How do Christians Expect to Convert Atheists?

[seeds]

Seeds: So you think there is an unfathomable order to things?

Absolutely yes!

Is that why we have a second law of thermodynamics that states the universe is becoming increasingly disordered?

I suggest to you that the order that made possible the manifestation of your own personal life and consciousness is so deep and profound that it purposely lulls humans into believing that the universe is a naturally occurring phenomenon that simply came into existence on its own accord.

Furthermore, the “lulling” of humans into believing that the universe may be all there is to life and reality is, in fact, a crucial aspect of the order itself.

The point is, don’t allow the observation of the mechanics involved in creating and maintaining the workings of the universe, fool you into thinking that it is all an accident.
_______

[seeds]

I don’t think that the religious (spiritual/metaphysical) deducing of the possibility of there being a creator is based on the mere “existence” of the universe, but more on the unfathomable order of its workings.

It depends on the argument, but the basic cosmological argument, which is promoted by William Lane Craig, as well as some contributors to this forum, really is that simple. This from wikipedia: [......]

Quite frankly, I’ve never felt that the Kalam cosmological argument, in and of itself, is strong enough to counter the push-back it receives from its opponents, and should simply be viewed as “one piece” of a much larger puzzle that attempts to defend intelligent design.

There are other arguments which appeal to the unfathomable order, intelligent design and its variant irreducible complexity, but they are indistinguishable from 'god of the gaps'.

Let’s look at the issue from a couple of yours (and my) favorite perspectives: the Big Bang and quantum theory.

According to certain interpretations of quantum theory, without the presence of consciousness to instigate the collapse of the quantum wave function, then everything that we understand “reality” to be...

(in other words, everything that appears to us as positionally-fixed, three dimensional phenomena suspended in a spatial dimension)

...would exist as spread-out, superpositioned waves (or fields) of energy and information.

Now with that in mind, and based on the presumption that consciousness did not arrive on the scene until billions of years after the initial Bang...

...then the only way to picture the Big Bang and everything that followed it is by realizing that all of the processes that went into creating the suns and planets must have taken place within the context of what physicists call “non-local” reality.

And what that means is that, theoretically, the primordial universe (sans consciousness) simply existed as a nebulous field of Kantian-like “noumena” or Heisenbergian “potentia” wherein nothing bore any resemblance to reality as we understand it.

The point is that prior to the emergence of consciousness, absolutely nothing in terms of the contents of the universe was presenting itself as three-dimensional “phenomena.”

(Continued in next post)
_______

[seeds]

_______

(Continued from prior post)

Now, the ultimate point and question to which I am leading in that lengthy build-up in the prior post is...

...how in the world did fields of random and chaotically dispersed energy and information somehow “know” how to self-adjust its attributes in such a way that would cause the three-dimensional phenomena appearing up in what physicists call “local reality” to be so “wondrously vital and appealing” to the five senses of consciousness?

In other words, how did unguided and unconscious (mindless) algorithmic processes...

(without any way of determining what the universe’s three-dimensional phenomena would actually look like, feel like, sound like, smell like, and taste like to consciousness)

...again, how did the primordial quantum processes “blindly predetermine” that in the presence of some future (heretofore nonexistent) consciousness, that fragrant vines of blooming honeysuckle, or beautiful mountain streams, or a vast cornucopia of delicious foods would suddenly emerge from the “noumenal-like” patterns of information that...

...logically...

...had absolutely no way of “knowing” what they (the patterns) had actually created until consciousness came along (again, billions of years later) to transform the quantum noumena into 3-D phenomena via the collapse of the wave function?

Now of course none of that “proves” anything about whether or not the universe has a guiding intelligence.

It is merely offered up as another puzzle piece to ponder (like the Kalam argument) that points to the idea that the universe seems to be founded upon an unignorable “teleological impetus” that – right from the start - had a highly specific “purpose” in mind.

And that purpose was to meet the needs and preferences of life and consciousness.
_______

[seeds]

I don’t think that the religious (spiritual/metaphysical) deducing of the possibility of there being a creator is based on the mere “existence” of the universe, but more on the unfathomable order of its workings.

What is supposedly unfathomable in the order of the Universe's workings?

ALL is fathomable and very simply and easily understood.

Well, for starters, as I mentioned in an alternate thread, I think that the unimaginable stability (for billions of years, no less) of the millisecond-by-millisecond precision with which this gigantic orb we are standing on...



...has maintained a perfect axial/orbital relationship with the perfect source of light and energy is, in fact, quite unfathomable in terms of its unerring and steadfast persistence (never mind the spectacle of it all).

