but inference.

I would have thought that your professed perspective, in which everything exists primarily in the mind, would be more guilty than the likes of I, of supposing that reality exists only in the mind.

“primarily” does not mean “solely”.

And as I’ve endeavoured to explain before, scientific endeavour will persist as long as it can, on the assumption that any perceivable phenomena are explicable in scientific terms.

Are all phenomena perceivable and scientifically explicable in principle?

Considering the success of scientific investigation thus far, I woud say this is merely a confident expectation, not a hubristic one.

The success of science is restricted to amoral and impersonal investigation.

The hubris comes in the form of those who pick up on particular scientific pronouncements without fully understanding them, and try to impose them upon others.

Like naturalists!

It also comes in the form of those who think that because scientific endeavour has not yet explained the entirety of the universe in all its intricate complexity…

“not yet” is an unsound basis for restricting reality to the nebulous “natural”…

Two things - firstly, why are physical events more unreliable than those supposedly supernatural events that people claim happen, but for which they can produce no evidence other than “just a feeling” or “because I believe it’s true”?

Do you regard intangible events as less reliable and less significant than natural events? If so your claim is based solely on your predilection for physical rather than rational evidence.

I think you’ll find that these numerous ways of being mistaken have actually been described by scientists, rather than by adherents of supernatural faith - the latter demands far, far more credulity than the former, after all.

To stake everything on the primacy of purposeless particles requires a colossal act of faith in the power of the senses at the expense of logic and abstract reasoning.

… Cause and effect relationships occur all the time, in which there are discernible reasons for ensuing phenomena.

“reasons” is simply a naturalist’s cloak for further physical causes. They don’t exist as independent facts grasped by the intellect. There is no room for truth in the world of sense data.

…Chance’ is distinct from ‘unintentional’. Please try to employ precise language.

Precision exists in the fact that the meanings of “by chance” are “for no reason” and “without purpose or design” = your view of existence.

 

[The_Reginator]

To stake everything on the primacy of purposeless particles requires a colossal act of faith in the power of the senses at the expense of logic and abstract reasoning.

When I see naturalists/materialists/etc. missing their obvious faith in things so hard to believe in it simply staggers me.

 

[tonyrey]

When I see naturalists/materialists/etc. missing their obvious faith in things so hard to believe in it simply staggers me.

Even primitive people intuitively distinguish mind and matter. Yet the resounding success of science has convinced gullible individuals in modern society that human intelligence is unsurpassed in its power to recognise that there is no Supreme Intelligence. God is replaced by gods on earth:

“Let my kingdom come, let my will be done…”

The Greeks anticipated Christians by singling out the deadliest sin: hubris - and its consequences: nemesis…

 

[tonyrey]

When I see naturalists/materialists/etc. missing their obvious faith in things so hard to believe in it simply staggers me.

The dominant factor is implicit faith in their own infallibility! Rejection of God inevitably results in unbridled power over oneself but it also leads to solitary confinement within one’s mind: a foretaste of hell (which hopefully is not fulfilled!)

Not everything happens for a reason but everything has rational consequences: positive or negative…

In spite of the elements of choice and chance everything - initially and ultimately - does occur for a reason. In other words cosmic justice is not an illusion but a fact. We ignore the laws of physical, moral, social and personal development at our peril. Vice is self-destructive whereas virtue is self-enhancing.

Life on earth is certainly not a vapid valley of ephemeral love-making, money-making and merry-making. In the words of John Keats this world is “a vale of soul-making”…

 

[Sair]

The dominant factor is implicit faith in their own infallibility! Rejection of God inevitably results in unbridled power over oneself but it also leads to solitary confinement within one’s mind: a foretaste of hell (which hopefully is not fulfilled!)

You’ve clearly never experienced the actual intellectual, experiential and philosophical rejection of supernatural gods. Just saying…

 

[Sair]

Even primitive people intuitively distinguish mind and matter. Yet the resounding success of science has convinced gullible individuals in modern society that human intelligence is unsurpassed in its power to recognise that there is no Supreme Intelligence. God is replaced by gods on earth:

“Let my kingdom come, let my will be done…”

The Greeks anticipated Christians by singling out the deadliest sin: hubris - and its consequences: nemesis…

How do you know that ‘primitive’ people distinguished mind and matter, rather than integrating them or recognising them as different manifestations of the same substance?

The success of science has shown that our own human intuitions are not necessarily accurate as descriptors of the real world - we have to learn to think beyond the simplistically obvious.

