![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Initial post on what I'm doing here.
43. Do you believe in a greater force? Whether that is religiously or simply believing in the power of the Universe?
Gravity is an intrinsic property of the universe. It affects everything in it, and has infinite range. That's certainly greater than anything I could command.
Regarding theology and religion, I keep stumbling over two questions, neither of them my own. First off, if one believes in and worships a divine entity that created the universe, it is totally fair by me to ask by what manner and agency that entity was instantiated. In which case, again by me a fair question, is that agency not also worth believing in and worshiping in the same manner? So you have to keep going, and can't stop. The only two ways this will work are if the number of divine creatives is zero (alpha, if you will), or infinite (omega, perhaps). If alpha, there is nothing to worship -- only to admire the vastness and complexity of the self-instantiating universe. If omega, one could well worship omega as the infinite tower of creative forces. But I can't tell which is which, so I'll pass.
Second, we can observe certain things about the universe. One of the most significant observations by me is that science works, despite all the efforts of those who refuse to accept that on religious or theological grounds. More precisely, it appears to be a fundamental property of the universe that independent experiments yield consistent results. If one were to postulate a creative force (call it "God" for now) responsible for the nature of the universe, it is again totally fair to note that none of the powers asserted for that force require that science works in all places, under all conditions. In fact, it is common for religions to claim the existence of "miracles", cases where "God" sets aside the usual properties of the universe for the sake of believers. So the creative force created a universe in which a prevailing condition is that science works, despite not being theologically constrained in any such manner. What conditions dictate this? Those conditions -- the constraints "God" is subject to -- represent "God's Laws" to me, not the more common, and often harmful, constraints on human behavior written by, and enforced on, humanity, that bear this epithet. And I choose not to accept any theology that does not recognize and discuss the constraints I classify as "God's Laws".
Still, I see space for the divine in the universe. It springs from the source of unpredictability that is quantum mechanics. It is no larger than the Planck length, and lasts no longer than the Planck time. It is everywhere. The universe itself asserts that such spaces are unknowable. And if there is divinity in the universe, that is where it exists.
43. Do you believe in a greater force? Whether that is religiously or simply believing in the power of the Universe?
Gravity is an intrinsic property of the universe. It affects everything in it, and has infinite range. That's certainly greater than anything I could command.
Regarding theology and religion, I keep stumbling over two questions, neither of them my own. First off, if one believes in and worships a divine entity that created the universe, it is totally fair by me to ask by what manner and agency that entity was instantiated. In which case, again by me a fair question, is that agency not also worth believing in and worshiping in the same manner? So you have to keep going, and can't stop. The only two ways this will work are if the number of divine creatives is zero (alpha, if you will), or infinite (omega, perhaps). If alpha, there is nothing to worship -- only to admire the vastness and complexity of the self-instantiating universe. If omega, one could well worship omega as the infinite tower of creative forces. But I can't tell which is which, so I'll pass.
Second, we can observe certain things about the universe. One of the most significant observations by me is that science works, despite all the efforts of those who refuse to accept that on religious or theological grounds. More precisely, it appears to be a fundamental property of the universe that independent experiments yield consistent results. If one were to postulate a creative force (call it "God" for now) responsible for the nature of the universe, it is again totally fair to note that none of the powers asserted for that force require that science works in all places, under all conditions. In fact, it is common for religions to claim the existence of "miracles", cases where "God" sets aside the usual properties of the universe for the sake of believers. So the creative force created a universe in which a prevailing condition is that science works, despite not being theologically constrained in any such manner. What conditions dictate this? Those conditions -- the constraints "God" is subject to -- represent "God's Laws" to me, not the more common, and often harmful, constraints on human behavior written by, and enforced on, humanity, that bear this epithet. And I choose not to accept any theology that does not recognize and discuss the constraints I classify as "God's Laws".
Still, I see space for the divine in the universe. It springs from the source of unpredictability that is quantum mechanics. It is no larger than the Planck length, and lasts no longer than the Planck time. It is everywhere. The universe itself asserts that such spaces are unknowable. And if there is divinity in the universe, that is where it exists.