If you are not awed by it, ken, and feel that it is simple and easy to understand (what? in some Newtonian/astrophysics way?), then you are coming across as being somewhat jaded.

It’s either that or you may be a little too confident in your assumptions of how well you “fathom” reality.
_______

[thedoc]

Well, for starters, as I mentioned in an alternate thread, I think that the unimaginable stability (for billions of years, no less) of the millisecond-by-millisecond precision with which this gigantic orb we are standing on...



...has maintained a perfect axial/orbital relationship with the perfect source of light and energy is, in fact, quite unfathomable in terms of its unerring and steadfast persistence (never mind the spectacle of it all).

If you are not awed by it, ken, and feel that it is simple and easy to understand (what? in some Newtonian/astrophysics way?), then you are coming across as being somewhat jaded.

It’s either that or you may be a little too confident in your assumptions of how well you “fathom” reality.
_______

I hope you are not suggesting that this particular system was picked to have those special characteristics to make life possible. I contend that with the billions of systems in existence, one or more were bound to have the correct conditions to allow life to develop, it just happened to be this one. And because we evolved on this system, this system is special to us.

[Arising_uk]

...
According to certain interpretations of quantum theory, without the presence of consciousness to instigate the collapse of the quantum wave function, then everything that we understand “reality” to be... ...

Except that this qwf can be collapse mechanically, i.e. mechanical detectors can do it?

[seeds]

...
According to certain interpretations of quantum theory, without the presence of consciousness to instigate the collapse of the quantum wave function, then everything that we understand “reality” to be... ...

Except that this qwf can be collapse mechanically, i.e. mechanical detectors can do it?

The question then becomes, what collapses the wave function of a mechanical detector that, according to theory, would simply spread-out and merge with the wave function of that which it is attempting to measure?

It is therefore speculatively surmised that because mind and consciousness do not seem to be composed of the same waving substance that underpins physical matter, that it must then be the presence of consciousness that initiates the collapse.

However, as I suggested to uwot in an alternate thread, instead of viewing the process as a “collapse” of the waves, it is better to think of it as a merging of consciousness with the patterns of information that then reveals the 3-D phenomena that the patterns encode - loosely similar to how 3-D phenomena is revealed when a laser merges with the photographic plate of a laser hologram.

Or even better yet, as I stated in that same thread...

...as a Panentheistic/Berkeleyanish idealist who believes that the entire universe is a product of mental processes, I suggest that whatever the mechanism is that allows the eye of our mind (i.e., consciousness) to transform waves of information into the three-dimensional phenomena of our vivid dreams when we look inward...

...likewise, is the same mechanism that transforms waves of information into three-dimensional phenomena when we look outward.

_______

[ken]

I don’t think that the religious (spiritual/metaphysical) deducing of the possibility of there being a creator is based on the mere “existence” of the universe, but more on the unfathomable order of its workings.

What is supposedly unfathomable in the order of the Universe's workings?

ALL is fathomable and very simply and easily understood.

Well, for starters, as I mentioned in an alternate thread, I think that the unimaginable stability (for billions of years, no less) of the millisecond-by-millisecond precision with which this gigantic orb we are standing on...



...has maintained a perfect axial/orbital relationship with the perfect source of light and energy is, in fact, quite unfathomable in terms of its unerring and steadfast persistence (never mind the spectacle of it all).

If you are not awed by it, ken, and feel that it is simple and easy to understand (what? in some Newtonian/astrophysics way?), then you are coming across as being somewhat jaded.

I am not suggesting for one second that Life, Itself, is not awe-inspiring, and, I am not saying that Life is simple and easy to understand in some newtonian/astrophysics way. I am just saying that Life, Itself, is a very simple and easy thing to understand. There is nothing hard nor complicated to understand in and about Life. It is only you, human beings, who complicate things. Even just living, itself, is a very simple and easy thing to do, but unfortunately most human beings appear to go out of their way to make living hard and complicated. It is a shame that human beings make Life and living so hard and complicated for themselves, when things are and can be so simple and easy.

You are here talking about earth being on some "perfect" relationship with some "perfect" source of light. You are trying to suggest that this is all "perfect" for 'you' to exist in. Again do not get Me wrong. It is awe-inspiring. But 'you' only exist because of the pre-existing conditions. Not because they were necessarily perfect conditions but just because they were pre-existing. Can you see the difference? If any one of those pre-existing conditions were the slightest bit different, then 'you' also would be the slightest bit different now.