And as far as hubris is concerned, I would suggest that this could most appropriately be ascribed to those who think they know there’s a particular supernatural being with a specific identity and discernible plans to which only the true believers in such a deity are privy.

 

[InJesusItrust]

When a man carries no torch and tries to walk in a cave he injures himself. Jesus is the torch he refuses to grab, lest he sees the danger around him clearly.

 

[tonyrey]

The dominant factor is implicit faith in their own infallibility! Rejection of God inevitably results in unbridled power over oneself but it also leads to solitary confinement within one’s mind: a foretaste of hell (which hopefully is not fulfilled!)

You are sadly mistaken, clearly unaware that I regarded religion as old-fashioned sentimentality for seven years! I experienced the mental isolation and the illusion of freedom from authority of any description…

 

[marysfiat]

Reminder: Got wants us to reach out in love, not :nunchuk:
I am grateful for Sair! For reaching out and saying sorry for the tradgeties in my life♥ that touched my heart♥"THANK YOU SAIR!!" and I respect “all” opinions.

I’m in love with my catholic faith, there are NO human REASONS for why things happen. As I stated, its “free will” period. NOT GODS WILL.

I just, once again, ENCOURAGE everyone to be sensitive to their “choice of words”

Lets ALL walk together in LOVE:heart::grouphug:

 

[tonyrey]

How do you know that ‘primitive’ people distinguished mind and matter, rather than integrating them or recognising them as different manifestations of the same substance?

Animism clearly distinguishes the material and spiritual aspects of reality like tribal religion which exists to this day. Witchcraft has also exemplified the distinction.

The success of science has shown that our own human intuitions are not necessarily accurate as descriptors of the real world - we have to learn to think beyond the simplistically obvious.

Which certainly applies to the materialist’s view that we are simplistically animals…

And as far as hubris is concerned, I would suggest that this could most appropriately be ascribed to those who think they know there’s a particular supernatural being with a specific identity and discernible plans to which only the true believers in such a deity are privy.

There is no doubt that the resounding success of science has convinced many gullible individuals in our society that human intelligence is unsurpassed in its power to recognise that there is no Supreme Intelligence. Christiansbelieve in a Father who has revealed His identity and plan not to the select few but to everyone who accepts His message of love, compassion and forgiveness. St Peter pointed out that God is no respecter of persons.

PS I take it that you agree with all the other points in my last response!

 

[JamesCaruso]

Everything does happen for a reason.

At any given moment in my life, Almighty God, because He is All Loving, wants me to be in the best of all places for the purpose of growing in sanctity and moving forward toward my salvation. I’d say this is a true proposition.

Is He able to put me in the best of all places? Let’s consider it. Does the Omniscient God know the precise results in every detail that will occur from the creation He has set into motion and which He continues to actively intervene and influence? I say, Yes.

Because He has an infinite number of scenarios to choose from, and He knows which one is best for me, knowing in advance what my free will choices will be, All Loving God always acts in such a way as to give the best result for me-- and for you-- remember He has an infinite number of possibilities to choose from.

If so, then can I not say that I live in the best of all possible worlds to lead me to eternal life. my free will, and everyone’s free will, and our human condition as sons and daughters of Adam considered? Again, I have to say, Yes.

And since God is always dealing from an infinite number of possibilities, even those things that do not affect our salvation or growth in sanctity must be ordered along the lines of some principle of good, say, beauty, order, or other combination of good ends, since God always acts for the greatest good because He is All Good.

This is why I believe that everything indeed does happen for a reason, even if we do not always know the reason.

I view the world around us as Matrix-like, referring to the movie, except that the “programmer” is no other than Almighty God, and their is no sinister plot. Each of us lives in a perfectly contrived environment. God has each of us in the right place for our own well being, that is, to further our personal salvation. Everything around us might as well be a script it is so well planned and laid out, except that it is really full of random happenings and other people making free will choices, all of which is foreseen by Almighty God.

This is not a fatalistic view. It is God already knowing our future free will choices. We are free. But don’t think for a minute that we can ever get away with the smallest infraction of the rules. Amen I say to thee, thou shalt not go out from thence till thou repay the last farthing. Matt 5:26

It does not make me fearful. It makes me hopeful, and it makes me confident that no matter what is going on in my life and around me, God has it all under control, and that He is watching out for my best interests. If God be for us, who can be against us?