seeds wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:04 am
seeds wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 7:21 pm
What I am saying (asking) is that if the doubters of intelligent design were asked to design a context of reality that was meant to awaken new souls into existence, then what would they do differently?
Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:57 am
For starters?
Forget the flying orbs.
And replace them with what?
In other words, describe a plausible alternative.
Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:57 am
I would definitely not integrate the reproductive with excretory organs!
Ah, but orbs such as the earth are indeed excretory organs.
They excrete (effloresce) the essence of life from the fabric of their being – an efflorescence that coats their surfaces.
Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:11 am
I don’t understand your criteria for plausibility?
My criteria for plausibility is that if you are going to create a dimension of reality that is capable of awakening new souls into existence, then not only must it be able to achieve that goal via the unique arrangement of its physical features,...
...but it must also appear logical (plausible) to beings who function at (or above) the human level of consciousness. Otherwise, we would probably be in a constant state of questioning and doubt as to the integrity of our surroundings.
Again, we are magnetically adhered to a ball that is flying through space at approximately 67,000 mph while being spun around - topsy-turvy - in a 24 hour rotisserie cycle. Yet, as we function on its surface, we are oblivious of any movement.
Such a “sleep-walking” type of obliviousness requires that our level of consciousness be attenuated in just the right amount in order to make our strange situation feel natural and believable to us (similar to our acceptance of the conditions taking place while being immersed in a vivid dream).
Consequently, the attenuation of our awareness can cause extremely intelligent humans to try and offer some kind of materialistic explanation for it all when, in fact, all they are doing is demonstrating the depth and degree of their somnambulism.
Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:11 am
In the hands of a creator plausibility is not a concern. Imagination is the only limit.
I could put a penis on your forehead. As far from your urethra as possible.
You want a flat Earth?
It disagrees with the laws of physics? Change the laws of physics!
Fine.
And to an ape or bovine level of consciousness, a change in the laws of physics that allows for a flat earth would not raise an eyebrow.
However, to the human level of consciousness, I highly doubt that the spectacle of standing on either side of a coin-like phenomenon - flipping through space - would feel as natural as an orb.
The point is that it (a flat earth) would make our context of reality seem way fishier** (i.e., less “plausible”) than it already is, and might cause us to question the integrity of this soul-creating illusion even more than we already do (especially since the discovery of quantum mechanics).
**
(Think about it. Even though the humans on the other side of this orb are literally upside-down from us, we are not vividly aware of it.
However, in the context of a flat earth, look down at the floor and imagine their upside-downness being inches away from where you are standing or sitting at this very moment. It would be totally bizarre.
Granted, it would be cool and fantasy-like. But that’s the problem, because I’m guessing that it would no longer feel as unquestionably natural as our orb world. Hence the plausibility issue.)
Logik wrote: ↑Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:11 am
You cave [sic] total creative freedom.
No, you would not have total creative freedom, not if you are attempting to stay hidden from your creation; not if you are attempting to make your embryonic progeny (your cosmic “offspring”) believe that their dimension of reality is a naturally occurring phenomenon.
_______