S
STT
Guest
There is really no need for an observer. Even if there is a need then it isn’t necessary God, creator.Notice that a ‘block universe’ is really just a description of a frame of reference. From ‘inside’ the block, the frame of reference is movement along a time axis. From ‘outside’ the block, all things in each slice of time, as well as all slices of time, exist eternally.
This presents two problems for your argument:
First, your description only holds if there exists an outside observer (who observes the ‘block’ in its entirety). We would call that observer God[sup]1[/sup]. Therefore, there must be some relationship between the two. (After all, either one is the cause of the other, or neither causes the other.)
If you insist in existence of an outsider then both of them, the universe and outsider, could be necessary.You cannot assert that God is contingent and the universe He creates is necessary, nor can you assert that both God and the universe are contingent. After all, both of these contradict the notion of a creator God.
Therefore, you must conclude that God is necessary and the universe contingent.
QED.
A conscious being cannot affect block universe. She however could experience events because of being in a special framework.Second, your argument doesn’t address the effects of the presence of consciousness in beings within the block universe. If I – as a conscious entity within the block universe – perceive myself as having a unity of existence (and not, as the block universe theory proposes, am merely traveling along a time axis), then my self-perception only includes those moments I have experienced. Therefore, as I ‘travel’ through time, my consciousness changes. After all, in time t[sub]i[/sub], I have no knowledge of the experience of time t[sub]i+1[/sub]; but, at time t[sub]i+1[/sub], I now gain knowledge of that moment.
In other words, at time t[sub]i+1[/sub], something has changed in the universe – my knowledge and consciousness. Therefore, a part of the block universe does experience change, and therefore, by your admission, it cannot be ‘not contingent’. QED.
We can put God aside for sake of discussion.However you slice it, your argument seems to fail.
[sup]1[/sup] Incidentally, the force of this argument proceeds from your acceptance of the notion that God creates the universe.