The logical fallacy of creation

Originally posted by bsbray11
Rather than a myth, I think creation stories are metaphors. Different word but I agree with you in concept: there really was no "beginning."


Even science is beginning to recognize this as they explore concepts of time being non-linear, multiple timelines and all of that. From a different perspective, time as we know it would not exist at all, but would be more akin to different localities where different things are happening.

Actually science isn't suggesting this. A handful of theoretical physicists with book deals are suggesting this, and the rest of science is shaking its head at how inane it is as a viable premise.

Creation stories or "genesis" as a metaphor though is useful for every sentient being here involved in co-creation. We are constantly creating our lives. As far as that creation goes, there can be a logical order to it, if that's what befits you.

edit on 16-4-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)

The traditional story of genesis is an allegory, that's true. It's actually an allegory concerning the creation of Earth, and only the Earth. Only American Evangelicals actually believe it to be literally true. That said, there was an actual genesis of physical existence, and long before there was any level of consciousness or intelligent thought. None of it violates the basics of raw logic, and the simplicity of it is pretty disarming.

Originally posted by SoulDominion

Originally posted by NorEaster

I'm pretty sure that all the staples of traditional wisdom are getting set to be tested for their viability soon. Once one of them tumbles, the whole universe will become a new place for those with the courage to look at it all with fresh eyes. Not that anything will have actually changed, but when you discover a breakthrough truth, it may as well have completely reconfigured.

edit on 4/16/2011 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

I think we will always have nothing but more questions than answers as time goes by. I think the breakthrough truth will be more theories and finally the endgame will be all the same as of where we are now. But like you and many others we all have our own unique view, and neither is fact, only opinions and theories.

I don't think the majority of this planet could handle the truth either way. We cannot even help ourselves now with all the tools we have that could actually better our own nations.

But keep the dream alive, it's better to want to know something than nothing at all.

Actually, the answers have been worked out, and whether you want to believe they have or not is irrelavent. The majority on this planet can easily handle the truth. Mainly because the truth dovetails so naturally with what they already know about what's real. It's not a spectacular mystery, or a mind-bending paradox. That kind of crap is what people manufacture when they don't know the truth, and feel that they have to defend a flawed initial premise. After a while, the entire theory begins to take on completely absurd levels of convolution, as the author struggles to address obvious fatal inconsistencies.

Mystical transformations and fantastic modulations of perception are easily constructed, but they don't affect the extremely simple tenets of physical reality - the only actual real that there is, by the way. That said, our world has one simple transition to make - and it's in the field of simple physics - before any of this will ever make full and completely natural sense to everyone. But once that's been accomplished, the answers will come fast and furious.

Originally posted by SoulDominion
True knowledge lies within. You have to chose what you truly want to believe in first. Warping your mind will make it warp more. Try to choose what you think occured, and use science and your heart then compare. Thats the easiest it will get.

Once you get there, your golden.

There are many levels at which I could answer here. I will just stick with of course it is easy but you do need to warp your mind because it is programmed to understand and function in physical a very limited part of physical reality

I choose to think that nothing occurred, science knows very little as of yet is still in its infancy understanding the world about as well as a newborn understands physics and my heart will naturally take me to safety.

If you want easy, simple, and security always follow your heart / instincts, they will take you there.

I want knowledge.

reply to post by Jinglelord


I have over the last few years changed my point of view on what you call "creation". We think in terms of birth, life then death. But with thought, creation is a continuing process. For that process to end, at least "here" means death. It has been suggested that consciousness arose somehow, someway, before everything else. And to me that makes no sense at all. It just may (barely) make sense if the multiverse version of our "universe" is true. Before our "big bang" which according to membrane theory was when one edge of another universe "touched" or "tapped" another brane, a fissure was created. The reaction was powerful enough to go beyond creating not just new "particles,etc." But a null space that was occupied by the most effective spacial structure that could "fit". That at least in our case became the universe with its physical laws we now live with in. People often do not understand the events at the our big bang, because they seem to violate causality. But it was not that the new "universe" moved through something else as it expanded faster then light. Because there is no need to contradict relativity.

