Cosmologic philosophy: multiverse/string theory (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Friday, January 02, 2015, 08:18 (3396 days ago) @ dhw


>DHW: I'm not sure what you mean by indirect observation. The vast majority of our knowledge comes from things we have learned as opposed to observed directly. If there is a universal consensus that there is a place called Australia, that the Earth goes round the sun, that once upon a time there were dinosaurs but no human beings on our planet, I accept it, and will continue to do so until there is evidence to the contrary. I don't “believe” in NDE's or cellular intelligence - I have an open mind on both, but offer them as possible evidence for different hypotheses which I continue to consider. I haven't thought a great deal about gravity, but since there seems to be scientific consensus that it causes apples to fall downwards, I see no reason to argue (as with my other examples). Evolution is a controversial theory, but with the important proviso that it does NOT exclude God, I find the evidence sufficiently convincing to believe in some aspects of it (common descent and natural selection) but not in others (random mutations and gradualism). There is absolutely no consensus on the existence of God, and I do not find the “evidence” convincing on either side. I am therefore not able to take a decision.-I mean indirect observation, studying the effects when the cause can not be studied directly. For example, you can't measure gravity directly. You can measure the effect of it, i.e. the degree of attraction between two objects of mass, but you can't actually observe the force itself. This is different than say, electromagnetism, which can be observed directly.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.