Why did God create the universe?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7914
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by LuckyR »

Zosimus wrote: June 25th, 2021, 7:27 am
LuckyR wrote: June 25th, 2021, 3:30 amHuh?

What does evolution have to do with gods?
Exactly nothing. That's the point. A change in the frequency of alleles from one generation to another has nothing to do with "gods" whatsoever.
On this we are in agreement. Was that a serious argument? Why would anything in the physical world tell us about the metaphysical?
"As usual... it depends."
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by AverageBozo »

Zosimus wrote: June 18th, 2021, 7:33 pm
Oh, ok. So, no evidence required. It simply has to strike you as less intelligent and sophisticated. For example, if evolution struck me as less intelligent and sophisticated than the idea that God created the universe, that would be good enough, right?
Since you agree this is nonsense, why did you insert evolution in your discussion about why God created the universe?
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by AverageBozo »

When you say:

1. We aim to show that God exists.
2. God exists means "For all x, if x is God, then x exists."
3. The corollary is "For all x, if x does not exist, then x is not God."
4. Harry Potter does not exist. Harry Potter is not God. So, there is evidence for 3.

you are only saying that if x exists, then x is God or x is not God…

…which is not a paradox. Note the law of the excluded middle. Note the “or” operator.
gad-fly
Posts: 1133
Joined: October 23rd, 2019, 4:48 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by gad-fly »

God exists, and God create the universe are two separate, though not entirely independent, issues. Without the first, there is no need to consider the second. The third issue is why he did it. Without the first two, there is no need to consider the third. The sequence is as simple as that.

The discussion of each issue should deserve its own forum.
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by AverageBozo »

gad-fly wrote: June 26th, 2021, 12:15 pm God exists, and God create the universe are two separate, though not entirely independent, issues. Without the first, there is no need to consider the second. The third issue is why he did it. Without the first two, there is no need to consider the third. The sequence is as simple as that.

The discussion of each issue should deserve its own forum.
I agree and said as much re the first two earlier. The OP replied that he wanted to discuss only the third and keep the other two separate. I have been assuming that the OP would like us to assume the first two in the positive for the sake of discussion.
Zosimus
Posts: 38
Joined: June 11th, 2021, 7:58 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Zosimus »

AverageBozo wrote: June 26th, 2021, 9:27 am
Zosimus wrote: June 18th, 2021, 7:33 pm
Oh, ok. So, no evidence required. It simply has to strike you as less intelligent and sophisticated. For example, if evolution struck me as less intelligent and sophisticated than the idea that God created the universe, that would be good enough, right?
Since you agree this is nonsense, why did you insert evolution in your discussion about why God created the universe?
I didn't. What I did was point out that some people who argue for one thing or another have the tendency to change the meaning of the terms midstream, and I mentioned evolution as an example thereof.
Zosimus
Posts: 38
Joined: June 11th, 2021, 7:58 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Zosimus »

AverageBozo wrote: June 26th, 2021, 9:57 am When you say:

1. We aim to show that God exists.
2. God exists means "For all x, if x is God, then x exists."
3. The corollary is "For all x, if x does not exist, then x is not God."
4. Harry Potter does not exist. Harry Potter is not God. So, there is evidence for 3.

you are only saying that if x exists, then x is God or x is not God…

…which is not a paradox. Note the law of the excluded middle. Note the “or” operator.
That is not the argument. The argument is called Hempel's Paradox or The Raven Paradox. If you don't understand the argument, google it. There are abundant videos and websites that will explain it to you.

The argument is:
It is claimed that: all Ps have characteristic Q.
Therefore, if x is a P then x has characteristic Q.
Therefore, if x does not have characteristic Q, it cannot be a P.
Object y does not have characteristic Q.
Object y is not a P.
Therefore, object y is evidence for the claim: All Ps have characteristic Q.

At no point is the argument "if x has characteristic Q then x is or x is not a P."

You cannot simply switch the argument around and pretend that it is the same one.

All men are mortal does not mean all mortals are men. Rover may well be mortal, but that doesn't mean him(it?) a man.

Nor does "all men are mortal" mean that I am claiming "If being x is mortal, then it either is or is not a man."
The claim is: If being x is IMMORTAL (not mortal) then being x cannot be a man (because all men are mortal).
Zosimus
Posts: 38
Joined: June 11th, 2021, 7:58 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Zosimus »

gad-fly wrote: June 26th, 2021, 12:15 pm God exists, and God create the universe are two separate, though not entirely independent, issues. Without the first, there is no need to consider the second. The third issue is why he did it. Without the first two, there is no need to consider the third. The sequence is as simple as that.

