Anthropic principle versus multi-verse - Page 3

  • Aggressive
  • Amazed
  • Amused
  • Angelic
  • Angry
  • Artistic
  • Asleep
  • Bashful
  • Blah
  • Bored
  • Breezy
  • Brooding
  • Busy
  • Buzzed
  • Chatty
  • Cheeky
  • Cheerful
  • Cloud 9
  • Cold
  • Cold Turkey
  • Confused
  • Cool
  • Crappy
  • Curious
  • Cynical
  • Daring
  • Dead
  • Depressed
  • Devilish
  • Doh
  • Doubtful
  • Drunk
  • Energetic
  • Fiendish
  • Fine
  • Flirty
  • Gloomy
  • Goofy
  • Grumpy
  • Happy
  • Hot
  • Hung Over
  • In Love
  • In Pain
  • Innocent
  • Inspired
  • Lonely
  • Lurking
  • Mellow
  • Mischievious
  • Nerdy
  • None
  • Not Worthy
  • Paranoid
  • Pensive
  • Psychedelic
  • Question
  • Relaxed
  • ROFLMAO
  • Sad
  • Scared
  • Shocked
  • Sick
  • Sleepy
  • Sneaky
  • Snobbish
  • Spaced
  • Stressed
  • Sunshine
  • Sweet Tooth
  • Thinking
  • Tired
  • Twisted
  • Vegged Out
  • Worried
  • Yee Haw
  • Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
    Results 31 to 34 of 34
    1. #31
      DuraGizer's Avatar
      DuraGizer is offline Heather Langenkamp Devotee
      Lonely
       
      Join Date
      September 4th, 2009
      Location
      Lake Country, BC
      Posts
      952
      Male - Protheist
      Mentioned
      0 Post(s)

      Re: Anthropic principle versus multi-verse

      I don't think the multiverse hypothesis/hypotheses disprove the existence of God, and believe that atheists that use it as an argument against theism are probably scraping the bottom of the barrel.

      Frankly, I like the idea of a multiverse. The possibilities are endless ...
      O God, I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams.

    2. #32
      Jedidiah's Avatar
      Jedidiah is online now TheologyWeb Grandfather
      Buzzed
       
      Join Date
      August 1st, 2003
      Location
      Alaska
      Posts
      18,123
      Male - Christian
      Mentioned
      3 Post(s)

      Re: Anthropic principle versus multi-verse

      Quote Originally posted by Jnthn View Post
      Good point. It does make the multiverse hypothesis sound horribly deterministic.

      J
      At least the particular view of the multiverse that Glenn discussed.
      He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. (Micah 6:8)

    3. #33
      Kenny's Avatar
      Kenny is offline victory!
      Lurking
       
      Join Date
      March 4th, 2003
      Location
      South Bend Indiana
      Posts
      6,220
      Male - Christian
      Mentioned
      0 Post(s)

      Re: Anthropic principle versus multi-verse

      I think that Glenn’s argument that the multiverse scenario (according to which there are tokens of all physically possible universe types) entails that we have no free will is fallacious.

      The mere thesis that I have a counterpart in another universe who makes different choices than I do (in relevantly similar circumstances to my own) doesn’t entail that my own choices aren't free. I don’t see how the entailment suddenly holds if we add that, for every choice I could have made in a given set of circumstances, a counterpart of mine in some other universe makes that choice in relevantly similar circumstances. What do my counterparts have to do with me?

      Even if it turns out that it is a law of nature that there be tokens of every physically possible universe type, so that the laws of nature guarantee that some counterpart of me will, say, choose to take up a life of crime, it doesn’t follow that the laws of nature entail that I will choose to take up a life of crime. Nor does it follow that the laws of nature entail that my counterpart who actually does end up taking up a life of crime does so because the laws of nature entailed that he would do it. All that follows is that the laws of nature entail that someone will fill the role of being the counterpart who takes up a life of crime. That’s consistent with it being the case that, for any guy who actually ends up filling the role, that guy could have done otherwise.
      Last edited by Kenny; September 14th 2009 at 03:15 PM.
      To be the value of a bound variable or not to be

    4. #34
      shunyadragon's Avatar
      shunyadragon is offline tWebber
      Thinking
       
      Join Date
      April 23rd, 2004
      Location
      Hillsborough, NC
      Posts
      18,687
      Male - Baha'i
      Mentioned
      0 Post(s)

      Re: Anthropic principle versus multi-verse

      Quote Originally posted by DuraGizer View Post
      I don't think the multiverse hypothesis/hypotheses disprove the existence of God, and believe that atheists that use it as an argument against theism are probably scraping the bottom of the barrel.

      Frankly, I like the idea of a multiverse. The possibilities are endless ...
      Atheists rarely if every use this argument against the existence of God. It is a rather foolish idea.
      Go with the flow the river knows.

      Frank Doonan
      Hillsborough, NC 27278

      Gifts of jade-silk change weapons and war into peace and friendship.

      I do not know, therefore I think . . . and everything is in pencil.

    Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

    Similar Threads

    1. Strong Anthropic Principle
      By Yamyam in forum Theology 201
      Replies: 9
      Last Post: August 27th 2005, 05:29 AM
    2. Tegmark's Multi-verse (some thoughts)
      By OckhamsRazor in forum Natural Science 301
      Replies: 8
      Last Post: August 30th 2004, 09:04 PM
    3. The Anthropic Principle
      By apologetics in forum Philosophy 201
      Replies: 18
      Last Post: April 5th 2004, 08:20 PM
    4. Anthropic Principle
      By Solly in forum Natural Science 301
      Replies: 71
      Last Post: April 28th 2003, 03:36 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •