To all,
I requested the opportunity to start a new thread. The purpose of the old thread had changed significantly. I felt the old name had become misleading and might cause lower participation. The discussion had just barely begun. Only a few messages were lost. I feel they can easily be added anew by the members. I will begin this new thread with an explanation of its purpose. I will resubmit the five questions I had posed.
The Purpose: To determine what is true, false or presumptuous about our current level of understanding about the nature of the universe.
It is my belief there is a general presumption that the fundamental operation of the universe is sufficiently and probably correctly described by theories that were formulated from a mechanical viewpoint. There is an ongoing search for a physics theory of everything that some feel may be within our reach. It is my impression that other important sciences are strongly influenced by the conclusions offered by theoretical physics. I see the result of this practice revealing itself in a mechanical line of thought passing from one science to another. When this line of thought reaches into analyses of life and intelligence, I see it revealing itself in ideas such as the mind and emotions are machine-like products of known, mechanical properties or causes.
I take the position that life and intelligence are not the result of mechanical properties. I additionally take the position that the mechanical theories of the operation of the universe are incorrect. My view is definitely a minority or perhaps even a singular point of view. It is not a Biblical point of view. I have no interest in arguing in favor of Special Creation or of events such as a world wide flood. I find myself almost isolated from both the mechanical scientific point of view and the prominant Creationist point of view. However, my position is that mechanics is not the key to understanding the operation of the universe. I believe we will learn the true nature of the universe by discovering and analyzing the nature of intelligence. I believe it is the single, important fundamental property of the universe. I do not claim to know of or even to conclude that it had an original cause. I presume that I stand alone with this view at least here within the Hypography Forums. If I do not, then I would appreciate hearing from others who agree.
Now the challenge I present is this: I am assuming the position of a dissident inside a scientific box in which I do not wish to remain confined. However, I must work my way out of that box. Those who disagree with me are invited to try to keep me in that box. The method I will follow is to move step by step in an orderly fashion. I will not try to jump out of the box by making grand pronouncements and sweeping judgements. In return, I will not stay in the box as the result of others using these kinds of declarations against me.
I resubmit the five statements that I would make and would like to have evaluated by others. They are:
1. The increase of entropy gives direction to the future of the universe.
2. Gravity gives direction to the future of the universe.
3. Electric charge gives direction to the future of the universe.
4. The strong nuclear force gives direction to the future of the universe.
5. The weak nuclear force gives direction to the future of the universe.
I offer the meaning of direction here to be an irreversible change from one state with a recognizable trend toward a new, future state. This definition can be modified by others. It should not be mine only.
These statements can be argued against or even reworded by others. The goal is to get them right. The opinions expressed can be either scientific or philosophical. I invite correctness. I believe that if things are not taken for granted, I will get out of the box. These five statements are the beginning of a journey I feel is worth travelling. I ask those who previously expressed their views to please resubmit them. I apologize for this inconvenience and would appreciate your renewed participation.
James
Quote:
Message from Tormod
This is where the "Thread previously known as Toward an Intelligent Design Science" will continue.
During the operation to split the threads I lost the last 10 posts, so the final posts in the old thread are no longer available. I aplogize for this.
James, edit this thread to restart your discussion.
|
