Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (453)	8/17/2000 6:16:33 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 28931

The chances of any particular planet having life, especially intelligent life is small, very small, it's tiny. And yet I would expect this sort of life to be found on a planet that has all the right conditions. If we were in a bizzare eliptical galaxy orbiting binary suns with nearby supernovas and life still evolved, that would be a miracle Agreed. It is not the fact of life I find awesome. It is the fact of the right conditions. In my opinion, to have all of these conditions present in the universe, and displaying this random intelligence, invites a far greater faith than that involved in believing that the universe is simply (and ultimately) intelligent. As a software engineer, you might find this interesting: leaderu.com The only God belief that seems to smoothly fit in all of this controversy, without giving ammunition to the other side, is a pantheistic belief. I believe that the principle of occam's razor leads one to this tentative belief at this point in our reasoning. Much of my fascination with the God phenomenon comes from simple introspection of my own consciousness. Mankind continues to discover and uncover the incredible laws of physics, mathematics, etc. He doesn't invent them; he doesn't cause their existence; he simply (eventually) recognises them. The universe has the appearance of a structure that is based on mathematical or rational principles. It is difficult (and I submit)contrived, to avoid the idea that consciousness is a force that somehow relates and connects all of life (which may, indeed, be all of everything) into unity. Even the purpose of evolution(what could be more purposeful) begs the question--WHY? What is the motive for life? What is the motive for self interest? Why should there be instinct or desire? Why does the universe cry for life? Why does the LAW sacrifice life forms for the ultimate survival (as far as our evidence thus far) of more advanced intelligence? Who wrote the source code? Why does the arrow go that way instead of that way? I'm not talking about a God that is interested in a particular stalk of wheat, or in myself: I'm talking about a universe that can easily be concieved of, either as god, or as an intelligent universe. It seems natural to me that a chaotic mind would be more apt to conceptualize a chaotic universe; a rational mind more apt to conceptualize a rational one. Even if the universe is merely the Universe, it is for me an object of reverence... members.aol.com

To: TigerPaw who wrote (453)	8/18/2000 6:45:39 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

One question that begs to be addressed when one considers evolution or God is the question of savants. Whether we talk about extreme and unlearned ability that originates in an otherwise normal child, or whether we talk about one or more abilities present in children clearly limited in many or most ways--the puzzlement is the same: What is this all about? Do they draw on a power present in all brains of homo sapiens? Or has genetics changed their neural make-up? What is a 5 year old mathematician tapping into when she does square roots in her head?