Wednesday, January 19, 2005

Random philosophizing.... thinking along the lines of if philosophic naturalism was really true. I use the terms philosophic naturalism a lot because it is a common philosophy in modern times. The best summary of it is probably Sagan's, "The Cosmos is all that is, was, or ever will be." The Christian view of Nature is that it is just a book to be written on or written by God. And the science and technology that developed in Christian cultures of the West bears out this type of thinking. Darwinism seems to be the deification of Nature, "random" mutation is the creator and Nature "selects" by natural selection. There you have creation, intelligence and design attributed all to Nature. Of course, Darwinists do not live by this and believe that their own creative acts, intelligence, ideas and designs are attributable to their own minds. Their own ontological state of being. I hope that's a little explanation of philosophic naturalism, as well as its fallacy.

But what if it was really true? Of course there would be a lot more evidence for sequence in Nature, rather than typology, missing links would not be missing, etc..

But some other notes, it seems that we cannot destroy matter or create it. In the thought experiment that assumes naturalism is actually true, Nature is eternal. If that is so, given an eternity of time would not patterns repeat? Would your arrangement of matter come about again in time and your consciousness emerge from it? Perhaps it would not, if one said that Nature is a one time event that came from nothing. (That is a philosophically unsound position. But then, this whole thought experiment is unsound. Observation shows that you don't get something for nothing.)

Another note, there would most likely be extraterrestrial life, as there are millions of places in the Cosmos where life might develop. Life may bring with it technology. If one is on a planet like ours which is situated in its galaxy just so, to see out to the heavens, one ought to be able to see the evidence. How so? Well there are billions of stars and so on, millions of places for possible life and technology. In one of those places, technology may have existed for millions of years. How high can it go? What is physically possible? (Nothing shall be impossible for them.) Once one of the races in the race had figured out technology on a massive scale, an exponentially increasing technology, they would be moving stars around, controlling light as the ultimate source of energy. They would be time-travelling and the like. All of this would leave a trail of evidence and would be the type of thing you would expect to see.

That is, given philosophic naturalism. (It begins to sound like Star Trek to me. All of this is the modernist mythology based on a new form of religion. It is internally consistent, in some ways. Anyhow, enough with the thought experiment....)

Stephen Hawking notes that no one has or ever will figure out time-travel, or we would have met them already.

Given the Christian mythos, a God who creates time, can time travel. So how could anything not go the way God would have it go? It seems an obvious point that one who can time-travel can always go back and do it over. Yet if someone is limited by their character or nature so that it is just not in their nature to do something, then they will not do it. But enough, I will stop random philosophizing at this point. Perhaps it is just in my nature to do so.

No comments: