View Single Post
  #23  
Old Feb 18th 2012, 02:08 PM
dilettante's Avatar
dilettante dilettante is offline
Moderator
Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,082
Default Re: Scientific determinism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
That's just not true. If you are seeking absolute proof, beyond all falsifiable experimentation, you need to talk to God, not a scientist.
Perhaps the sticking point is the word "exists"?

The universe itself exists, that is to say it has being. The laws of physics describe the behavior of the universe, but descriptions do not, in and of themselves exist; they means by which we deal with things that do exist.

That doesn't mean that they aren't accurate, useful or true, only that they must be deduced/inferred/learned from observations of the universe and cannot be found in it the way a rock, a squirrel or a supernova can be. Without any people or textbooks around, the universe would (presumably) continue to behave the way it behaves now; but there would be no descriptions of that behavior, no "laws of physics."

Anyway, I can only assume that when you said "grand design" earlier you just meant a complex and vast arrangement (or something like that) and didn't mean to imply that the arrangement was arranged the way it was for a particular purpose, as purpose would indeed necessitate the existence of a "designer."
Reply With Quote