Now, if those pre-existing conditions were any different, then what ever those conditions were, and 'you' did not exist, then would things still be 'perfect'? Or, are they only "perfect" because 'you' exist? Are you looking at this like everything is perfect because 'you' are here, as though 'you' are it, and 'you' are the one? Or are you looking at this objectively? Would the Universe and ALL of It's conditions still be perfect if there was no 'you', that is no conscious being, being awed?

Life, conditions, existence, whatever you want to call It, just IS. At any time and at any place It just IS. There is no actual real "perfection" about It. Human beings place the label of "perfection" on It. If, for example, Life was much different so that 'you' were not born when you did and you did not come into consciousness now, but let us say 'you' were born in a wholly completely unfathomable different body and became conscious in say an unfathomable distance from earth in an unfathomable different time period from today, with there being absolutely no resemblance to this here and now, where there was not the perceived perfection of the orb you were on maintained a perfect axial/orbital relationship with the perfect source of light and energy where everything jumped into and out of place, then would that still be perfect in its own right? To 'you' would that still be perfect?

If not, why not?

If so, then just because the earth revolves around the sun in a relatively very minuscule period of a few billion years, in an immensely tiny small part of the Universe, then what is so perfect about this relatively nothingness part of the Universe?

The relative size of the orb, earth and the sun and the length of time they exist for compared to an infinite and eternal Universe is pretty close to nothing, so why just imagine and/or fathom them only as being perfect?

Either ALL of the Universe IS perfect, in of Itself, with or without a 'you', human beings, or It is not.

If human beings really want to discover, see and understand the truth and reality of It ALL, then they really do need to look at the 'big picture' instead of just looking at and seeing themselves in It,

It’s either that or you may be a little too confident in your assumptions of how well you “fathom” reality.
_______

Or it maybe some thing else. Until I express how well I fathom 'reality', you will never know what 'it' IS. For example you probably could not even begin to guess how I perceive and fathom 'reality'. Would you like to try? Hint; it is nothing like most human beings think it is.

[ken]

_______

(Continued from prior post)

Now, the ultimate point and question to which I am leading in that lengthy build-up in the prior post is...

...how in the world did fields of random and chaotically dispersed energy and information somehow “know” how to self-adjust its attributes in such a way that would cause the three-dimensional phenomena appearing up in what physicists call “local reality” to be so “wondrously vital and appealing” to the five senses of consciousness?

In other words, how did unguided and unconscious (mindless) algorithmic processes...

(without any way of determining what the universe’s three-dimensional phenomena would actually look like, feel like, sound like, smell like, and taste like to consciousness)

...again, how did the primordial quantum processes “blindly predetermine” that in the presence of some future (heretofore nonexistent) consciousness, that fragrant vines of blooming honeysuckle, or beautiful mountain streams, or a vast cornucopia of delicious foods would suddenly emerge from the “noumenal-like” patterns of information that...

...logically...

...had absolutely no way of “knowing” what they (the patterns) had actually created until consciousness came along (again, billions of years later) to transform the quantum noumena into 3-D phenomena via the collapse of the wave function?

Now of course none of that “proves” anything about whether or not the universe has a guiding intelligence.

It is merely offered up as another puzzle piece to ponder

But there really is nothing to ponder over here as that piece fits perfectly with all the other pieces in forming the 'Big Picture'.

(like the Kalam argument) that points to the idea that the universe seems to be founded upon an unignorable “teleological impetus” that – right from the start - had a highly specific “purpose” in mind.

And that purpose was to meet the needs and preferences of life and consciousness.
_______

[ken]

...
According to certain interpretations of quantum theory, without the presence of consciousness to instigate the collapse of the quantum wave function, then everything that we understand “reality” to be... ...

Except that this qwf can be collapse mechanically, i.e. mechanical detectors can do it?

The question then becomes, what collapses the wave function of a mechanical detector that, according to theory, would simply spread-out and merge with the wave function of that which it is attempting to measure?

It is therefore speculatively surmised that because mind and consciousness do not seem to be composed of the same waving substance that underpins physical matter, that it must then be the presence of consciousness that initiates the collapse.

However, as I suggested to uwot in an alternate thread, instead of viewing the process as a “collapse” of the waves, it is better to think of it as a merging of consciousness with the patterns of information that then reveals the 3-D phenomena that the patterns encode - loosely similar to how 3-D phenomena is revealed when a laser merges with the photographic plate of a laser hologram.

Or even better yet, as I stated in that same thread...

...as a Panentheistic/Berkeleyanish idealist who believes that the entire universe is a product of mental processes, I suggest that whatever the mechanism is that allows the eye of our mind (i.e., consciousness) to transform waves of information into the three-dimensional phenomena of our vivid dreams when we look inward...