The discussion of each issue should deserve its own forum.
Perhaps you started the thread with that idea in mind. However at viewtopic.php?p=386980#p386980 Tegularius said, "The only empirical evidence which remains absolute is there never was any evidence for god's existence...."

First of all, this statement is false. We can easily come up with evidence for god's existence through the use of Hempel's Paradox.
Second, even if the statement were true, so what? Why should a lack of physical evidence be considered important when contemplating a spiritual being?
Third, if evidence is required in order to believe the statement "God exists" then evidence is also required to believe the statement "Evidence is required in order to believe statement s (whatever s may be)."
Fourth, even if evidence could be obtained to back up the statement "Evidence is required in order to believe statement s (whatever s may be)" then all we would be doing would be engaging in circular logic — no different from saying that the napkin religion is true because it says so on a napkin.

To date, I have yet to see any meaningful response to any of these points.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Atla »

Zosimus wrote: June 16th, 2021, 9:44 am Just this morning I had a conversation with my friend, John. It went like this:

John: Last night a water elemental slept in our back yard!
Zosimus: That seems pretty unlikely.
J: No, look! The grass is wet.
Z: I'm still not convinced. The grass might be wet every morning at this time.
J: Did you check on the wetness of the grass yesterday or at any point in the past 30 days?
Z: I must admit that I did not.
J: So, I have evidence to support my claim whereas you have no evidence to support your doubt.
Z: Evidence is irrelevant.
J: Don't you remember how Fanman said, "...in any kind of argument, the evidence-based position is the stronger one." Any kind of argument.
Z: You're right. Well, I still have my doubts, but since you have evidence, I'll provisionally accept the water elemental theory because of the evidence.
Wrong. An evidence-based position will look at everything known about the entire world, not just one person's backyard. And since to the best of our knowledge, no water elemental has ever been seen anywhere before, the much more likely scenario is that there was no water elemental in the garden either. Same goes for God beliefs.
True philosophy points to the Moon
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by AverageBozo »

Zosimus wrote: June 26th, 2021, 3:03 pm
AverageBozo wrote: June 26th, 2021, 9:57 am When you say:

1. We aim to show that God exists.
2. God exists means "For all x, if x is God, then x exists."
3. The corollary is "For all x, if x does not exist, then x is not God."
4. Harry Potter does not exist. Harry Potter is not God. So, there is evidence for 3.

you are only saying that if x exists, then x is God or x is not God…

…which is not a paradox. Note the law of the excluded middle. Note the “or” operator.
That is not the argument. The argument is called Hempel's Paradox or The Raven Paradox. If you don't understand the argument, google it. There are abundant videos and websites that will explain it to you.

The argument is:
It is claimed that: all Ps have characteristic Q.
Therefore, if x is a P then x has characteristic Q.
Therefore, if x does not have characteristic Q, it cannot be a P.
Object y does not have characteristic Q.
Object y is not a P.
Therefore, object y is evidence for the claim: All Ps have characteristic Q.

At no point is the argument "if x has characteristic Q then x is or x is not a P."

You cannot simply switch the argument around and pretend that it is the same one.

All men are mortal does not mean all mortals are men. Rover may well be mortal, but that doesn't mean him(it?) a man.

Nor does "all men are mortal" mean that I am claiming "If being x is mortal, then it either is or is not a man."
The claim is: If being x is IMMORTAL (not mortal) then being x cannot be a man (because all men are mortal).
The horns of this “dilemma” are mutually exclusive and (equally) satisfiable. These are not the characteristics of a paradox. No paradox here.
Zosimus
Posts: 38
Joined: June 11th, 2021, 7:58 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Zosimus »

Atla wrote: June 26th, 2021, 3:26 pmWrong. An evidence-based position will look at everything known about the entire world, not just one person's backyard. And since to the best of our knowledge, no water elemental has ever been seen anywhere before, the much more likely scenario is that there was no water elemental in the garden either. Same goes for God beliefs.
Is that so? Well, to the best of my knowledge an electron has never been seen — even the strongest magnifying glass will now make them show their faces. Have you seen dark matter? Have you seen dark energy? What about potential energy — have you seen that? Felt it? Smelled it? Tell me — how does it taste? I've heard it tastes like strawberries. Is that true?
An evidence-based position will look at everything known about the entire world...
So tell me, what is it that you know about the entire world, and how do you know it? How do you know, for example, that black holes exist? Let me guess — you're going to say that we (whoever "we" is) have evidence that black holes exist from gravitational lensing and whatever else you think is relevant. Great! But, what evidence was presented to you to convince you that evidence was important?

