Whether you believe in a universe or a multiverse or something bigger is not my concern. I will simply call it "everything" in this thread.

Pardon me for my simplicity but...

The designer of everything is simply Nature itself, the most balanced force. The top of the hierarchy.

Nature is not stupid because it created a moth with no mouth or mr.kitty 55 without a brain or because millions died because of one misunderstood terrorist or because one titty is bigger than the other on a pron star or because little babies die without having lived.

Whether perfect balance of "everything" is possible or not is not my concern either. All i know is that nature is the most balanced. Whether time had a beginning with the big bang or will have an end with a reverse cycle is also not my concern. All i know is that time's age is indeed infinity because even if it stops, it will start again just the way it did before. And so with the infinity of time, perfect balance can be achieved, but only by nature. Maybe perfect balance is already existing in this"everything" and maybe it always will, maybe for every billion people killed in earth, there will immedietly be a billion born in another part of everything.

I'm not sure if this post does justice in proving that nature is designer. I am just an average writer who just didnt fall into bullshit stories. I don't care how much flaming will occur here and I dont care if you don't believe me. Just know that you got a glimpse of the truth while wandering aimlessly across the boards of totse.

Maybe perfect balance is already existing in this"everything" and maybe it always will

;)

I'm not sure if this post does justice in proving that nature is designer.

I don't think it does, but I also do not agree with the "designer" theory. I don't think God is separate from all, some sort of big person who thought up/designed and actively created everything. I believe that God is all, the oneness of all, of all possibilities, and that they all simply are. Or that, all is.

Good post man.

But what does it mean that 'nature is the designer'? To me, this seems similar to if a large rock was sitting in the middle of the road and you stated "the rock is that which blocks the road." Ok, it is blocking the road, but not 'on purpose' or knowingly. That is to say, nature is nothing but a process, one with no aim, goal, or cognizance. So giving it praise or blame for doing x or not doing y is inane.

Just know that you got a glimpse of the truth while wandering aimlessly across the boards of totse.

Before you can make a claim of truth, you must show some evidence.

While your speculation is rather comforting, it is droll and unoriginal, but the most important thing to bear in mind is that it is pure specualation. So, you can understand why I hesitate to be awed by it, or the glimpse of "truth" provided by it.

That is to say, nature is nothing but a process, one with no aim, goal, or cognizance. So giving it praise or blame for doing x or not doing y is inane.

So? What isn't purposeless? Or, at least, cannot be regarded as purposeless?

Should nature have knowingly made everything? Why? does it even matter.. ?Who says the designer needs to knowingly make everything or unknowingly make everything? I never said Nature only does X or not Y. I'm sure my post said it made everything, which consists of x y z and maybe even u. =)

Do music directors know the outcome of the song when they begin to make it? Do movie directors plan out exact expressions for actors to express thereby planning an exact reaction from the audience in doing so? No probably not, they figure it out while doing it, so they did not know the final design at one point. It doesnt matter if it knows or doesnt know what it is making. All that matters is that it does what it does or already did what it did.

As for evidence, ask yourself this question, "What is one thing that nature did not create?" Other than the highly retarded answer that states nature didnt create nature or itself.. you will find 0 things that nature did not directly or indirectly make. If your like me and can't find anything it did not create, then would'nt you believe that it would be this "Designer"?

I'm sorry that you are not awed by my speculation that nature is designer. Maybe you would be awed if it was a huge mechanical factory dishing out random pieces of rock from the corner of the universe or a white unicorn that had "everything" in a tiny ball at the center of the universe and all it did was poke the ball slightly and exactly at the center with its pinpoint horn accuracy causing the big bang.

So in other words, you want to personify natural processes for no good reason while providing no good evidence? Gotcha.

So? What isn't purposeless? Or, at least, cannot be regarded as purposeless?

Me typing this response, I am doing it with a goal and am doing so knowingly.

Should nature have knowingly made everything? Why? does it even matter.. ?Who says the designer needs to knowingly make everything or unknowingly make everything? I never said Nature only does X or not Y. I'm sure my post said it made everything, which consists of x y z and maybe even u. =)

Do music directors know the outcome of the song when they begin to make it? Do movie directors plan out exact expressions for actors to express thereby planning an exact reaction from the audience in doing so? No probably not, they figure it out while doing it, so they did not know the final design at one point. It doesnt matter if it knows or doesnt know what it is making. All that matters is that it does what it does or already did what it did.

As for evidence, ask yourself this question, "What is one thing that nature did not create?" Other than the highly retarded answer that states nature didnt create nature or itself.. you will find 0 things that nature did not directly or indirectly make. If your like me and can't find anything it did not create, then would'nt you believe that it would be this "Designer"?



