Creation is the greatest Power in the Universe?

Post Reply New Topic

Agree or disagree? Why isn't creation named as a force in the Universe when it seems to be what everything in the universe in a constant state of doing... ?

I agree and think part of the reason more people do not agree is they 'see' reality AS noun instead of verb.

To 'see' the act of Creativity as GOD is to see GOD as Creativity to me.

And to NOT act WITH Creativity is NOT to act WITH GOD to me.

But of course I see GOD as Mother Nature True as FORCE it is, and yes it is an ever changing creative force in the ebb and flow of distance and space in all things and no things, as above so below inside and outside IS WHAT IT IS. :)

And A key is IS is verb. :)

There are Spectators in the play of what IS and tHere are Directors, Producers, and Actors of what IS verb of CREATION PLAY.

AND FOR THOSE who cannot Create and are Spectators of life AS NOUN, these words are likely gibberish to them. :)

It's not necessarily about God, AHD, it's about everything creating something. Everything does, doesn't it? Is there anything in this entire universe that doesn't create?

It's entropy, not creation, that everything heads towards...

Do you think that may be somewhat of a limiting view of reality considering IT MIGHT come back again.

Again, above as below AS waves wash out but they COME back in.

There is no REASON KNOWN NOW why the Universe CANNOT DO THAT TOO.

SO The EBB AND FLOW goes ON UNTIL someone PROVES OTHERWISE BUT UNTIL THEN IT is all poetry in TRUE EFFECT AND AFFECT OF VERB until someone with reason in NOW knows.:)

NO DOUBT FOLKS WERE UNSURE THE SUN WOULD COME BACK AFTER AN ECLIPSE UNTIL THEY COULD WITNESS IT THEMSELVES BEFORE Science helped them out, much later.

To think one knows IT ALL in an unchanging way is precisely the noun of falsehood I'm speaking of, for NOW. :)

GOD is only a humanly created abstract three letter word and that IS ALL.

The essence ascribed to IT CAN BE REAL AND IN MY OPINION THAT IS the overALL FORCE OF CREATIVITY.

SO I JUST added in my opinion, along with agreeing totally with your point here. :)

Do people still think that The Steady State Theory is reasonable?

Once again I implore you to research your thought bubbles. The laws of physics and the 4 basic forces of the universe are so called because they help predict and understand natural phenomena including themselves. Creation of life requires these laws and forces as it is a natural phenomena. Until someone can show (using empirical evidence) that creation in fact precedes these laws and forces it will be rightly regarded as a consequence of them rather than a cause. Scientific illiteracy in an age where knowledge is so readily at hand is barely inexcusable. You seem fascinated by the universe yet you don't seem willing to take the plunge into evidence based knowledge and prefer to muse like some contemporary aristotelian scholar.

The general definition of creativity is as follows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity



Even IF Stephen Hawking is correct in suggesting that the Universe creates itself, as GOD is the Universe as whole, by the way, as far as I am concerned, to bring that three letter word back in the conversation; EVEN IF ALL THERE IS, IS UNIVERSE ALL THERE IS IS CREATIVITY AS THE UNIVERSE IS CONTINUING TO CREATE itself in all things Humans know, feel, see and beyond these human abstract concepts of human perception and experience alone.

Friend, this is not a science project, alone, this is a philosophy, politics, and religion forum.

And that is what we are talking about, philosophy, and not the scientific method as GOD alone. :)

But I guess if I can bring GOD back in the discussion, it is just as fair that you should be able to bring back the material reductionism of science as 'we' ARE attempting to THINK OUT OF THE BOX. :)

Truly it's not the end of the world or science if Ana decides to be a philosopher, and express herself as such, in a philosophy forum.

At least that's what science suggests.

The science of philosophy that is (per technical definition of science, already discussed, as body of knowledge) that is never limited by IN the BOX thinking, per classical style philosophy, and not the new ways and waves of material reductionism in thought, which truly is IRONIC, IF one 'THINKS' ABOUT that, as thoughts cannot be fully measured by science, anyway, in any experiment known now. :)

Hell, there are still people who think Austrian and Supply-side Economics are reasonable!

The only thing I know for certain is that I know nothing for certain.

HOWEVER...

I consider creation as the product of intelligence and I see little in nature to suggest such. My reason tells me the universe is an incredible and intricate machine that seems to work by a knowable and predictable set of rules...

Who/what set the rules and the machine in motion is another matter entirely.


The study of the universe is a matter for science. The study of who or what created the universe is a matter for philosophy. And, the two activities are not mutually exclusive.

I for one do not limit the definition of creativity to human life, and I think to do so, in my opinion, is no different than suggesting that GOD is an anthropomorphic concept that thinks like humans per our tiny fractal level of existence.

SO yes, I KNOW nothing too, but it is equal fun to discuss nothing known, in my opinion @least.

Unless the "Dark Force" turns out to be just another mathematical quirk, the universe will eventually become filled with nothing but a cold haze of quantum particles left over from proton decay.

And considering that Stephen Hawking suggests the Universe can create the Universe out of Nothing.

That makes Nothing the greatest creative FORCE OF ALL.

AND THAT is like common sense or non-sense or perhaps ALL of this is BS.

In other words, ALL CARDS ARE STILL ON THE TABLE OF NOTHING NO 'MATTER' 'WHAT'. :)

THAT MEANS GOD AND OR THE UNIVERSE MIGHT BE A F

ART. ;)

AFTER all is said and gassed out.

And usually a big bang goes along with THAT 'SAID' but silent bangs could be possible, too, in the scale of NOTHING AS THE GREATEST CREATIVE FORCE OF ALL. :)

THIS is why philosophy is @LEAST equally as important as science as scientists tend to be narrow thinkers, OVERALL, PER NOTHING OR ALL AND DARK AND LIGHT thinking of nothing and all that is AS same.

AND PERHAPS scientists are both correct and incorrect about all that is.

And that makes philosophy KING and QUEEN per checkmate. ;)

It's just that I look around and see an awful lot of creating.

When I look around, I see an awful lot of already-existing matter being converted into different forms - nothing is being created from nothing, which is what "Creationism" is all about.