Where's the evidence for evidence? Or am I supposed to take it on blind faith as you do?
Zosimus
Posts: 38
Joined: June 11th, 2021, 7:58 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Zosimus »

AverageBozo wrote: June 26th, 2021, 4:32 pmThe horns of this “dilemma” are mutually exclusive and (equally) satisfiable. These are not the characteristics of a paradox. No paradox here.
Well, for some weird reason, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hempel/#ParaConf) has issued it the name "The Paradox of Confirmation" and has emitted an entire article on confirmation, with a note on Hempel's Paradox (see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/conf ... oParOthDif). Perhaps we should call them up and let them know that an AverageBozo on the Internet has dispensed with the entire paradox with a wave of his wand and the magic words "mutually exclusive and (equally) satisfiable."

You know, I was under the impression that this was a Philosophy Discussion Forum on which I could discuss philosophy. Was I mistaken? Did I make a wrong turn at Albuquerque and lose my way entirely?
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Atla »

Zosimus wrote: June 27th, 2021, 9:18 am Is that so? Well, to the best of my knowledge an electron has never been seen — even the strongest magnifying glass will now make them show their faces. Have you seen dark matter? Have you seen dark energy? What about potential energy — have you seen that? Felt it? Smelled it? Tell me — how does it taste? I've heard it tastes like strawberries. Is that true?
The evidence for them comes from the observed behaviour of things. They don't themselves have to be visible objects, maybe they aren't objects at all.
So tell me, what is it that you know about the entire world, and how do you know it? How do you know, for example, that black holes exist? Let me guess — you're going to say that we (whoever "we" is) have evidence that black holes exist from gravitational lensing and whatever else you think is relevant. Great! But, what evidence was presented to you to convince you that evidence was important?

Where's the evidence for evidence? Or am I supposed to take it on blind faith as you do?
Certain knowledge is humanly impossible, some degree of faith is always involved. The evidence-based position is a way of thinking that tries to match the observed world perfectly (as good as humanly possible), so this position probably requires the least amount of faith, it's most likely to be correct.

You'll have to do better than that..
True philosophy points to the Moon
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by AverageBozo »

Zosimus wrote: June 27th, 2021, 9:28 am
AverageBozo wrote: June 26th, 2021, 4:32 pmThe horns of this “dilemma” are mutually exclusive and (equally) satisfiable. These are not the characteristics of a paradox. No paradox here.
Well, for some weird reason, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hempel/#ParaConf) has issued it the name "The Paradox of Confirmation" and has emitted an entire article on confirmation, with a note on Hempel's Paradox (see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/conf ... oParOthDif). Perhaps we should call them up and let them know that an AverageBozo on the Internet has dispensed with the entire paradox with a wave of his wand and the magic words "mutually exclusive and (equally) satisfiable."

You know, I was under the impression that this was a Philosophy Discussion Forum on which I could discuss philosophy. Was I mistaken? Did I make a wrong turn at Albuquerque and lose my way entirely?
Thanks for the links. You may want to continue/resume your philosophy discussion with others in this thread. Enjoy.
Zosimus
Posts: 38
Joined: June 11th, 2021, 7:58 pm

Re: Why did God create the universe?

Post by Zosimus »

Atla wrote: June 27th, 2021, 9:36 amThe evidence for [electrons and other unobservable objects] comes from the observed behaviour of things. They don't themselves have to be visible objects, maybe they aren't objects at all.
So, you admit that scientific realism (a philosophical position worthy of discussion on a philosophical board) is suspect and you refuse to defend it. Yet, somehow I think that what comes below will deny the consequences of such a philosophical admission.
Certain knowledge is humanly impossible, some degree of faith is always involved. The evidence-based position is a way of thinking that tries to match the observed world perfectly (as good as humanly possible), so this position probably requires the least amount of faith, it's most likely to be correct.
So, you claim that the evidence-based position is "most likely to be correct" but you have no evidence to support that claim. This is what we call an incoherent system of beliefs.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021