...likewise, is the same mechanism that transforms waves of information into three-dimensional phenomena when we look outward.

_______

That is just how the Mind/I and the brain/you works. You, the brain, think/believe that there is time and space/3 dimensions, whereas I, the Mind, knows there is no such thing as time and space. Depending on how keen 'you' are to look at this I am quite happy to delve into it.

[Arising_uk]

...
The question then becomes, what collapses the wave function of a mechanical detector that, according to theory, would simply spread-out and merge with the wave function of that which it is attempting to measure? ...

Well if it does then you seem to have an infinite extension which will answer no substantial questions, basically a re-hash of the 'What's thinking 'God' then?'.

...as a Panentheistic/Berkeleyanish idealist who believes that the entire universe is a product of mental processes, I suggest that whatever the mechanism is that allows the eye of our mind (i.e., consciousness) to transform waves of information into the three-dimensional phenomena of our vivid dreams when we look inward...

...likewise, is the same mechanism that transforms waves of information into three-dimensional phenomena when we look outward.
_______

And again, what's thinking the thing that's thinking?

To me the mechanism is the Body and nothing more than an external world for it to sense in is needed.

[surreptitious57]

It is merely offered up as another puzzle piece to ponder ( like the Kalam argument ) that points to the idea that the universe
seems to be founded up on an unignorable teleological impetus that right from the start had a highly specific purpose in mind

And that purpose was to meet the needs and preferences of life and consciousness

This is not true because the conditions which allowed life to develop were random events with a probability of less than one. Also the
Kalam presumes the Universe had a beginning. But the Big Bang was merely the beginning of local cosmic expansion and nothing more

[surreptitious57]

Well for starters as I mentioned in an alternate thread I think that the unimaginable stability ( for billions of years no less ) of the millisecond by millisecond precision with which this gigantic orb we are standing on has maintained a perfect axial /orbital relationship with the perfect source
of light and energy is in fact quite unfathomable in terms of its unerring and steadfast persistence

The Earths orbit around the Sun is not perfect as the Sun itself also rotates like all bodies within the
observable Universe do. And it is not unfathomable either since it is explained by General Relativity

[thedoc]

...how in the world did fields of random and chaotically dispersed energy and information somehow “know” how to self-adjust its attributes in such a way that would cause the three-dimensional phenomena appearing up in what physicists call “local reality” to be so “wondrously vital and appealing” to the five senses of consciousness?

In other words, how did unguided and unconscious (mindless) algorithmic processes...

(without any way of determining what the universe’s three-dimensional phenomena would actually look like, feel like, sound like, smell like, and taste like to consciousness)

...again, how did the primordial quantum processes “blindly predetermine” that in the presence of some future (heretofore nonexistent) consciousness, that fragrant vines of blooming honeysuckle, or beautiful mountain streams, or a vast cornucopia of delicious foods would suddenly emerge from the “noumenal-like” patterns of information that......logically......had absolutely no way of “knowing” what they (the patterns) had actually created until consciousness came along (again, billions of years later) to transform the quantum noumena into 3-D phenomena via the collapse of the wave function?

Now of course none of that “proves” anything about whether or not the universe has a guiding intelligence.

It is merely offered up as another puzzle piece to ponder (like the Kalam argument) that points to the idea that the universe seems to be founded upon an unignorable “teleological impetus” that – right from the start - had a highly specific “purpose” in mind.

And that purpose was to meet the needs and preferences of life and consciousness.

First of all, since no-one can determine what happened before the Big Bang, it is reasonable to assume that there were universe's that existed before this one and there is no reason to think that if many previous universes existed, those universes might have each had slightly different conditions, and this one just happened to be right for life to develop. Also there is no reason to assume that life of some sort did not develop in some of those, (if not all) previous universes. Science knows of only one form of life and is somewhat prejudiced toward that form of life, hence the phrase, "life as we know it".

The senses evolved to respond to the conditions that were present, there was no preconceived conditions that were created just so they could be appreciated by the senses that we have, the senses followed the conditions that were most useful for survival. Bees see into the ultraviolet portion of the spectrum, dogs have a much better sense of smell, sharks have sensors that detect electromagnetic signals from fish that are in distress, bats "hear" a picture of their surroundings. Each creature has senses evolved to benefit their survival in the existing world.

[surreptitious57]

Life could have evolved in other universes [ assuming they exist ] but here on Earth it only began about four billion years ago which means this universe had none for the first nine billion years of its existence [ assuming it did not / does not exist any where else ] so it is very rare indeed