Is Intelligibility of the Quantum Universe an evidence of God's Existence?

[2PhiloVoid]

So how are we now to interpret what you mean by the phrase 'a biblical God' there?

I'm not going to define it here. Do you think it has something to do with this thread?

I mean, given from your previous post that you appear unwilling to necessarily have it mean what most of us thinks it means?

And you've read all 23,000 posts I've ever posted on CF as well as my epistemic starting point in the list of books I've placed on my CF personal page? ..... wow. If so, you're quite the reader.

I note that you also mix that phrase in the same sentence as the phrase 'the universe' .. which typically has a scientifically assigned meaning .. so what do you actually mean by that?

Are you wanting me to tell you which theorist(s) I entertain in thought and agree with the most?

If my main working axiom is that "no one human being knows everything," then at the very, very least, my definition of the Universe, whatever it might be, isn't going to be a complete one.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Sounds like you need to duke it out with the mods. Good luck with that.

No. They are who they are and this website belongs to its owner. If their main purpose is to offer a sort of pavilion of chat primarily for Christians, then I'm not going to attempt to disrupt that. However, being that they allow non-Christians on this website, it makes it difficult at times to actually answer questions posed or to have fuller discussions.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

'Interesting'? For what purpose?

For the purpose of filling the void............................... what else would a philosopher who focuses on history do for meaning in life?

Try having your posts repeatedly deleted without explanation!

I've had a few go missing over the years. Don't think it's only you.

 

[SelfSim]

For the purpose of filling the void............................... what else would a philosopher who focuses on history do for meaning in life?

'Void'?
I have a book called 'Touching the Void'. It seems the author actually realised the void .. and then had it mean something very touching!

I've had a few go missing over the years. Don't think it's only you.

Nice to know. I've even had threads I've started deleted too.
I generally don't bother starting any new ones now because of that.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

'Void'?
I have a book called 'Touching the Void'. It seems the author actually realised the void .. and then had it mean something very touching!

Actually, my pen-name here is inspired by Frank Close's book, The Void (2009).

Nice to know. I've even had threads I've started deleted too.
I generally don't bother starting any new ones now because of that.

My guess is you got deleted because a) you used rash language or b) you criticized a Christian doctrine. ......It happens.

 

[Ophiolite]

Is Intelligibility of the Quantum Universe an evidence of God's Existence?​

It is not inconsistent with the existence of a God that chose to make a universe that was intelligible. The absence of inconsistency would seem to be a necessary part of evidence, but not sufficient of itself to be considered evidence. So, I guess that's a "No".

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Is Intelligibility of the Quantum Universe an evidence of God's Existence?​

It is not inconsistent with the existence of a God that chose to make a universe that was intelligible. The absence of inconsistency would seem to be a necessary part of evidence, but not sufficient of itself to be considered evidence. So, I guess that's a "No".

I agree, although I'm sure there are those who would provide us with what, in their view, are a few epistemological caveats, all of which we could then disagree with in one of a dozen different ways.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think there's a certain aesthetic appeal to the notion that mathematics demonstrates an all-pervading Intelligence in the universe (it certainly was appealing to A.N. Whitehead), but given that moderns have divorced aesthetics from metaphysics and epistemology, I doubt it would be persuasive to most people now days.

I was talking about this recently with my brother: younger generations don't even have the discourse to describe things being beautiful or good anymore. We are truly in a post-Christian age, much as C.S. Lewis predicted.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think there's a certain aesthetic appeal to the notion that mathematics demonstrates an all-pervading Intelligence in the universe (it certainly was appealing to A.N. Whitehead), but given that moderns have divorced aesthetics from metaphysics and epistemology, I doubt it would be persuasive to most people now days.

I was talking about this recently with my brother: younger generations don't even have the discourse to describe things being beautiful or good anymore. We are truly in a post-Christian age, much as C.S. Lewis predicted.

I agree. But I don't know what we can do about it, and due to my view on Eschatology, I don't view the situation as reversible. There may have been moments in the past where notions of "revival" or other "new enlightenment" forms of Christian thought might have assuaged some of the more skeptical waves running across Europe and the Americas, but I think we've reached a tipping point where that sort of thing won't fly very far for very long. Ideas pertaining to science and mathematics don't offer much purchase power aesthetically or morally these days where once they did due to the newer paradigms we now inhabit. (...and I'm not saying any of this like you don't already know this.)