It expanded through an "absolute vacuum" and was not constrained by the laws of a universe that in effect did not yet exist. What moved was space itself as the infant universe inflated. The concept behind the "real" warp drive does not use expended propellant to move mass that increases just by moving very fast. Go fast enough and even a single atomic particle will not get enough energy to break the light barrier in this universe. But if you stand still you can in theory move space around you. But for the moment that remains awkward. You need to generate the energy that is embodied in the planet jupiter. Talk about an electric bill. But there might be a way to maneuver around that problem, as well. We'll see.

reply to post by Jinglelord

Well whatever it is, it appears to be a design of some kind, like a work of art, even as an eternal evolutionary process, or more precisely, something founded and based upon...an idea, or more specifically, a thought process, no matter how incomprehensible or unfathomable that might be from our perspective - nevertheless, I think a very strong argument can be made that the only rational explation for the occurance and phenomenon of existence, is that it arose from an idea, with an intent or a design, and therefore a purpose. Scares the atheists I realize to posit such a thing, but the alterative doesn't make any sense, as to why and how is it, that there is something and not nothing at all. Either way, it's an extraordinary miracle, that it is here and that we are here discussing it.
I say that our universe is founded in a monistic idealism (consciousness, not matter is primary) rather than a materialist monism or realism (matter alone is primary).
As a "chicken or egg first" deduction, I think there's a powerful argument to be made that the idea preceeds every manifestation of form, and that therefore, this first/last cause or prime mover of existence could very easily be likened to a mind of God of which our mind is also a part ie: you can test the voracity of this first cause premise in terms of it's potential for "gnosis" or knowledgable awareness and understanding, with an aspect of that same mindstuff..

reply to post by Jinglelord


Don't snuff him so quickly people! He actually brings up an argument that is as old as even the Greek philosophers... who created the creator? If op is interested he may check out "Problems with Philosophy" (I forgot the authors name) It has devoted an entire section to this issue.

A few explanations could be: God is the "First necessary being" (it is impossible for him/her not to exist), There is no god, etc.

It seems somewhat hypocritical for members of a site that claims to deny ignorance to be so reluctant in having a discourse for a topic such as this.

Even if a person is a Trolling...If you are true in your convictions, should it not be your self proclaimed duty to address such trolls.--------The Truth should always rise above fallacy...no matter how many times it is challenged.

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by SoulDominion

Originally posted by NorEaster

I'm pretty sure that all the staples of traditional wisdom are getting set to be tested for their viability soon. Once one of them tumbles, the whole universe will become a new place for those with the courage to look at it all with fresh eyes. Not that anything will have actually changed, but when you discover a breakthrough truth, it may as well have completely reconfigured.

edit on 4/16/2011 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

I think we will always have nothing but more questions than answers as time goes by. I think the breakthrough truth will be more theories and finally the endgame will be all the same as of where we are now. But like you and many others we all have our own unique view, and neither is fact, only opinions and theories.

I don't think the majority of this planet could handle the truth either way. We cannot even help ourselves now with all the tools we have that could actually better our own nations.

But keep the dream alive, it's better to want to know something than nothing at all.

Actually, the answers have been worked out, and whether you want to believe they have or not is irrelavent. The majority on this planet can easily handle the truth. Mainly because the truth dovetails so naturally with what they already know about what's real. It's not a spectacular mystery, or a mind-bending paradox. That kind of crap is what people manufacture when they don't know the truth, and feel that they have to defend a flawed initial premise. After a while, the entire theory begins to take on completely absurd levels of convolution, as the author struggles to address obvious fatal inconsistencies.

