Humility: Good or Bad?

[zork]

Thanks, zork.  I was making reference to grammatical rules.  So, according to Catholicism, realism leads to "a god", from there faith and revelation must take over.  Do I have it right?  So, the question is; how does realism lead to "a god"?

You're welcome.

[james03]

Realism leads you to "a god".  He could be the jewish monotheistic god, or the Christian God, or He could be some other god.  He would have to be One, though this does not exclude the Trinitarian God,  He would have to be outside of time, pure spirit, omniscient and omnipotent, He would have to be Good, He would have to be sane, and He would have to be Loving.

Realism, accepting the Natural Law and logic, will take you that far.

[james03]

Please explain to me how realism leads to "a" god.

Are you now a committed Realist?

[Probius]

Please explain to me how realism leads to "a" god.

Are you now a committed Realist?

Yes, between realism, idealism, and nominalism, I am definitely a realist.  I hold that the universe and all in it exists regardless of what I think or wish, and it is my job to discover it, not create it.  As Ayn Rand said, "wishing won't make it so."

[Probius]

Please explain to me how realism leads to "a" god.

Are you now a committed Realist?

Yes, between realism, idealism, and nominalism, I am definitely a realist.  I hold that the universe and all in it exists regardless of what I think or wish, and it is my job to discover it, not create it.  As Ayn Rand said, "wishing won't make it so."

So, with that being said, how does realism lead to "a god"?

[voxxpopulisuxx]

Please explain to me how realism leads to "a" god.

Are you now a committed Realist?

Yes, between realism, idealism, and nominalism, I am definitely a realist.  I hold that the universe and all in it exists regardless of what I think or wish, and it is my job to discover it, not create it.  As Ayn Rand said, "wishing won't make it so."

So, with that being said, how does realism lead to "a god"?

So if you found a carved wood rocking chair on mars would you safely assume it was left there by a "creator?"

[Probius]

Please explain to me how realism leads to "a" god.

Are you now a committed Realist?

Yes, between realism, idealism, and nominalism, I am definitely a realist.  I hold that the universe and all in it exists regardless of what I think or wish, and it is my job to discover it, not create it.  As Ayn Rand said, "wishing won't make it so."

So, with that being said, how does realism lead to "a god"?

So if you found a carved wood rocking chair on mars would you safely assume it was left there by a "creator?"

If I saw a carved wooden rocking chair on mars, it would definitely stand out.  The reason would be that there are no humans on Mars, so it would be strange.  I would be surrounded by the metaphysically given, and would have come across a man made object.  It would stand out as the only man made object, other than my space suit, on the planet.  So, yes I would assume that this rocking chair had been left there by a "creator", that is a man.

[voxxpopulisuxx]

Fine...so how much more complex is even the most primatve living organism than a wooden rocking chair? And what natural being is capable of fashioning such a complex object. Further...these organisms are found as far as we can tell on this planet only within billions of miles of observable space. Rwalism leads to God.

[Probius]

Even the smallest and most primitive organism is much more complex than a wooden rocking chair.  But, this is actually why I doubt that any living organism was created.  I can see a wooden rocking chair being created by an intelligence, but not something as complex as a living organism.  The more complex something is, the less likely it is that its order was created by an intelligence.  Order doesn't naturally come from the top down, it comes from the bottom up.  The only time order does come from the top, is when it comes from an intelligence, that is from man.  But, this way is imposed and is strictly limited.  A top down method of creating order is much less efficient than a bottom up method of creating order.  The top down method can only do so much, which is a fraction of the bottom up method.  This bottom up method of creating order is called spontaneous order.  Order creates itself.  This is from my view of metaphysics.

[Gardener]

Even the smallest and most primitive organism is much more complex than a wooden rocking chair.  But, this is actually why I doubt that any living organism was created.  I can see a wooden rocking chair being created by an intelligence, but not something as complex as a living organism.  The more complex something is, the less likely it is that its order was created by an intelligence.  Order doesn't naturally come from the top down, it comes from the bottom up.  The only time order does come from the top, is when it comes from an intelligence, that is from man.  But, this way is imposed and is strictly limited.  A top down method of creating order is much less efficient than a bottom up method of creating order.  The top down method can only do so much, which is a fraction of the bottom up method.  This bottom up method of creating order is called spontaneous order.  Order creates itself.  This is from my view of metaphysics.

But by this method you start with the presupposition of no Intelligent Being higher than man rather than arriving at that conclusion.

God is not some limited being, but rather IS Being; not measured of good but IS Good; etc.

