The origin of chance

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jim_Baur
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jim_Baur

Guest
If chance produced everything, how did the reasonable world come into existence?

If chance formed everything, why do we discover it through our reason?

THANKS TO ALL WHO ARE HELPING ME!!!
 
If chance produced everything, how did the reasonable world come into existence?

If chance formed everything, why do we discover it through our reason?

THANKS TO ALL WHO ARE HELPING ME!!!
Chance is only a reasonable concept after the fact that physical reality exists. It makes no sense to speak of chance if physical reality is not already in existence, and therefore chance is not the ultimate cause of physics. The only options that anyone has is either to speak of physical necessity or to argue that a non-physical intelligence created physics.

But what does it mean to speak of physical necessity in a changing universe?

If we consider that all forms of change is in fact the actualisation of potentially real states, it makes no rational sense to attribute existential necessity to physics. Its a contradiction. I think a well informed person will see that there is only one option and that is the idea of non-physical timeless intelligent cause; since the existence of natural events cannot logically be explained by non-intelligent events alone.
 
If chance produced everything, how did the reasonable world come into existence?

If chance formed everything, why do we discover it through our reason?
When a system is described as having an element of “chance” that usually means that the knowledge of the system is incomplete or that we don’t have sufficient resources (whether mental, computational, time, or some other type) for modelling it. I’m pretty sure butterfly effect type scenarios can appear chaotic.

I’ve seen the word “chance” used in these forums and other places like it’s one of the fundamental forces of the universe right next to electromagnetism, gravity, strong, and weak. I wouldn’t use it that way. I prefer to reserve it’s use for describing a distribution of samples.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top