Mystical transformations and fantastic modulations of perception are easily constructed, but they don't affect the extremely simple tenets of physical reality - the only actual real that there is, by the way. That said, our world has one simple transition to make - and it's in the field of simple physics - before any of this will ever make full and completely natural sense to everyone. But once that's been accomplished, the answers will come fast and furious.

edit on 4/16/2011 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

The answers have not occured, thats why there are forums and discussions as thus. There are no answers my friend only theories, and if theories are your answers than you have no answer only the theory you think is the answer.

Look people, I'm not saying there is a Almighty that sits above the Heavens, I'm saying there is no proof that can otherwise 100% dismiss the other. You can through every single type of equation of thought or process, or emotion at me but in the end, you know, I know and some of the most brilliant minds on the face of the earth know there are no 100% answer.

To them their own belief is true so they will tell you it is correct and with the right words religion and science can sway you into whatever direction the mind you were born with has programmed you think.with.

But to sit on a forum and make claims that the answer is here or near is not right.

If it was, we would not have these discussions.

If it was there would be no reason to talk about it.

But again, I will get responses of how I am wrong which I know is the way it is when throwing cards into the pot of discussion, but again, I stay in the middle, I live and learn by life and experiences and what I want to believe in.

There are holes in both science and religion and until both sides get their '' alpha omega '' attitude into calm truce, these discussions of what you want the answers to get further away and start where the arguement begins, with human arrogance and self fullfillment.

There will be more arugements to come, it will never end and someone will always accuse the other as false. Accept it. I have.

I want the answers as much as anyone but I'm able to look at both sides and understand there is no simple answer for either, it's not that complicated.

what im wondering is why people think the universe had to be created? does everything have to created in order to exist? it there some kind of law that says everything had to be created?

why not just say the universe always existed? i dont see any proof for a creator and i have no good reason to want to believe there was one.

Well the trend nowadays is to not believe in anything, it is growing, it is the new age. And even if there is a God im pretty sure he has turned his back on us and we surely have deserved it by the way we treat each other.

I leave this discussion with this. Believe what you want, obviously many of you already have the answer so I guess there is no reason to have this discussion or ever have another one since you already know what people have been trying to answer for thousands of years. Kudos.

So I leave now. But what happens if all these beliefs you have come to pass and your wrong?

reply to post by SoulDominion


so is that it?
what if we're wrong?
sounds like fear to me, believing in something because you're scared of what might happen is bad. might as well pray to ALL gods just in case. or believe that comet elenin or whatever is really coming just in case.

i believe i will rot and lose consciousness when i die. im not afraid of death because i dont believe in any afterlife, but that's a whole other topic.

Oh come on. Creation implies intent. And while I now know its not quite true, the universe could have begun in theory completely by accident. I'm serious, don't believe me? With the use of math and good observational skills, I can walk into any casino on Earth and win close to 80% of the time any game of so called "chance" I don't have to stoop to using a biological technology they could not even imagine yet alone detect. Simple math and the house in time, will fall. Now you know why unless I'm going to Groom Lake you will not see me in Vegas. I don't like to make people nervous, they devolve to their base instinct's. But it could be done by chance and in time it would be, the creation of universe we live in may have and most likely tried an infinite number of times but in time we show up. And when it does and were part of it? We think were the center of the universe. Does that mean were responsible for the bill? By chance? Almost certain, but there may have been something more. But its unlikely we will ever know.

Originally posted by NorEaster
Actually science isn't suggesting this. A handful of theoretical physicists with book deals are suggesting this, and the rest of science is shaking its head at how inane it is as a viable premise.

Sounds like a layman synopsis to me. The OP is on track as far as I'm concerned. To say at some "time" there was absolutely nothing, in any sense of the idea, and then suddenly **BAM!!!!** everything came out of nothing, is nonsensical. It does not follow in any stretch of the word "logical."

What ever happened to "something can't come from nothing"? Are you a actually religionist?

Since nothing exists, we have empirical proof that there was no creation.

reply to post by chr0naut


Speak for yourself.

reply to post by bsbray11

Originally posted by bsbray11


What ever happened to "something can't come from nothing"? Are you a actually religionist?

