Quote from: pungopete468 on February 17, 2014, 08:49:16 AM

Quote from: organofcorti on February 17, 2014, 08:09:44 AM

The probability is a priori unknowable. Until someone can make some falsifiable hypothesis about god that is not made false by the evidence, the question of god is uninteresting - unless you're religious, of course.

Well the question about god may be uninteresting but I think it's the wrong question to ask at this time, given how little we know... I'm Agnostic.

I think a few more interesting questions would be,

- Do the laws of the Universe allow God to exist?

- If the laws of the Universe do allow God to exist, then what can God do that we cannot do and by what process?

- If God existed would God be trans-dimensional? Would God be subject to the laws regarding time?

- If God exists within our Universe, what then will happen as our Universe unravels and eventually ceases to exist?

- Do living things have souls?

- Is the subconscious brain in some manner connected to other living things? Is it further connected to God?

- Is life the birth of a new soul or the continuance of a timeless one? Both? What decides?

Just a few questions...

But it's 4:00 AM here and I'm done for now.

Good debate!

I think a more relevant question is "Why do you think there needs to be a god to investigate?". Belief in gods have added nothing to our knowledge of the universe; why should that change?

Thomas Aquinas says it best when he presents a point of view against which he is arguing:

"Further, it is superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few principles has been produced by many. But it seems that everything we see in the world can be accounted for by other principles, supposing God did not exist. For all natural things can be reduced to one principle which is nature; and all voluntary things can be reduced to one principle which is human reason, or will. Therefore there is no need to suppose God's existence."

I completely agree with this and in some ways it summarises my views. What point is there of a god if that god has no measurable effect?

BTW, Aquinas' answer to this is wrong since it assumes nature is directed than otherwise, when it's clear now that nature is not directed and does not need a god in order to exist.

Sleep well, bud.