Total Posts:62|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Does God Violate Occam's Razor More Than The

Magic8000
Posts: 975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.

"So Magic8000 believes Einstein was a proctologist who was persuaded by the Government and Hitler to fabricate the Theory of Relativity"- GWL-CPA
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 6:39:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM, Smithereens wrote:
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?

One is explained through magic. The other is explained through String Theory and actually has some evidence for it (dark flow).
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 10:59:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 6:39:42 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM, Smithereens wrote:
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?

One is explained through magic. The other is explained through String Theory and actually has some evidence for it (dark flow).

Didn't realize string theory was functionally different from magic.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 12:55:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 10:59:22 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 6:39:42 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM, Smithereens wrote:
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?

One is explained through magic. The other is explained through String Theory and actually has some evidence for it (dark flow).

Didn't realize string theory was functionally different from magic.

Oh ya, because God isn't?.. "Let there be a universe!" *poof* tada!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 1:17:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 12:55:39 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 10:59:22 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 6:39:42 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM, Smithereens wrote:
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?

One is explained through magic. The other is explained through String Theory and actually has some evidence for it (dark flow).

Didn't realize string theory was functionally different from magic.

Oh ya, because God isn't?.. "Let there be a universe!" *poof* tada!

Good way to miss my point, but okay.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 1:23:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 1:17:59 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 12:55:39 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 10:59:22 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 6:39:42 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM, Smithereens wrote:
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?

One is explained through magic. The other is explained through String Theory and actually has some evidence for it (dark flow).

Didn't realize string theory was functionally different from magic.

Oh ya, because God isn't?.. "Let there be a universe!" *poof* tada!

Good way to miss my point, but okay.

I got the point, it just wasn't a very good one. You are equating valid scientific inquiry with "magic"
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 1:29:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 1:23:50 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 1:17:59 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 12:55:39 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 10:59:22 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 6:39:42 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM, Smithereens wrote:
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?

One is explained through magic. The other is explained through String Theory and actually has some evidence for it (dark flow).

Didn't realize string theory was functionally different from magic.

Oh ya, because God isn't?.. "Let there be a universe!" *poof* tada!

Good way to miss my point, but okay.

I got the point, it just wasn't a very good one. You are equating valid scientific inquiry with "magic"

No I'm not. lol That means you did miss the point.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 1:30:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 1:29:07 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 1:23:50 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 1:17:59 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 12:55:39 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 10:59:22 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 10/7/2013 6:39:42 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:14:36 AM, Smithereens wrote:
It depends entirely on what type of explanation you need. If you think you require a being with power, intelligence and moral perfection to be able to create the universe and the human being, then the theistic God is the maximum of the minimum. If you think the universe can be explained via an infinite amount of other universes, then that appears to have no simpler version either. In what scenario are you thinking that God is violating Occam's Razor more relative to the MU theory?

One is explained through magic. The other is explained through String Theory and actually has some evidence for it (dark flow).

Didn't realize string theory was functionally different from magic.

Oh ya, because God isn't?.. "Let there be a universe!" *poof* tada!

Good way to miss my point, but okay.

I got the point, it just wasn't a very good one. You are equating valid scientific inquiry with "magic"

No I'm not. lol That means you did miss the point.

You said "Didn't realize string theory was functionally different from magic". Did you forget what you wrote that quickly? lol
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 1:45:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Infinite means infinite, not finite, beyond definition; so, neither an infinite multiverse nor an infinite god would be infinite in anything; they would have no meaning.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 3:21:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The whole thing's a distraction. It is treating the symptoms not the disease. There still needs to be a first domino piece for the endless chain. So really, it doesn't take God out of the picture.

Believing in multi-verses for the sole purpose of avoiding philosophical arguments is irrational.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 3:23:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 3:21:43 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
The whole thing's a distraction. It is treating the symptoms not the disease. There still needs to be a first domino piece for the endless chain. So really, it doesn't take God out of the picture.