I remember a debate for hours in a chatroom... The whole room listened to two of us talk about this very topic... He was studying Physics in Uni and I had a Philosophy background. After a few hours we came to an agreement... The premise we both came up with was....

"The universe didn't come from "nothing" but it was "still" and not moving ( i.e. NOTHING to the physical ). When it "MOVED" the creation process happened."

We both agreed on this... after hours of work.. lol

This thread I wonder comes under Finite/infinite and Immortality... rather then a logical premise much like "There are NO Absolutes", which of course is non-sense and NOT VALID. If there were NO Absolutes... That LAW and RULE would be an Absolute.... That reasoning will for ever lead people to the Art of Zen lol....

Rather then try to conclude how a First Cause was Caused... maybe trying to understand even simple paradigms in this, like how NO Time and NO Space... "functions"... Before trying to skip what is and would be essential in concluding any premise concerning the first cause.

All in all it's like a universe for a ceiling in this playroom.. lol A universe that not only is as far as we can see looking out... but as far as we can see looking in... looking behind the eyes.... searching for that first cause that looks out through our eyes.

What if were all part of creature so big that we cannot see.
We in turn are creatures within one of the bigger creature's atoms, the planet.
In turn this giant creature looks like a human being and is part of the same world we live in just an alternate reality.
In his world he is also a creature living in one of the atoms of a bigger creature and so on.

Where does it end?
It doesnt. When does Mario stop jumping for mushrooms?

I think its a creation, something along the lines of a holographic universe.

reply to post by Jinglelord


I think you are spot on about infinity, but that is about it. There is no fallacy in creationism because frankly we don't know how or why we are here. Did something create this universe? Is life just a random event that happened because of the Big Bang? In reality they are both just theories. We can't prove anything. The only thing that we can do is believe what works for us, so how is creationism a fallacy?

Just an opinion, but I think reality is far more interesting than we know. A computer-type program maybe? Like I said, just an opinion

I have spent a lot of time trying to figure out a way to understand how creation could have happened.

The best way i know is by thinking about dimensions.

If "God" is the infinite dimension, than all other dimensions must be different. But they are not just different, they have to be created by the infinite dimension as well. And exist within the infinite dimension, there are no other alternatives.

If you take a white sheet of paper and imagine that it is infinite in all directions. On this white sheet of paper you want a dot to appear smack in the middle.

Now, if you search the white sheet of paper, you wont find a dot to put in the middle, Because the dot doesn't exist.

You can take a pen and create the dot in the middle of the sheet of paper. But then the sheet of paper wouldn't be the creator. You would be. Because you use your pen to put the dot in its place on the sheet of paper.

How would the sheet of paper be able to create the dot without us doing it?

Since the sheet of paper is infinite in all directions it must be a constant. Because it has no reason to change. It is as big as it gets and as small as it gets at the same time.

Since the sheet of paper is infinite in all directions there is only one possibility for it to create the dot. The sheet of paper must compress it self to create it. It must compress it self to create a different dimension then it self.

But we have a problem, the infinite dimension is a constant and cant just randomly compress it self. It must have a will to do so.

Just think how long you would have to wait until your white sheet of paper would create a dot smack in the middle. It would never happen because it doesn't have the will or a reason to do so.

So a will to create must be present if you want the dot to appear.

Originally posted by Serafine
I remember a debate for hours in a chatroom... The whole room listened to two of us talk about this very topic... He was studying Physics in Uni and I had a Philosophy background. After a few hours we came to an agreement... The premise we both came up with was....

"The universe didn't come from "nothing" but it was "still" and not moving ( i.e. NOTHING to the physical ). When it "MOVED" the creation process happened."

We both agreed on this... after hours of work.. lol

That sounds a lot better to me too, than to say everything just suddenly came out of nothing somehow.

