The modern creation-myth

[JohnJones]

We moderns (…a moment’s pause to consider that), we moderns, pose a new style of creation-myth. Like the new 3 1/2 mile crossing over the river Severn in Wales, ours is a timeless myth, crystallised out of mathematics.

Here is our new creation-myth:
Space-time was caused without a cause, Matter was caused by space-time and consciousness emerged from matter.

Here is the old creation-myth:
Space, Time, matter and consciousness emerged together.

As you can see the old myth is hopelessly inadequate, steeped in hocus pocus. The new myth is so much better. Even though both myths rely on a non-causal emergence we can see that the new myth works. Can’t we. It is mathematically written up.

[Only_Humean]

@JohnJones

We moderns (…a moment’s pause to consider that), we moderns, pose a new style of creation-myth. Like the new 3 1/2 mile crossing over the river Severn in Wales, ours is a timeless myth, crystallised out of mathematics.

Here is our new creation-myth:
Matter was caused by space-time and consciousness emerged from matter.

Here is the old creation-myth:
Space, Time, matter and consciousness emerged together.

As you can see the old myth is hopelessly inadequate, steeped in hocus pocus. The new myth is so much better. Even though both myths rely on a non-causal emergence we can see that the new myth works. Can’t we. After all, it’s mathematically written up.

I believe the old creation myth was either space, time and consciousness gave birth to matter or, more theologically rigorously, that consciousness gave birth to space, time and matter.

I don’t think the “new myth” actually extends to cover the non-causal step. There’s more an existentialist shrug at that point. Myths are pragmatically useful rather than literally true - they teach lessons and instil values. Of course, to do this they have to be considered literally true.

As a description of fact, the new story is better-evidenced than the old; as a myth, it’s hollow.

[ochaye]

@JohnJones

We moderns (…a moment’s pause to consider that), we moderns, pose a new style of creation-myth. Like the new 3 1/2 mile crossing over the river Severn in Wales, ours is a timeless myth, crystallised out of mathematics.

Here is our new creation-myth:
Space-time was caused without a cause, Matter was caused by space-time and consciousness emerged from matter.

Here is the old creation-myth:
Space, Time, matter and consciousness emerged together.

As you can see the old myth is hopelessly inadequate, steeped in hocus pocus. The new myth is so much better. Even though both myths rely on a non-causal emergence we can see that the new myth works. Can’t we. It is mathematically written up.

It takes some pretty fancy maths to prove that anything was caused without a cause.

You can prove anything with language!

[Lucis_Trust]

I heard the Big Bang myth was actually originally proporsed by a catholic priest or bishop, go figure. I think those scientists tend to exaggerate their proofs. They can’t even predict what the weather of our earth will be like in a few days, or when an earthquake will occur, yet they want us to believe they can postdict what the weather of our universe was like billions of years ago, preposterous. First it was global cooling, then it was global warming, now it’s “climate change”. Next it’ll be climate stasis. Human beings are preventing the planet from going through it’s natural weather cycle… give us 5 billion dollars. Not falling for it. They want us to believe that they have a monopoly on truth, that their’s is the only reliable method, of course they do, human beings always do, they’re peddling their merchandise (in this case truth) like any other business, of course they don’t want to have to compete with religion, philosophy, common sesne, or some other method yet to be developed. And now they’re intertwined with Big Government. Tody we live in a scientocracy, I propose just as potentially deadly and disasterous for truth as theocracy.