[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by ZGoten

But even though that's the case, what's more important is the fact that the absence of such an entity would not mean the absence of a deterministic functioning universe. Just because one cannot prove the theory true does not mean that it isn't. Of course one might wonder how this theory differs from religious views then. The answer is, that there actually is scientific evidence that would suggest a deterministic functioning universe, which is not the case for religions.

That is not true, and is the classical "Appeal to Ignorance" argument that often gets thrown around on the internet. On AS, it usually is "The show hasn't ended so you aren't allowed to make an opinion"

Yes, it's true that there is no way to prove impossbility. But if we accept this, then all discussion becomes worthless because then why even bother talking. You can't prove that there aren't pink unicorns running the universe, and any degree of absurdity can be defended. Instead, science has certain standards.

And science is definitely not like religion because when sanely applied states we can only theorize, not force truths on people. Or at the least not imply terrible punishment if you don't accept all of its "truths" and determinism.

Not all religions are like that of course, but the popular ones do seem pretty damned self centered in their popular interpretations to me, which generally give an infinitely inflexible interpretation of the universe (and thus far more deterministic) then any scientific argument can ever give.

But I'll invoke my own argument to uncertainty, just in case. How many religions do preach that other religions can be mutually true as them anyways?

There is no proof, which is correct, and there likely will never be, but there is evidence (any instance of cause-effect-realtionships, increasingly important the more complex and repeatable they are) and the possiblity for more of it.

Your question as to why I believe it is the most logical way to make sense of the world, I can answer by saying that I have yet to see or experience anything that would make me believe that there is actually something that is not the single possible result of some cause(s). I just don't believe in chance.

You can't seek truth without second guessing yourself all the way. It's a good idea to examine yourself for validity and accuracy, but if you truly believe every step you take has no more value than another just because the alternative is not impossible, then you'll end up dead in the water.