Really I think the whole problem is a lot of very complex multi-dimensional entities are involved that we can hardly conceptualize yet. I realize that probably sounds like a cop-out or pessimistic but I agree "something" seems to automatically be in motion compared to "something else" which is perfectly still.

But it just has to have always been there, no? Outside of Einsteinian space-time this might not be such an alien concept after all, since by definition time wouldn't apply. I think I've grown to side with the philosophers that stated, "it is impossible for nothingness to exist."

Originally posted by SoulDominion
The answers have not occured, thats why there are forums and discussions as thus. There are no answers my friend only theories, and if theories are your answers than you have no answer only the theory you think is the answer.

There are ways of eliminating complete fallacies in this field of inquiry. In fact, it's really easy to eliminate 95% of the inane crap that gets tossed around on forums like this. Of curse, you have to be capable of critical thinking, and most people aren't, but that doesn't affect reality or the debunking of that 95% of foolishness that is associated with discussion concerning this subject. Theories? Yeah, they are theories. But most of science and virtually all of cosmology is theories. Quantum physics is 100% theory, as is a good 60% of natural history. Christ, what makes you think that humans KNOW anything at all at a 100% level of assurance? What we KNOW is what we've been taught to believe, but that doesn't mean that reality isn't clearly defined and rigidly structured. It just means that human beings are not very good at choosing what they'll believe and what they'll dismiss as nonsense.

Look people, I'm not saying there is a Almighty that sits above the Heavens, I'm saying there is no proof that can otherwise 100% dismiss the other. You can through every single type of equation of thought or process, or emotion at me but in the end, you know, I know and some of the most brilliant minds on the face of the earth know there are no 100% answer.

What we can know is what is NOT true. And within the range of what's left, we can get pretty damn close to the general parameters of what is possible, and even plausible. 100% isn't necessary. Figuring out what's being claimed that are obvious lies and willful ignorance is plenty good for a start. That much has been accomplished, whether you believe it or not. Your belief has no impact whatsoever on what is happening.

To them their own belief is true so they will tell you it is correct and with the right words religion and science can sway you into whatever direction the mind you were born with has programmed you think.with.

But to sit on a forum and make claims that the answer is here or near is not right.

If it was, we would not have these discussions.

If it was there would be no reason to talk about it.

Really? Humans would not challenge clear and concise answers to these questions? Are you kidding me? This is Earth you're living on. On Earth everything is challenged and litigated and attacked and abused and lied about and slandered and run right into the ground. Did anyone ever tell you about the time when (allegedly) the actual son of God came here to this planet, and (you won't believe this) the people who he told that he was God's son actually killed him for saying it. This is a crazy place. People are maniacs on this planet.

Sh*t, you chanllenge some people on this subject and they go right after you as if you kicked their mom otr something. It's nuts. I don't know, man. This must be your first forum or something. Believe me, it gets real bad on some of these boards.

But again, I will get responses of how I am wrong which I know is the way it is when throwing cards into the pot of discussion, but again, I stay in the middle, I live and learn by life and experiences and what I want to believe in.

I'm not saying that you're wrong about how things have been. I'm just telling you that there's been a change, and that change is going to make its way around until you start hearing about it from places other than here. This is new, so I don't expect you to know about this already.

There are holes in both science and religion and until both sides get their '' alpha omega '' attitude into calm truce, these discussions of what you want the answers to get further away and start where the arguement begins, with human arrogance and self fullfillment.

There will be more arugements to come, it will never end and someone will always accuse the other as false. Accept it. I have.

I want the answers as much as anyone but I'm able to look at both sides and understand there is no simple answer for either, it's not that complicated.

The truth is that the answers are a lot less convoluted than anyone could've ever imagined. Nothing mystical and nothing magical. And absolutely nothing that doesn't dovetail naturally with everything that you've already grown to see as normal and completely dependable as reality. But like I said, this is very, very new, and I realize that until you hear it coming from more than one source, you won't feel it to be significant enough to look into. And that's okay too. Reality won't be going away any time soon. It is what it is, and there's no hurry.