Far out cosmology (Introduction)

by dhw, Monday, January 27, 2014, 12:29 (3732 days ago) @ George Jelliss

GEORGE: Just came across this comment while browsing:
dhw says: The eternal "First Cause" argument therefore works just as well for the atheist's faith in chance as it does for the theist's faith in God.
The difference is that chance is known to exist so no faith is required.-A fair enough reprimand for taking intellectual short cuts! What I mean is that theists believe first cause eternal energy is conscious of itself, and has deliberately designed the universe and life. This requires faith. If atheists were to accept the concept of an eternal first cause, it would be mindless, and consequently the complexities of the universe and life would have originated by chance ... i.e. there was no conscious form of energy that designed them. This also requires faith. I consider both concepts to be equally beyond belief. (See below for why the eternal first cause works equally well for both parties.)-GEORGE: I'm puzzled where the idea that the universe is infinite comes from in this discussion. There is no evidence that it is anything but finite.-I'm not sure what statements you're referring to here, but the line I have been following with David is that there has to be a first cause, and if we accept that this is energy, there is no reason to suppose that it is limited by time. Whether it is conscious (God) or mindless, it is perfectly feasible that it would have gone on and will go on producing universes ad infinitum. Some theists like to use the Big Bang as "evidence" of a single creation, while some atheists like to use the multiverse theory as a means of reducing the odds against chance producing life (the more universes you have, the greater the likelihood of the right combination). I do not see the Big Bang or the multiverse theory, or an infinite number of past and future universes, as providing any evidence for or against the existence of a designer.