Further, what if God started working from the bottom > middle > top?

[Probius]

Order which is created by an intelligence is naturally more limited than order which comes about spontaneously.  Man, as an intelligent animal, creates order from the top down, but only on a very small scale.  Much more complex order comes about from the bottom up, and not from a single mind.  When there are many minds working together, they form more complex order from the bottom up.  But, the most complex order comes from no minds at all, but from the natural laws of the Universe.  Take a look at a galaxy, it is very complex, and yet is created by natural laws.  Any order which comes from an intelligent mind, is limited.  How could such complexity come from an intelligent mind?

How can God be being itself?  Can you really get your mind around such a concept?  Things exist, how do you say God is existence itself?  How is God not limited?  I had assumed that the universe was infinite in size, but I was given a very good argument against that.  A thing which is not limited is something which has no defining characteristics, which is something which has no identity, which is something which has no existence.  This is because to be is to be something, existence is identity.  To have an identity is to have characteristics and measurements, which means to be limited.

What I mean by bottom up order is that it does not come from a single intelligent mind.

The crux of the problem here seems to be a tendency to confuse the metaphysically given from the man made.  This is a common mistake.  A wooden rocking chair is man made, a tree is the metaphysically given.  An easy way of looking at it is that anything which is not man made is metaphysically given.  I know that the rocking chair is man made (a creator) because I know how rocking chairs are made.  If I come upon a new rocking chair, I can compare it to other rocking chairs I have seen in the past and conclude it is man made.  The Universe is different, as we know of only one.  I cannot compare it to a universe which was not created.  What is not man made is metaphysically given, it just is.  The problem I have with a created Universe is metaphysical, not epistemological.  Thoughts?

[voxxpopulisuxx]

The problem I have is your simply thrusting out your opinion as fact (not in evidence) and using this as the basis for your proof.."I say so...so it is so". Which is consistant since you place yourself as god. Its not just complexity in nature...its complexity that accomplishes a purpose effectively and efficently. DNA is information....information that does predictable and awsome things...information cannot spontainiously develope to such a complex effective degree. The rocking chair as created object is apparent because it has purpose and does something...it fits the tired human ass...it rocks wich soothes the human mind...it doesnt collapse when used ( unless misused). You just make shit up and wizzz straight pass the salient points that defeat your opinion. You are a jelous god and will have no gods before you. The rocking chair proves a creator ...so does the amoeba.

[Probius]

The problem I have is your simply thrusting out your opinion as fact (not in evidence) and using this as the basis for your proof.."I say so...so it is so". Which is consistant since you place yourself as god. Its not just complexity in nature...its complexity that accomplishes a purpose effectively and efficently. DNA is information....information that does predictable and awsome things...information cannot spontainiously develope to such a complex effective degree. The rocking chair as created object is apparent because it has purpose and does something...it fits the tired human ass...it rocks wich soothes the human mind...it doesnt collapse when used ( unless misused). You just make shit up and wizzz straight pass the salient points that defeat your opinion. You are a jelous god and will have no gods before you. The rocking chair proves a creator ...so does the amoeba.

I tried explaining that complex order doesn't come about by an intelligent mind.  This is because minds are naturally limited.  If a thing exists, it has identity.  To be is to be something, to be something is to have identity.  In other words, existence is identity.  If a thing is unbounded or unlimited, it has no identity.  This is because an unlimited thing has no defining measurements, a thing which is nothing in particular, is nothing.  A mind cannot create any kind of complex order, but only a very limited and imposed order.  Truth is stranger than fiction, the wonder of the Universe is much greater than anything man can dream up.  Man has a mind, which is necessarily limited, and cannot create the things which naturally exist in the Universe.  How could a single mind possibly create the entire Universe and all of the wonderful complexity in it?

[james03]

Order which is created by an intelligence is naturally more limited than order which comes about spontaneously.

So you admit there is order which comes about spontaneously.  However the Second LAW of Thermodynamics states that this is impossible.

[james03]

Yes, between realism, idealism, and nominalism, I am definitely a realist.  I hold that the universe and all in it exists regardless of what I think or wish, and it is my job to discover it, not create it.

And you also agree that there are immaterial things that exist?  An example, Justice.  Would you agree that a proper economic  system has to be based on Justice?  That in order for there to be Justice, you must be paid and be able to keep what you are owed, and that only a trade where we exchange value for value is just?  Therefore you believe that "justice" exists?

From there, would you admit "an ability to be owed" as something that exists?