"Any attempt to formulate a "God" concept presents the thinker with the
problem of an
infinite regress. You have no right to the words "rational" or "logical"
if you try to evade this issue."
Well, I certainly wouldn't want to lose my right to use those words, so I
will see what I can do to address the issue.
Basically, the issue is how to form the theory for the beginning of the
Universe without having the problem of an infinite regress. Someone
might say an intelligent being created our universe. Well, how did
*that* universe start? Another intelligent being created it. And so on.
Infinite regress. Another theory is the Big Bang theory. Some say that
nothing existed and then suddenly the Big Bang was in progress. That
seems to evade the infinite regress problem. But if nothing existed,
then how did the Big Bang occur unless there existed a way for it to
occur? Can something truly come from nothing? Of course, nothing isn't
anything, so it doesn't exist. So there is no reason to even consider
it. The only thing worth considering is the something that does exist,
because that is all there is to consider. So asking how this Universe
began is really asking how it came from nothing. But "nothing" doesn't
exist; it is pure fantasy. So, does that mean the Universe has no real
beginning, since it's impossible for it to not exist, since the state of
nothingness doesn't exist? If the Universe has no real beginning, then
how do we explain its existence?
The real question is: Why is there something, instead of nothing?
I don't think that question has been answered satisfactorily yet. My
answer is that "nothing" doesn't exist, so "something" is the only other
option. But that is just playing with words and doesn't really answer
the question. Why does anything exist?
Well, I'm still evading the infinite regress issue, but hopefully I've
distracted you long enough to reclaim my rights to use the words
"rational" and "logical".
David Musick (DavidMusick@juno.com)
- Continual improvement is the highest good.