Language and Logic (General)

by David Turell , Saturday, April 12, 2014, 19:08 (3667 days ago) @ romansh


> Romansh: So you don't believe in some absolute nothing and neither does Krause?
> 
> He defines nothing as some quantum phenomena and you define it as god.-All I am proposing, and I can't imagine what is in Krause's mind, is that there has never been a true nothing, that some sort of energy must be eternal, because it is impossible to get something from a true nothing. Since the universe has a complex interactive zoo of quantum particles, an intelligence put that together to work to form a universe which supports life. I'm simply working backward from what we know. I think his definition does not take this view into account, because his thinking is that he must maintain an atheist position. By starting with a quantum potentiality, he can use it to perturb his way to this universe, making it all chance, no teleology. My view is I cannot conceive of the result of sentient humans as a chance phenomenon.