Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    Quantum mechanics has demonstrated that not everything has a cause...

    But anyway, let's take your argument: "Why can a cause do nothing but create the effect?" What does that even mean? I am confused, looks like you are. I may have rambled on a bit but every piece of ramble was on point. You, like all you apologetics, make confused statements leading to the other debator having to waste time and effort sieving through the mess before being in a position to answer. In this example, you have turned my words around. I did not say that a cause can do nothing. I said the assumption that a cause must exist is just that, an assumption, not a premise. That is not the same as you have now made my point out to be.

    Do you now see why I am saying you are intellectually dishonest?
    Sorry I meant that as a reply to RobML (forgot to quote him). That's why you're confused

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    The properties of the cause I am happy to accept initially as being anything - the final paragraph (conclusion) is a deductive analysis through which the properties are established.

    The 'it seems logically impossible' was, firstly, just ome of many defenses of this argument provided, and, secondly, I would ask, does it not seem so to you? As a seeker of truth, does it seem possible to you that material could arrive from not just empty space, but quite literally *nothing* at all. Not even space itself? If you are happy to postulate that this is possible it is you whonis relyibg in faith.

    The reason God is timeless is that time is a property of the universe. Thus, existing independent if the universe, God is independent if time (timeless).
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Except "seem" is not good enough when trying to show something logically...

    As a seeker of truth, does it not seem implausible (forget the idea of the God that you love) to you that there is something unimaginably powerful that has existed forever? To me, that seems incredibly implausible.

    And let me use your own arguments against you. Matter is timeless, ubiquitous, etc. matter is everything you have just described God to be. You know something "external" as you call it. Suddenly pieces of matter collide and voila you have a big bang and a universe.

    That is perfectly logically coherent inside the framework of your argumentation.

    And finally, something I said before, something you haven't addressed, even if your God version is true, that in no way, shape, or form is equivalent to the God being the benevolent being that the silly books of Christians or Muslims think watches over us.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    Haha that looks very well thought through! I suggest putting your head in a fridge for a bit - help the old brain cool off

    Why can a cause do nothing but create the effect?

    Your counter seems to rest on that, so I'd appreciate an explanation, because aren't there examples of 'causes' e.g. humans, doing many things besides causing a specific effect? Perhaps I've misunderstood you

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I think you have a faulty of understanding of what a cause is. A cause isn't a thing, but a specific event or change. I.e. a volcano isn't a specific cause but an eruption is.
    A cause either does something or it does not. If it does something, it is to create an effect, for all things that happen are by definition effects.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    Sorry I meant that as a reply to RobML (forgot to quote him). That's why you're confused

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So?

    You have no argument do you, that's why suddenly you replied to someone else rather than answering my argument.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    Quantum mechanics has demonstrated that not everything has a cause...
    Actually it has only shown that the connection between cause and effect is not always deterministic.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    So?

    You have no argument do you, that's why suddenly you replied to someone else rather than answering my argument.
    If by 'argument' you're referring to that line about quantum mechanics (I've addressed the rest of your comment, notifying you it was sent in error), then I invite you to read the defence of the first premise of my orginal syllogism. If you had read that, you'd know that in quantum mechanics things do not happen uncaused out of nothing. There are all sorts of conditions required (space the most basic of them) for these effects to take place. Thus, no, there are no examples of 'uncaused' effects in quantum mechanics to the best of my knowledge. Yes, I've just seen that RobML is backing me on this point
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    Actually it has only shown that the connection between cause and effect is not always deterministic.
    That would be enough to squash the so-called "premise". But then again I am not a physicist, so maybe I don't understand it fully.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Welcome Squad
    Because, he doesn't exist, obviously.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    If by 'argument' you're referring to that line about quantum mechanics (I've addressed the rest of your comment, notifying you it was sent in error), then I invite you to read the defence of the first premise of my orginal syllogism. If you had read that, you'd know that in quantum mechanics things do not happen uncaused out of nothing. There are all sorts of conditions required (space the most basic of them) for these effects to take place. Thus, no, there are no examples of 'uncaused' effects in quantum mechanics to the best of my knowledge. Yes, I've just seen that RobML is backing me on this point
    Did he? In another post he told you that you don't know what a cause is...but I guess in the end the intellecutally dishonest will lie and fake as much as they want in order to promote their agenda.

    Why is the existence of the universe an effect and not a cause?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    I think you have a faulty of understanding of what a cause is. A cause isn't a thing, but a specific event or change. I.e. a volcano isn't a specific cause but an eruption is.
    A cause either does something or it does not. If it does something, it is to create an effect, for all things that happen are by definition effects.
    This is interesting. I'm unsure - since the eruption cannot happen without the volcano, why is the volcano not classed as a cause also?

