How do atheists & skeptics explain the existence of anything without acknowledging a Beginning or First Cause?

Question

Evolution had to start someplace At every level of existence in the physical universe, from subatomic particles, all the way up to single cell animals & far-flung solar systems, all fit into a hierarchy of being, from simple to complex, as does humanity & sentient intelligence itself. Given that, how can a non-belief system, which perforce must acknowledge this tiered level of existence & also must acknowledge the apparent Intelligence of not only the Human Race, but also the Intelligent design of every facet of existence, fail to also see that we, too, must have been preceded by some greater than our intellectual & physical selves? I submit to you, that it is illogical to acknowledge the existence of Reality, a well-ordered Universe, & sentient Beings, while at the same time refuting the fact that it all must have started at some point in the past, by a vastly superior, intelligent First Cause.

Some fine, logical arguments here both for & against. To those who can't find it possible to disagree without debasing themselves with primate-like rage, your arguments are dismissed. Those who don't understand concepts that have already been defined, then base their disagreement on that lack of understanding, your arguments too, are automatically dismissed. They not lack merit, but the understanding needed to carry on intelligent discourse.

It could be that we may never know the answers to questions such as these, or, it could be that the answers are already there, but that we refuse to see them. There are those who don't understand. There are those, who understand, but don't comprehend. There are those that comprehend, but can not accept. Within these various flaws of human cognition will be hidden what may well be the ultimate & simple truth of our existence, & our origins. That truth won't be discovered on a forum like this, simply because even if it were it would not be accepted.

Answer 1

The issue isn't whether there was a beginning.

The debate is what happened, and did it happen by divine will or the laws of multi-dimensional physics. And since none of us were there, the best we can rely on is guesswork and hearsay.

The flaw in your argument is that we must assume "Intelligent design of every facet of existence". That is an assumption, but not a necessary one. There are other explanations that make the math work, and none of those explanations require intelligence or external metaphysical guidance.

Those who believe that the universe was designed are fully entitled to do so. But there's no actual proof. That's the problem with the Intelligent Design model. It doesn't stand up to rational scrutiny. Check out the link below. That's a simple logical analysis of steps that would allow people to prove Intelligent Design as a valid model.

I'm an ordained minister. I have absolutely no doubt as to the existence of the divine, and how the divine has touched the universe. But I won't tell someone else what to believe.

And before I can support something as having the weight of a valid objective theory, it has to be able to answer some rational questions. Intelligent Design, as currently proposed, doesn't do that yet.

Answer 2

You make a lot of assumptions in your question.

What the heck is a tiered level of existence? What criteria are you using to classify and organize all beings? Why would such a system need to exist? Why would athiests and skeptics "have" to acknowledge such a system?

You also mention "intelligent design of every facet of existence." How can you make such a statement? How could you prove such a thing? You don't offer any evidence for this statement.

And who says the universe must be "well-ordered." I sure don't believe that. You should really do some research into other beliefs before being so critical.

Answer 3

As well thought out as your argument seems, it is flawed. It isn't so black and white as to say, "if we don't know what started everything, it must mean there is a god". Frankly, up until recently we thought that world was flat. Our intelligence it still in it's infancy, so how much could we possibly explain? There may never be a time when we fully understand how all this is, but there is a large gap in your logic if you go from not understanding where the origin of all things originates, to saying that it must have been the work of some higher being.

Answer 4

Is there a beginning? What of acausality and Virtual Particles in a Vacuum?

These are two possibilities for the origins of the universe. Trying to tie this with Evolution is intellectually dishonest as Evolution merely describes the origin of species.

You don't see people taking the theories of Cisternal Maturation and Vesicular Transportation in transportation between Golgi Apparatus and trying to have them answer the questions of life, now do you?

PS: The "design" we see in the universe is "Natural Design" not Supernatural. There are good indications to go with natural methods over supernatural methods (IE. Occam's Razor, the oddity of ill-designed systems, etc.)

PPS: The arrangement of order does not point to intelligence, as the structure does not resemble higher cognitive movements. Show me when systems are designed in such a way as to spell out in perfect Spanish "There is a god and its talking to you right now" and I'll accept the evidence pointing to a sentience instead of natural laws.

Answer 5

We don't have to aknowledge any of that until we have the knowledge to either proove or disproove. What you are presenting is speculation. Sure, the universe is complex. No, that does not make the presence of a supernatural intent in creating a given. Evolution in general didn't start anywhere, it's an idea. The evolution of man (or cat or dog or leaf or whatever) had to start somewhere, because it is a series of events. Never assume that the lack of a realistic answer justifies your far flung beliefs

Answer 6

There is an invisible purple spotted unicorn in my back yard. I don't have to explain it. This old book venerable book I have discovered entitled "Purple Unicorns and Why They're Invisible to Non-Believers" tells me I'm right. And if you don't believe me, the Book also points out you're going to be gored for eternity by the Great Rhinoceros for your callous disbelief. Okay, all kidding aside, your query is nothing more than an "intelligent design" rehash. I like the idea of the universe becoming self aware through sentient beings like us, but that universe doen't have to have human characteristics, morals, and it certainly doesn't have to conform with humanity's ignorance. It is what it is, why not let it be?

Answer 7

How does a fire begin? Because the laws of the physical universe we know allows for the combination of three conditions, namely an ignition source, a fuel and oxygen, to turn into the chemical process known as combustion.

How does life begin? because the laws of the universe we know allows for carbon molecules to be able to form into very, very long chains of incredible elegance; chains held together by combinations of ionic and covalent bonding, van der Waals forces and, of course, hydrogen bonds where there is liquid water.

How did life begin on Earth? By chance.

What keeps life from being wiped out? Chance. Pure, sheer chance.

There is no First Cause, and there never has been. It's all just the laws of this Universe that permit it. If the laws had been written differently, there'd have been no life and we wouldn't be here discussing it.

Answer 8

Why has there got to be a first cause? Like ages ago, humans were convinced that the world was flat and if we venture too far you fall off the edge. Later discovered the world was a globe... just because we can only understand reality in a certain way at this time, doesn't mean it has to be right. Scientific truths are as sand forms in a desert.

Then again ... if God created all things, who created God and who created the one who created god etc... ad infinitum ... if based on the theory that there HAS to be a first cause.....

Answer 9

we don't be conscious of. Gods at the instant are not intense on the record of possibilities until eventually there is a few information of gods. It does not somewhat restoration something to declare which you have defined a being as something that ought to stay outdoors area and time and led to the universe and so subsequently it would desire to have achieved so. you're transforming into past to your self. First coach a god exists and then set up that it exists outdoors area and time and ought to create universes. Then we are able to evaluate it a contender for a causal agent.

Answer 10

Who ever claimed there were sentient beings. I basically agree with you despite that. I don't believe there is a being who cares about humans or intervenes with their affairs. The universe had to start somewhere and I acknowlege it could have been an intelligent force but in my mind it could be something sneezed out of someones nose. (Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy) Just as likely.