ChatterBank1 min ago
Quest For God
7 Answers
Imagine a circle.
Everything we know is within the circle.
Everything we don't know is outside of the circle.
The circumference represents the question we are in the process of answering, the problems we are solving.
So, if God in your knowledge and experience does not confront you within the circle of your knowledge, how can you know definitively that the proof of God exists outside of the circle of knowledge?
I have not articulated this very well but you get my drift.
So, do you accept the possibility that God exists, and that science has not ruled Him out?
Everything we know is within the circle.
Everything we don't know is outside of the circle.
The circumference represents the question we are in the process of answering, the problems we are solving.
So, if God in your knowledge and experience does not confront you within the circle of your knowledge, how can you know definitively that the proof of God exists outside of the circle of knowledge?
I have not articulated this very well but you get my drift.
So, do you accept the possibility that God exists, and that science has not ruled Him out?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Whilst I can't as anything's possible, it seems rather a long shot.
Science rarely rules out much. Theories are enhanced with new knowledge, but on rare occasions what was thought so is overthrown by a new, better explanation. But, "A God did it", doesn't sound the revelation you're looking for, or that we're likely to find.
Science rarely rules out much. Theories are enhanced with new knowledge, but on rare occasions what was thought so is overthrown by a new, better explanation. But, "A God did it", doesn't sound the revelation you're looking for, or that we're likely to find.
So, do you accept the possibility that God exists, and that science has not ruled Him out?
Is it possible that God exists? Yes.
Is it likely that He exists? No.
It the existence of the Universe evidence that He exists? No.
Science is founded upon falsifiability. It proposes a hypotheses and states, "demonstrate that it is not so". Science is predicated on the notion that all claims can be disproved by empirical evidence that shows the claim to be invalid. All valid scientific hypotheses are disprovable. Evolution, for instance, could be disproved by excavating a human skeleton that was temporally equivalent to a dinosaur. Gravitational theory could be disproved by someone demonstrating that a feather isn't attracted to the centre of the Earth at a rate slower than a hammer.
The notion of God is not scientific. The notion of the existence of a supreme creator deity is scientifically unfalsifiable. Therefore, it does not fall within the purview of science. Science can no more prove that God exists than it can prove that He doesn't. If someone wants to believe in God, that's up to them. It's the same with the Tooth Fairy. Some people believe that she exists. Others don't. The likelihood of the Tooth Fairy's existence is commensurate with the likelihood of the existence of God – both of them are highly unlikely to exist and both of them are scientifically unfalsifiable as a concept.
Is it possible that God exists? Yes.
Is it likely that He exists? No.
It the existence of the Universe evidence that He exists? No.
Science is founded upon falsifiability. It proposes a hypotheses and states, "demonstrate that it is not so". Science is predicated on the notion that all claims can be disproved by empirical evidence that shows the claim to be invalid. All valid scientific hypotheses are disprovable. Evolution, for instance, could be disproved by excavating a human skeleton that was temporally equivalent to a dinosaur. Gravitational theory could be disproved by someone demonstrating that a feather isn't attracted to the centre of the Earth at a rate slower than a hammer.
The notion of God is not scientific. The notion of the existence of a supreme creator deity is scientifically unfalsifiable. Therefore, it does not fall within the purview of science. Science can no more prove that God exists than it can prove that He doesn't. If someone wants to believe in God, that's up to them. It's the same with the Tooth Fairy. Some people believe that she exists. Others don't. The likelihood of the Tooth Fairy's existence is commensurate with the likelihood of the existence of God – both of them are highly unlikely to exist and both of them are scientifically unfalsifiable as a concept.
Latest thinking I think I understand is that there are no fundamental particles to constitute materialism, but only quantum fields that coalesce into particles, atoms, molecules and elephants.
Sean Carrol has many good videos on YouTube on this. He is at the forefront of quantum research.
He thinks the universal fields are eternal.
So, quantum field / spiritual dimension?
Something to think about?
Sean Carrol has many good videos on YouTube on this. He is at the forefront of quantum research.
He thinks the universal fields are eternal.
So, quantum field / spiritual dimension?
Something to think about?