[MD] Distinguishing Levels (Individual level)

[Ham Priday]

Case --


Case reveals quite a bit about himself in the 3rd person:

> Sorry Case did not get the notes on the first lecture. He thinks that
> fundamentally it is all a probability distribution. How likely is it, that
> something could result from nothing? Case thinks not very. But he thinks
> that if it has ANY likelihood at all it is inevitable.

Here are the notes you've apparently discarded:

> That nature and the cosmos are not chaotic but operate as an
> orderly system according to intellectually discernable laws suggests
> that there is a design implicit in the system, and an implicit design
> logically presupposes a Designer.  Moreover, if we were designed
> by a Designer, it would seem logical that there is a purpose
> to the design.

Now I've got two questions for you, Case.

For the sake of argument, let's say you are right that "it is all a
probability distribution":

1)  What is it you suppose the probability is DISTRIBUTING?

2)  Since, as you note, it is highly unlikely (actually impossible) that
something could result from nothing, why do you assume nothingness as your
starting point?   Don't the odds -- excuse me, "probabilties" -- favor a
primary "something" as progenitor?  Wouldn't it be more logical to put your
bets on a timeless, spaceless source that doesn't have to be created?

Just a bit more "posturing" from your stuffy pen pal.

Happy 4th.

--Ham