    The dictionary defintion is 'a person or thing that gives rise to an action, phenomenon, or condition'.

    In the same way that an eruption (the change) requires a volcano (the 'thing', the cause of the universe (the change) presumably requires a 'thing' also (God)? Why would the change take place if not for a thing making it do so?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    I believe that suffering is a test, and that those who pass the test will have a good afterlife, and those that fail the test will have a bad afterlife. However everyone's test is different, so everyone gets a different mark scheme. As He is the best of judges, he knows how to make the tests and their mark schemes fair for everybody. For example, a homeless man is tested on whether he steals to survive, or if he tries to live honestly. A rich man would be tested on how he spent his wealth. As for God already knowing the outcome of this test, let's say your teacher already knew who was going to pass and fail at the end of the year. You would still think it unfair to reject your application before you even start, right? It's not fair to punish someone for what they would do, only for what they have done.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    This is interesting. I'm unsure - since the eruption cannot happen without the volcano, why is the volcano not classed as a cause also?

    The dictionary defintion is 'a person or thing that gives rise to an action, phenomenon, or condition'.

    In the same way that an eruption (the change) requires a volcano (the 'thing', the cause of the universe (the change) presumably requires a 'thing' also (God)? Why would the change take place if not for a thing making it do so?
    A release of pressure caused the eruption. A fracture in the walls of the volcano caused the release of pressure. A build up of pressure caused a fracture in the walls of the volcano. We can follow this chain of cause and effect for as long as we want, but we'll never reach a cause that is just "the volcano", or reach a cause that is any "thing" for that matter. Things are merely frameworks in which causes occur.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If you actually want a serious answer to the original question, Christian theology makes clear that humans are responsible for their own downfall:
    ‘The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness’ (Rom 1.18)
    Therefore suffering can be seen as punishment that people incurred onto themselves ever since the banishment from Eden:‘God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another’ (Rom 1.24)
    Simply speaking, the Christian God is not actually benevolent in the sense that most are considered damned except for the few that he has chosen to save. This is made clear as ‘grace’ is a special thing for the few, otherwise it is not special and cannot be called ‘grace’.‘Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity.’ (Rom 1.28-29)
    Suffering for general mankind is due to their rebellion, but for Christians it has different reasons entirely. I cba explaining that part cos that affects the minority.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Because suffering and pleasure are both natural phenomenon and won't change. The universe had no beginning and will have no end, just cycles of life and death with everything in between. Why is it created this way? Because it just is.

    That would be the dharmic/Hinduism answer.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by otah007)
    I believe that suffering is a test, and that those who pass the test will have a good afterlife, and those that fail the test will have a bad afterlife. However everyone's test is different, so everyone gets a different mark scheme. As He is the best of judges, he knows how to make the tests and their mark schemes fair for everybody. For example, a homeless man is tested on whether he steals to survive, or if he tries to live honestly. A rich man would be tested on how he spent his wealth. As for God already knowing the outcome of this test, let's say your teacher already knew who was going to pass and fail at the end of the year. You would still think it unfair to reject your application before you even start, right? It's not fair to punish someone for what they would do, only for what they have done.
    So how does he decide "well his test is going to be leukemia aged 14"? How does he judge someone in such a test? You don't know do you because...muh God.

    Great argument. Nice talking to you.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    That would be enough to squash the so-called "premise". But then again I am not a physicist, so maybe I don't understand it fully.
    Not really. Quantum mechanics still follows the laws of causality. The science is probabilistic so we can't fully predict exactly where particles can be at a moment.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    lol God is not a Guardian reader
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It's better than that; in fact not only would a god have to 'allow' suffering but actually everything that has happened/ever will happen is already known for them to be a omniscient god. yes this very same god one day made the decision to have childhood leukemia be a thing and laws which allow the obscenely wealthy to hide their riches.

    the point i'm trying to make is if you believe in a god then you're a bit of a prat
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    Not really. Quantum mechanics still follows the laws of causality. The science is probabilistic so we can't fully predict exactly where particles can be at a moment.
    You mean Heisenberg? We know position but not time, or time but not position? Maybe I will ask a colleague, I work with many physicists.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    A release of pressure caused the eruption. A fracture in the walls of the volcano caused the release of pressure. A build up of pressure caused a fracture in the walls of the volcano. We can follow this chain of cause and effect for as long as we want, but we'll never reach a cause that is just "the volcano", or reach a cause that is any "thing" for that matter. Things are merely frameworks in which causes occur.
    So, you're arguing that causes are not things but are changes or events.

    But, accepting premise 2, that change or event needs to take place in 'nothing'. A change/event ex nihilo. A change or event, as you say, requires a framework in which to occur. Given that there is literally *nothing* to supply this framework (no space, no time, no atoms etc.) God is the most rational explanation for what the framework was/what created the first framework.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.