God doesn't need to be in the picture in the first place lol


Believing in multi-verses for the sole purpose of avoiding philosophical arguments is irrational.

Um, the multiverse is part of many philosophical arguments. One could just that believing in God just to avoid the multiverse is irrational.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 3:34:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The multiverse violates Ockham's razor, which states: "one ought not multiply entities beyond necessity." Since God would explain the creation of the universe, and he is a single entity, whereas the multiverse might also explain the creation of our universe, yet the multiverse contains an infinite (or near infinite) amount of entities, then it seems that the God hypothesis should be preferred over the multiverse hypothesis. That is, if we're going to look at the creation of the universe only from Ockham's razor.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 3:51:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 3:34:08 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
The multiverse violates Ockham's razor, which states: "one ought not multiply entities beyond necessity." Since God would explain the creation of the universe, and he is a single entity, whereas the multiverse might also explain the creation of our universe, yet the multiverse contains an infinite (or near infinite) amount of entities, then it seems that the God hypothesis should be preferred over the multiverse hypothesis. That is, if we're going to look at the creation of the universe only from Ockham's razor.

Thank you KeyrarHero, however there are exceptions to the multiplying of entities with regards to Occam's Razor (sometimes it can be similar to a "quality" vs "quantity" issue). Let me give you and analogy... Lets say there is a huge airplane hanger, and someone says that there is either a time machine in it, or a million cars of particular brand that was thought to be only one of a kind. Which violates Occam's Razor more? Well, the time machine (even though there is only one). Thus, even though we only thought there was one of those certain type of cars, it is still more likely that there are a million of those in the hangar then even one time machine. Some could argue that an all powerful being that is an intelligence without a brain is a wild claim like a time machine...We know that a universe can exist, but the assumption that the great being can exist is just that; an assumption. Thus, even multiple universes is still less of an assumption than one God.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 3:57:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Either there are a fist full of pennies in my hand, or one orb that can take me to Mars in two seconds. Obviously, the one orb is more of an assumption even there is more pennies blah blah blah...You get the point.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 4:00:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 3:34:08 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
The multiverse violates Ockham's razor, which states: "one ought not multiply entities beyond necessity." Since God would explain the creation of the universe, and he is a single entity, whereas the multiverse might also explain the creation of our universe, yet the multiverse contains an infinite (or near infinite) amount of entities, then it seems that the God hypothesis should be preferred over the multiverse hypothesis. That is, if we're going to look at the creation of the universe only from Ockham's razor.

Also, what does "near infinite" even mean? lol If you can always keep adding one, then how do you know where you are "near infinite"?
Idealist
Posts: 2,520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 4:55:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?

Read my post.... Some times it doesn't matter how many assumptions there are, but how big the assumption is; like a "quality" vs "quantity" . Also, an omnipotent God would make anything at all possible, not a multiverse....A multiverse would be constrained to the laws of physics, but Gd, if he exists, could do more than that.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 4:56:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 4:44:08 PM, Idealist wrote:
Many physicists have cut their own throat on Occam's razor...

How so? I think God is one of the biggest assumptions of all....
Idealist
Posts: 2,520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 5:08:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 4:55:58 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?

Read my post.... Some times it doesn't matter how many assumptions there are, but how big the assumption is; like a "quality" vs "quantity" . Also, an omnipotent God would make anything at all possible, not a multiverse....A multiverse would be constrained to the laws of physics, but Gd, if he exists, could do more than that.

I agree - sometimes "quality" does trump "quantity." But in an infinite universe both quantity and quality would be inferred, since the basic reason for suggesting such an entity is that it makes even the most complicated of things (life) easy to assume.
Idealist
Posts: 2,520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 5:10:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 4:56:18 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:44:08 PM, Idealist wrote:
Many physicists have cut their own throat on Occam's razor...

How so? I think God is one of the biggest assumptions of all....

