|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2004 1:12 pm
A while back I did an argument on the existence of god.
I along with my friend came up with a pair of theories, these being the Tinker and Tower theories.
TINKER-by losarn
this theory simply states that when you make something out of legos you want to keep adding and altering it to improve and experiment.
This is a parallel to evolution and a reason for god to create it.
TOWER-by xeroxer
this theory is the statement that when you build the best tower out of legos that you have ever built you want it to stand unchanged for all time.
This is the metaphor for the standard view of creationism.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:17 pm
That is probably one of the best metaphors I have ever heard. I should try that on one of my friends... course she'll figure out a way to argue with it, something stupid and Godlike.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2004 7:29 am
The 'tinker' metaphore implies that God is not all-knowing, that he uses evolution as a tool to discover the ideal form (that is, the form which God is happiest with).
This idea of God is not compatible with most peoples' idea of God.
The tinker metaphore is also not compatible with secular science, because non-religious people do not believe that forms have been created by an entity (obviously).
Considering the fact that even if God did exist, there would be no way of verifying that God was all knowing, any rational Christian should accept the potential validity of the tinker metaphore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:59 pm
gigacannon The 'tinker' metaphore implies that God is not all-knowing, that he uses evolution as a tool to discover the ideal form (that is, the form which God is happiest with). This idea of God is not compatible with most peoples' idea of God. The tinker metaphore is also not compatible with secular science, because non-religious people do not believe that forms have been created by an entity (obviously). Considering the fact that even if God did exist, there would be no way of verifying that God was all knowing, any rational Christian should accept the potential validity of the tinker metaphore. An interesting point. But I would believe it would be fun to watch just the same. Take the domino chain it looks like this to begin with.... ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| you know its going to end up like this. ////////////////////////////////////__but it is still enjoyable to watch just the same. It still can support that he all knowing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:10 pm
If I could contribute to the Tinker concept?
What if one made "perfection", ie the perfect state for your tower, to be conditional on the environment or surroundings? For example, a hammer is the perfect tool when one needs to bash in a nail, but when the time comes for screws, the perfect tool is the screwdriver. That would make tinkering, or adding more legos, an essential part of maintaining perfection, or some close proximity. The Tower would be near-perfect for a while, but would eventually become obsolete as conditions change.
This would explain the role of Natural selection as a force to maintain near-perfection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:24 am
If God is omnipotent and created the world, then the world is already perfect. It may be that the capacity to change, including evolution, is a part of the world itself, which makes it perfect.
God is supposed to have made everything, which I supposed could include all time frames.
Of course, we aren't to know any of this. We cannot know (which is why it is irrational to believe any of it.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:53 pm
think of the bible as a part of your tower theory. now think of that tower being so complex that it has literally everything we will need to know until the apocalypse when we kill ourselves(dont get me started there) in essence, "dont kill your friend and sleep with his mother" is as true today as it was back then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:04 pm
gigacannon If God is omnipotent and created the world, then the world is already perfect. It may be that the capacity to change, including evolution, is a part of the world itself, which makes it perfect. God is supposed to have made everything, which I supposed could include all time frames. Of course, we aren't to know any of this. We cannot know (which is why it is irrational to believe any of it.) if god is omnipotent, and, according to the bible (i think) he is also omniscient, than he would have created us, the world, and everything perfectly, knowing exactly how it would turn out and what it would need to stay perfect forever, perfection means without flaws, if we are flawed, forcing us to periodically change to adapt and fix those flaws as they become exposed to certain conditions, than has god failed? and if he has failed, has he not then proven himself to no longer be omnipotent, omniscient, or both? doesn't necassarily dissprove god, but it does prove... i hope... that if he does exist, that he is either no more capable of foresight than any of us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 4:48 am
If anyone can prove that we are or are not flawed on some objective scale, I'd like to hear it. But I'm never going to; it can't be done.
You can make an infinte number of arguments based on God that vary with how you define God, but it's all meaningless drivel. Ultimately, the word 'God' is just a word. The concepts which we associate with God all have their own names and it is these concepts which we should deal with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 6:57 pm
While i agree with the metaphore, both seem rather irrelevent to me; but any information that would offer a chance for new exploration into the matter of god is cool to me biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2004 3:47 pm
k_gilmore gigacannon If God is omnipotent and created the world, then the world is already perfect. It may be that the capacity to change, including evolution, is a part of the world itself, which makes it perfect. God is supposed to have made everything, which I supposed could include all time frames. Of course, we aren't to know any of this. We cannot know (which is why it is irrational to believe any of it.) if god is omnipotent, and, according to the bible (i think) he is also omniscient, than he would have created us, the world, and everything perfectly, knowing exactly how it would turn out and what it would need to stay perfect forever, perfection means without flaws, if we are flawed, forcing us to periodically change to adapt and fix those flaws as they become exposed to certain conditions, than has god failed? and if he has failed, has he not then proven himself to no longer be omnipotent, omniscient, or both? doesn't necassarily dissprove god, but it does prove... i hope... that if he does exist, that he is either no more capable of foresight than any of us. A clever fundie would reply that God knows what's perfect better than we do, so we can't question his motives because he knows what he's doing. However, I do agree with you. I believe the concept of perfection to be an inherently unnecessary idea - what is its justification? If one is perfect, why seek to make everything else conform to this "perfection?" - and, as such, I don't believe that any God which may exist can possibly be as infinitely awesome as many Christians would have me believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:13 pm
Perfect is a well-defined word, but one with many possible variations. It can mean whole, or the most useful, among other things. But; take any object. It is the perfect form of that object; say, a cup. Everything else is different from that form, but the cup itself fulfills that form exactly; hence, it is perfect. It can also mean useful; for example, a screwdriver is the perfect tool for screwing in a screw.
If the world was made perfect, it could mean that it was made whole; which might imply God made the whole world, not only part of it. Or, it could mean the world fills some sort of purpose. Many Christians believe our purpose is constant worship of God. If we knew our purpose, would we want to fulfill it? Maybe suicide bombers have second thoughts, but they think they are fulfilling God's given purpose.
Perfect can also mean good to the maximum degree. But then, if being good isn't something we like, then how can it be considered good? It's supposed to be bad to steal bread, but what if you are starving? Then, do you really want perfect, or do you want to stay alive and be happy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
