Who Created you?

Aparthib Zaman

Important points to note in the content on the creator  question:

1. It is easy to answer a wrong question, because any wrong answer is as good an answer to a wrong question as any other. A wrong answer     is easy to come up with.

2. It is not always easy to ask the right question, and when it is     possible, the right answer  is often quite hard to come up with. Sometimes the right answer is not answer and  one may never know.

3.  Which question is asked wrongly and which one rightly is a subtle one, but  is easy for those who is fairly analytic and  cares to think logically.


Now come to the crux: "WHO created you?" is NOT the right question.

It does not matter if  individually A or B disagrees with my above assertion. Professional philosophers, scientists who are employed in all secular schools supported by tax payers and private sponsors (ranging form the mediocre to the top notch) have overwhelmingly
reached a consensus on this.  The right question is WHAT is the underlying natural cause if any behind the creation of life. And the answer IS KNOWN. It is -  THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. What is not known is what is the underlying natural cause, if any, behind the existence of  THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. It is not inconceivable that the Laws of Physics are there uncreated, from eternity up to eternity. If we claim limitations of human understanding (Which is conveniently used by theists to affirm the existence of a creator) there is no reason to dismiss the eternal uncreated existence of the laws of physics
which gives rise to all diverse patterns and order in the cosmos. The nature of the laws of physics is such that it leads to the creation of life 

[via the route: Physics+ the laws of complexity->Chemistry->biology->Life 
Whether the laws of complexity are a themselves rooted in Physics or are autonomous laws themselves is not known, but nevertheless they are natural laws. Life is nothing but an implementation of a code (cosmic code), the origin of the code itself being hidden from human ken. As a side for those a bit more technically inclined the aspect of Physics that is most relevant to creation of Life is the Second law of thermodynamics (via the maximization of entropy)]

See http://www.fes.uwaterloo.ca/u/jjkay/pubs/Life_as/text.html,
IF anyone is sincerely interested in learning  MORE (not 100%)
about the mystery of life's creation.

The question "WHO" created you does not make any sense because one the question already assumes an answer, that there IS a creator, and if there IS a creator then the answer to the question cannot be but a tautology: The creator created you.  Surely the questioner did not ask the question to know the name of the creator. So it is a meaningless question. As I said the right question is WHAT (not WHO) is the CAUSE of the creation of life, IF there is any. And the answer is the one above I gave (And unanimously agreed upon by majority of leading Physicists and Biologists).

And in case anyone still thinks naively as  Bishop Paley did two hundred years ago that anything that looks designed must have a designer, needs to wake up and read the following as a minmum for the wakeup and just try to realize that the most competent minds have thought through these issue in the last two centuries, so the views and facts expressed in the following links reflect the accumulated insights from that collective thoughts, and not to be
dismised by layfolks with subjective thinking in islolation from the intellectual advancements of the past two centuries. A simple argument is worth noting: We look at a watch and feel amazed at its design and immediately assume a designer. That is because we compare a watch with a heap of dust of shape "X" (To distinguish this shape from almost infinite other possible shapes) and the watch APPEARS to us more designed because -

Prior  knowledge that the watches ARE designed by human watchmakers, a heap of dust of shape "X" IS NOT designed by a human. designer. So our perception of design/designor is very subjective and shaped by our  daily experiences. Reality is not always formulated or defined by our daily experiences. Now can you design a heap of dust of shape "X" ?  Looks almost impossible, so is it not amazing to see one ?  Now, how come I don't see an urge to see a creator in this amazement and wonder? Get the drift? The fact is that the entire universe with life is a single sample, one shot event, so you cannot ascribe design to this all encompassing entity, because there is nothing to compare against which is NOT designed, unlike the case of the watch and a heap of dust. We have no choice but to reconcile  with ultimate ignorance when it comes to the ultimate reality behind the cause of the entirety of cosmos and life, other than understanding it to the level of the natural laws (The laws of Physics) which created the observable cosmos with life . That is quite a feat already. And it is an ultimate irony and disservice to human intellect to bypass this human understanding (cosmology and evolution) and jump to an armchair theorizing about the ultimate with no intellectual tool and raw materials as a support. Anyway, there is time for redemption :). Anyone who sincerely  wishes to look into this ultimate questions of reality and find out about it as much as is humanly possible can check out the following.


Argument from Design:
1. http://www.positiveatheism.org/faq/design.htm
2. http://home.inu.net/skeptic/design.html
3. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/4388/design.html
4. http://skepdic.com/intelligentdesign.html
5. http://www.stargazer.org/refute.txt  or  http://www.ffrf.org/lfif/refute.html
6. http://www.duke.edu/~sdk2/ooze/skeptic/design.html
7. http://riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/watch.htm
8. http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/design.htm
9.  http://skepdic.com/design.html
10. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cosmo.html (Vic Stenger:Cockroaches..)
11. http://reason.com/9907/fe.ks.is.html (Kenneth Silber)
12. http://www.csicop.org/si/2001-03/intelligent-design.html (Taner Edis)
13. http://biomed.brown.edu/faculty/M/Miller/TR/Lifes-Design.html
14. http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/dawkins_18_3.html
15. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2000/pigliucci1.html



Ryan Responds to Aparthib