This was a comment often used by Bohr to point-out that things are often more complicated that the evidence would make them seem.
Magic8000
Posts: 975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 5:14:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 1:45:02 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Infinite means infinite, not finite, beyond definition; so, neither an infinite multiverse nor an infinite god would be infinite in anything; they would have no meaning.

What do you mean? I didn't state they were finite. How would they be meaningless? An infinite multiverse would be infinite in universes. Some multiverse ideas don't posit an infinite amount of universes anyway, I just gave the infinite idea because it's an extreme. If an infinite God has no meaning, then it would seem a finite multiverse would be favored.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.

"So Magic8000 believes Einstein was a proctologist who was persuaded by the Government and Hitler to fabricate the Theory of Relativity"- GWL-CPA
Magic8000
Posts: 975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 5:19:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?

No. It doesn't matter how many items are in a hypothesis. What matters is the assumptions of the hypothesis overall. If a God existed, he would be infinite in many more things than possible realities. So, the problem is equally applied.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.

"So Magic8000 believes Einstein was a proctologist who was persuaded by the Government and Hitler to fabricate the Theory of Relativity"- GWL-CPA
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 5:19:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 5:08:51 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:55:58 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?

Read my post.... Some times it doesn't matter how many assumptions there are, but how big the assumption is; like a "quality" vs "quantity" . Also, an omnipotent God would make anything at all possible, not a multiverse....A multiverse would be constrained to the laws of physics, but Gd, if he exists, could do more than that.

I agree - sometimes "quality" does trump "quantity." But in an infinite universe both quantity and quality would be inferred, since the basic reason for suggesting such an entity is that it makes even the most complicated of things (life) easy to assume.

We know a universe can exist, and there never seems to be just one of anything....Thus, a multiverse isn't that big of an assumption. However, an intelligence not dependent on a brain? That's a leap. But not only that, it is omnipotent; he can do anything conceivable. Not just that, this being is the most benevolent of all. and he knows everything! I'm sorry, one God is much more of an assumption than multiple universes.
Idealist
Posts: 2,520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 6:01:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 5:19:01 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?

No. It doesn't matter how many items are in a hypothesis. What matters is the assumptions of the hypothesis overall. If a God existed, he would be infinite in many more things than possible realities. So, the problem is equally applied.

But a God, if he existed, needn't be infinite. A God, as a being, could have limited powers and a limited "lifetime", yet still be perfectly sufficient to explain reality as we know it.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 6:07:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 6:01:59 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/7/2013 5:19:01 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?

No. It doesn't matter how many items are in a hypothesis. What matters is the assumptions of the hypothesis overall. If a God existed, he would be infinite in many more things than possible realities. So, the problem is equally applied.

But a God, if he existed, needn't be infinite. A God, as a being, could have limited powers and a limited "lifetime", yet still be perfectly sufficient to explain reality as we know it.

A God isn't needed to explain reality as we know it.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2013 6:08:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/7/2013 6:01:59 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/7/2013 5:19:01 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
At 10/7/2013 4:42:47 PM, Idealist wrote:
At 10/6/2013 11:55:59 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
Multiverse = random and unorganized
God = Organized intelligent mind

I would say God does violate it more. An infinite multiverse and an infinite god would both be infinite, however instead of infinite in universes, he would be infinite in power, knowledge and maybe love. Clearly more assumptions

It doesn't matter the amount of things in a hypothesis, only the assumptions.

Wouldn't an infinite multiverse put-forth an infinite number of assumptions, as it makes anything at all possible?

No. It doesn't matter how many items are in a hypothesis. What matters is the assumptions of the hypothesis overall. If a God existed, he would be infinite in many more things than possible realities. So, the problem is equally applied.

But a God, if he existed, needn't be infinite. A God, as a being, could have limited powers and a limited "lifetime", yet still be perfectly sufficient to explain reality as we know it.

Also, a multiverse doesn't need to be infinite either... I personally don't think the idea of a multiverse or God is needed to explain reality.