Harvey:"I think the premise that the universe is eternal without there being a 'God' is more problematical than the universe being infinite or finite as a result of God's existence." Mario: Why? The only justification for that that I can see is that God is a more nebulous concept that can fit any hole you feel like putting it into.

'God' is a much more parsimonious solution to the universe versus a materialist one. In the case of a materialist solution, we should eliminate as real the following:

truth
cause
logic
mathematical order
physical laws
material properties (i.e., universals)
objects as real
etc....

I can't accept these concepts as epiphenomenal. In addition, the concept of 'God' is easily deducible based on believable premises:

1) The universe has mathematical laws in place that cause the universe to behave mathematically

2) Mathematical laws stem from simple axioms being 'true'

3) Truth is a real concept that exists

4) Truth is equivalent to 'intelligence'

C) God exists

• More - stormcrow - November 3, 2004 - 21:49 UTC
  • truth as 'intelligence' - harvey1 - November 4, 2004 - 15:44 UTC
    • Okay - stormcrow - November 5, 2004 - 16:52 UTC
      • Truth trees - harvey1 - November 6, 2004 - 16:48 UTC
    • Causeless infinite chain - yanniru - November 5, 2004 - 19:28 UTC
      • infinite chains and what causes them - harvey1 - November 6, 2004 - 17:05 UTC
        • Why is infinite timeline inconsistent with materialism? - yanniru - November 11, 2004 - 13:00 UTC
• Did Harv just prove that god is math? - yanniru - November 4, 2004 - 13:24 UTC
  • More than math - harvey1 - November 4, 2004 - 17:38 UTC
    • natural evils (at) play - yanniru - November 5, 2004 - 19:49 UTC
      • Orders versus consciousness and intelligence - harvey1 - November 6, 2004 - 17:20 UTC
    • Does this mean math is love??? - beandog - February 2, 2005 - 19:07 UTC