To give something the endowment of label 'designer', it would seem, implies that there is some entity that has an aim and is cognizant of what they're designing. That is, if I passed out with a crayon in hand and woke up to see I drew a few lines on my wall, I wouldn't say I designed it. Nature is nothing in-itself, but rather a label we attach to any process we can empirically identify.


Maybe a music director doesn't always 'know' what the final product may be, but "nature" can never "know" anything.

Well Kiko, in that case, there is no designer.

If you don't want to call Nature a designer, thats fine but then you'd have to believe there is no designer.

The designer can't be of limited form or size unless ofcourse we're talking about Gods. The designer would have to be responsible for starting the design of the entire... universe.

Maybe my post would have made more sense if I said, God is nature or God may become the force of nature and control it at his will. With the power of nature, he has control over everything. We all want the designer to be a thinking being but it just doesnt have to be.

It's not that I didnt want to bring God into this... but because it simply does not matter. Nature... the way I see it.. is just balanced already, why do we need to personify it? To say nature did something is implying it did it with pure perfection. The only perfection that matters is balance. The only way to break the universal balance is UNREALism. There are many things we don't understand and so we say its UNREAL. I do not believe in UNREALism. There is no such thing. There are things we understand and things we don't. There are things we are incapable of understanding, but that still doesnt make it unreal as a whole. All nature can do is real processes. All we can do is real processes. The only thing that can happen is real processes.

"'nature'" can never 'know' anything."... or Nature can know everything.

Before you can make a claim of truth, you must show some evidence.
.

With respect, I must strenuously disagree with this statement. For one thing, this is a metaphysical forum--it is not court of law, nor is anyone on trial here, in any sense of the word. Many of us speak from our own experience, but I contend that there is no way to really prove or disprove many of the statements so made.

And while numerous studies have validated various forms of ESP, many of the most spectatular manifestations of various so-called paranormal stuff are singular, not prone to be duplicated. This is directly contrary to the "scientific" method, which demands duplicatability (um, is that even a word? oh well. . . .)

Jesus is supposed to have said that the kingdom of God is within us. Ancient Vedic sages said that we are not in the world--the world is in us. Many modern writers state that all the love, strength, and power we need now or will ever need is within us--we need only own it and use it--and if you do not go within, you will surely go without. Thus, to me, the only evidence I require to determine whether or not a statement is valid is how it resonates within my heart--whether or not it feels right.

Take the notion of oneness--thsi is at the heart of most metaphycial systems and is older than recorded history. But getting a handle on the truth of this is next door to impossible if one only uses one's brain to suss it out intellectually. But one can grasp it, grok it in fullness in an instant, if one only listens to one's heart and soul.

Take the notion of oneness--thsi is at the heart of most metaphycial systems and is older than recorded history. But getting a handle on the truth of this is next door to impossible if one only uses one's brain to suss it out intellectually. But one can grasp it, grok it in fullness in an instant, if one only listens to one's heart and soul.

I think that the oneness of all, and the 'allness' of one, can be described mathematically.

I think that the oneness of all, and the 'allness' of one, can be described mathematically.

Been Done! Check out the book by Gevin Giorbran "Everything Forever - Learning to See Timelessness" (Enchanted Puzzle Publishing 2007) http://everythingforever.com/

Cheers:)

Been Done! Check out the book by Gevin Giorbran "Everything Forever - Learning to See Timelessness"

I will.

Due to the laws of physics:

1) Everything is pre-destined. Everything due to the laws of chem/phys that happened before will create a 100% predicable future.

2) 10th dimension folds in space and time upon contact create a big bang in another universe. This, through quantam mechanics and general/special relativity allowed a universe to exist under the perfect physical laws-- our universe.

/end
There is no nature.

Thus, to me, the only evidence I require to determine whether or not a statement is valid is how it resonates within my heart--whether or not it feels right.



Surely you only use this method in religious matters...? It seems a poor method, since if you started out in the wrong direction, that is, with predispositions or early propositions that did not coincide with truth, then your 'feelings' will tend toward these falsehoods as well, creating a vicious cycle. By "heart" I take it you mean the brain and instinctive feelings.

Due to the laws of physics:

1) Everything is pre-destined. Everything due to the laws of chem/phys that happened before will create a 100% predicable future.

2) 10th dimension folds in space and time upon contact create a big bang in another universe. This, through quantam mechanics and general/special relativity allowed a universe to exist under the perfect physical laws-- our universe.

/end
There is no nature.

Source for one and two? Those statements sound a lot like speculation, not fact.