Recent news have announced that Stephen Hawking believes that creation did not require a creator, going against modern conventional christian culture. Physics have toppled many theories and we have to embrace that fact that it should not be treated second place to religion in 'the search for truth'. Who is to say that these religious beliefs are not as 'untruthful' as science, considering that religion is molded by humans, therefore leaving room for biasedness and unreliability of sources.
The battle between creationists and evolutionists is still not over today. There is sufficient scientific evidence today to say that evolution is a probably phenomena that created the variety of organisms we see today. After all, we don't see odd otherworldly creatures springing out in the wild nowadays. From my point of view, since evolution is a more logical process to happen, it is more likely to be true, though I cannot rule out the possibility that creationism is 'more right', for someday logical argument might be presented about creationism.
That was a controversial example. One thing we cannot deny is that the Earth moves around the sun, not the other way round. To be extremely precise, in fact neither moves around the other, as gravitational attraction is mutual and motion is relative. However this was an idea banned in ancient times. People preferred to believe that the world revolved around them. A perfect example of how religion is not foolproof. Created by humans, subject to errors. But the best we can do would be to think logically and listen to our conscience and observe 'the truth around us'.
(For the sake of argument again you can say that our conscience is a dimensionless concept instilled into us by aliens in order to trick us and our logical system is actually entirely flawed and yet we do not spot the paradoxes beneath them because our mind is not so great to comprehend them)
But look at the title, this post isn't supposed to be about searching for truth. As I was thinking about Stephen Hawking on the bus quite some time ago, I realised that I came to a very fundamental question.
How is the existence of existence justified?
Based on definition, we live in a world that exists. Many people believe that this world originated somewhere in the distant past, and so do I. When I say the world I don't just mean the universe. Maybe clusters of Universes, from the beginning to the end of time.
If we believe in a creator, then who created that creator?
If we do not believe in one, then there must be a process that make this world work. Maybe a process which causes the world recycle itself time after time spontaneously? Then isn't that process 'something'? What created that process?
Why does something exist, rather than nothing?
Soon we realize that this question is itself a paradox. Any attempt to answer that question will result in a contradiction.
It's no use thinking about it, and it serves no purpose, neither would the world be made a better place if you know the answer.
It's just a thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment