God Or Chance 2 (Post 11)

'The fool who has said in his heart, there's no God above.'

Well, if it isn't God responsible for all things and it isn't chance, then what is it? Well, I say, evolution is - and it is not the same as chance. But before I begin on evolution which is purely biological, let us look at a far bigger problem, the origin of the universe. The allure of believing in a designer for the universe is in the fact that it provides us with the satisfaction that there was some intention in our creation and, therefore, some purpose in our existence, that is – we were destined to be beforehand. This is also declared in the bible - "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you," God said to either Jeremiah or Ezekiel. 

I will cut to the chase and say that it is a well known fact that our planet is so delicately fine tuned in location, atmospheric conditions and composing elements that if a there'd been a most infinitesimally small alteration, there would have been no life ever on Earth. This is one thing that simply just happened - yes, by chance. Our planet just happened to be formed with the Big Bang in exactly the right location and with all the right conditions for life. Some clever folk have snorted at this and expressed their dissatisfaction in the metaphor - "Saying that nature with all its order happened by chance is like saying if we gave chimps typewriters, they could produce the works of Shakespeare by chance!" 

Yes, yes, the chances of a planet like ours occurring by chance are very small indeed; it would be like winning the lottery jackpot ten days in a row. But what people fail to see is that we are dealing with infinite time here. Mathematically, as long as something is possible by however small a margin even if it is one chance out of several billions, if given infinite time, it will definitely happen. What's the proof? The proof is we would have to get to the end of eternity to claim that it hadn't happened! So, if I have infinite time to play with, I will at some point win the lottery jackpot ten days in a row! This is basic Mathematics. 

Space out there had infinite time to play with; it was therefore possible for anything, however unlikely, to happen. And so, our universe and our planet were formed and here we are. I cannot tell you what caused the Big Bang; that is beyond my knowledge. Read up on what scientists are up to today; I hear they've recently discovered the 'God Particle' or Higgs Boson. But I can tell you that if you cannot subscribe to a Universe that came from 'nothing' because you think that that is ridiculous, then you cannot and should not subscribe to a creating God because, it is even more ridiculous on two counts – one, it is an unseen, unobserved and unverified entity and two, God who would be even more complex than the universe would also need an origin. And if you say that God, for which there is no evidence, had no beginning or came from nothing, then you admit that it is possible for something to have no beginning or come from nothing. So why not the universe which, at least, we can see and we have verified as real. In a nutshell it is more difficult to 'create' God than to create the Universe.

Science claims that all reality (everything that actually exists) is knowable and within reach of the human experience. Science can make this claim because before we can say something cannot be known, we would have to know that thing first and know that it cannot be known. 

In essence, I did reach some conclusion that could be labelled as the five A’s:

All reality is knowable   

All precise reality is known, deductible and obvious

All general reality is elusive

All general unknown ‘reality’ is object of research

All precise unknown ‘reality’ is imagination

Until it is known or deductible and/or obvious, it cannot be categorically termed ‘real’; of course, that is no claim that it is certainly unreal but a claim that it is the object of research as long as no precise definition of its attributes, traits or functions has been arrived at before the results of research show it to be so.

Therefore the only precisely defined reality we know should have been made explicit by research; any other is simply imagination. Every unknown reality under research such as the cure for some illness cannot have a precise enclosed definition and, thus remains a general reality – elusive. No general reality can be known; any known reality has to be precise. And as naturally follows, there can't be a precise but unknown reality; if it is precise, it is ipso facto known; any precise but unknown reality is imagination. 

To explain, if we know a lot about it - its attributes, qualities, likes, dislikes, feelings, actions, commands and yet, it is not readily reachable by objective human scrutiny or science nor is it openly observable to research, then it is imagination.