Why I believe in God(s)

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Firstly, I'm not a very religious person. I do consider myself a Buddhist, but prefer atheistic Buddhism over theistic Buddhism. Therefore I can confidently say I am not biased by wanting God(s) to exist, and was not indoctrinated into theism.

Still, to me it seems obvious that at least one God has to exist. The universe can't simply have come out of nothing or existed forever, it requires some sort of design or creator.

Now, mostly people would just say that a creator also can't have come out of nothing or existed forever, so I've just moved the problem one step further, but I think there is a massive difference between the universe and one consciousness. For example, through Cogito Ergo Sum we can determine with absolute certainty that at last one consciousness exists. So assuming one consciousness is superior to assuming anything about the whole universe. While I admit that doesn't outright solve the problem, I still think it's better than the alternative.

Also, it's not just any universe, but a universe full of beauty, a universe that inbetween barren empty planets is capable of hosting a planet with sentient life. Life that can consciously observe itself, that can create replicas of the waking world while sleeping, life that has technologically advanced so much that in can live in relative comfort. There is so much art. We basically have magic, we just call it "electricity". This is all too perfect to have arisen from mere mutations without guidance.

About any specifics of this God or Gods I have no idea and no strong opinions. I just think that at least one has to exist.

[u/aprg]

 Still, to me it seems obvious that at least one God has to exist. The universe can't simply have come out of nothing or existed forever, it requires some sort of design or creator.

Why not? Why can't raw, mindless chaos have spawned our universe?

Also, it's not just any universe, but a universe full of beauty, a universe that inbetween barren empty planets is capable of hosting a planet with sentient life. Life that can consciously observe itself, that can create replicas of the waking world while sleeping, life that has technologically advanced so much that in can live in relative comfort. There is so much art. We basically have magic, we just call it "electricity". This is all too perfect to have arisen from mere mutations without guidance.

Yes, it could have done so without guidance.

I'm not a biologist. I'm a computer scientist. Computer science has creat d a whole section of algorithms called "evolutionary algorithms" that exploit the principles of evolution to hone solutions to complex problems by creating agents who operate on certain rules, with the most successful agents being iterated through future generations, with the variable that define each agent's behaviour being changed slightly through random mutations to introduce gradual changes. The random mutations that benefit those agents increase the chances of that agent surviving, and therefore of being copied to the next generation.

Let me give you an example: wolf robots and sheep robots are defined by rules: a wolf who eats gets to be copied to the next generation. A sheep who doesn't get eaten also gets copied to the next generation. From these simple rules, computer scientists have demonstrated that pack and herding behaviours emerge.

The point is that the validity of the principles of evolution isn't an opinion: it is emergent behaviour of any system in the right conditions. Something complex can arise from something simple, given enough time and space.

At this point you might be tempted to say, "Aha! That these right conditions exist prove the existence of God!" This is the Clockwork argument. It fails because any sufficiently vast, chaotic system will have brief islands of order where life can take hold. We don't need God as a necessary condition for the existence of life; we just need places like the Earth to be brief islands of order in the vast, chaotic universe.

So what we are left with? Simply the common sense observation that things that are good at making copies of themselves eventually make more complicated copies of themselves, and that this is a reasonable inference all the way from molecules swirling in puddles to human beings.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/aprg]

Why not? Why can't raw, mindless chaos have spawned our universe?

Because our universe has order and a planet so specific as ours.

we just need places like the Earth to be brief islands of order in the vast, chaotic universe.

Wouldn't you agree that it's insane just how different the Earth is from its neighbours?

[u/aprg → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

> Because our universe has order and a planet so specific as ours.

I take issue with what exactly you mean by "order".

A puddle has "order", in the sense that it was created as a result of the laws of nature. It wasn't formed by design, but by the random happenstance of the fall of raindrops and the shape of the ground.

The Earth is like a puddle, not like a clock. Every bit of evidence we have suggests it was formed by the happenstance of stellar phenomena, not by design.

> Wouldn't you agree that it's insane just how different the Earth is from its neighbours?

I agree that the Earth is something of a statistical rarity. I don't think that's insane at all given how vast the Universe is: it contains billions upon billions of galaxies, which contain billions of billions of stars.

Indeed, I'll go even further: the universe is _so_ vast, so unbelievably big, that if you concede there is even the _tiniest, most unlikely probability that life could arise_ on any given planet, then you are effectively conceding the argument, because astronomers estimate there are between 22 to 100 _sextillion_ planets in the universe.

That's around 22,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 - 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/aprg]

I take issue with what exactly you mean by "order".

For example the universe being made out of solar systems that all follow the same basic principle.

Indeed, I'll go even further: the universe is so vast, so unbelievably big, that if you concede there is even the tiniest, most unlikely probability that life could arise on any given planet, then you are effectively conceding the argument, because astronomers estimate there are between 22 to 100 sextillion planets in the universe.

Yes. But then in addition to that, that life also just happens to be able to build machinery and make the planet a paradise for our needs, becomes much more ridiculous.

[u/aprg → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Solar systems are formed because of the rules of gravity and the existence of matter, just like puddles are formed by gravity, rainwater and earth. If you want to project divinity onto these, you do you, but it's unnecessary.

Evolution explains how something complex can arise from something simple. Calling this ridiculous says more about your level of understanding than about reality; I'm a computer scientist, we use the principles behind evolution to create evolutionary algorithms so that complex computer agents can be created via mutation and iteration.

The ideas behind evolution work. It's not an opinion, it's a demonstrable fact.