2006-12-24 03:13:15 · 21 answers · asked by ? 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Disagree. Just because we don't understand something, does not mean there is a supernatural force guiding that something.
2006-12-24 03:15:28 · answer #1 · answered by a sock 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If that were the case, there would need to be something more complex than the thing more complex than the universe... and if that were the case, there would need to be something more complex than that......
You'd never reach the end.
The idea that the universe, or the eye, or any other mechanism is too complex to have been achieved by chance is an attempt by the religious to dispute theories of origins that don't rely on a supreme being. They claim that random chance is completely unlikely to produce such order... the odds are infinitley stacked against it.
What they fail to recognize is that there are likely infinite universes, of which we are on. And that in this universe there are an unimaginable number of stars, planets, etc. So, if a thing is very unlikely, then with an infinite number of nearly infinite universes, wouldn't it stand to reason that something highly unlikely in any single place, might come about SOMEWHERE?
2006-12-24 11:26:01 · answer #2 · answered by Deirdre H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, I disagree with more the way the question is phrased.
I would say that the universe; by 1) It's very nature with organized laws, checks and balances, this against that, mathematical ratios, 2) The laws governing the structure of any property, elements, or bodies;
Require an Intelligent Designer. The complexity of the designer is not known, nor can it be. That isn't the nature of the dilema. The nature of the problem is the structure of the universe itself. Not it's complexity. It's fabric. Lets say you have Universe B, that has simplistic laws. But if those same laws reflected Intelligent Design, well, that's the issue. What does the **nature** of those laws state regarding the origin of it.
The question as phrased, in my humble opinion, does not accurately reflect the nature of the universe and the associated dilema.
2006-12-24 11:19:45 · answer #3 · answered by raVar 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Disagree. That doesn't make sense. By that logic, the "something even more complex", itself would need a more complex explanation. Besides, evidence shows us that complex things arise from simple beginnings.
2006-12-24 11:14:50 · answer #4 · answered by nondescript 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Disagree. The complexity of the logic behind the universe is only directly proportional to your ability to understand it.
2006-12-24 11:22:07 · answer #5 · answered by vinslave 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the explanation for the universe is relatively simple, though the cause may not be. The explanation of all odd numbers (an infinite set) is 2n-1, a simple equation.
2006-12-24 11:45:11 · answer #6 · answered by neil s 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Disagree, by that logic then a Lego Building would have to be built by smaller, more complex Lego buildings instead of Legos.
2006-12-24 11:42:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
People would actually agree with this???? You just created an infinite upward spiral of complexity. It isn't even close to logical.
2006-12-24 11:24:19 · answer #8 · answered by Alex 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Disagree!!! the universe is immeasurable so how can you possibly explain it although some smart **** will try badly and try to justify thier religoius belifes in doing so.
2006-12-24 11:18:18 · answer #9 · answered by mrhoppy22 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
disagree....
why cant it be something simple....
who says de universe is complexed?...
n no i didnt mean god as an answer..
2006-12-24 11:21:02 · answer #10 · answered by i hate mosquitoes 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