Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 > Well, why can't the universe just have existed forever with all it's > complexity? Eternal existence of universe is taught by taoism, if I remember well. It's a form of monism. Moreover, it is contradicted by Vedanta-sutra 2.4.20 saying that the Lord is both the primary and the secondary cause of creation. > We might not understand everything about the universe > know, but science shows that we have good reasons to think that the > laws behind the universe are very simple. So simple that in the > future we can wear them on the front of a T-shirt. I'd say those who have Radha-Krsna / mahamantra on their t-shirt, have the answer since the world is Their lila product, so to say. 8) > And the wacth-maker analogy is simply an analogy. We can't take such > analogies as certain proof of anything. Even if it was a good > analogy we can't even know anything about the intelligence, or > intelligences, behind the world. Why should we name it God? The watch maker analogy is a modern (coined by W. Paley) form of a Vedanta analogy: "Within the effect (world) the cause (Brahman) can be seen just as cobweb makes one [intelligent person] think of a spider." (Vedanta-sutra 2.2.15 paraphrased) When you talk about intelligence (either in sing. or in pl.), you're more of a monist or similar than a general atheist. ys Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.