Chaos Theory

[TheOliverOrder88]

One of my dear friends has come to a revelation called "The Chaos Theory".

He says it can lead to the possible existence of God (he was a sorta agnostic/atheist person).

Anyone know of such thing?

[tojo]

My roommate gave a speech on chaos theory recently. he told me a bit about it. In my extremely unsophisticated analysis of what he said, basically it holds that in all the seeming random "chaotic" aspects of the universe, there is an order, things make sense, effects have causes, etc. And of course, the effects of the universe points to its cause®.

[Aloysius]

also known as the butterfly affect, because when the weathermen finally figured out that it's impossible to 100% accurately predict the weather they said that, by the chaos of the universe, perhap the fluttering of a group of butterfly's wings in an area would shift the winds ever so slightly and maybe there would be a tornado that wouldn't have come otherwise or there wouldn't be a tornado that was going to come.

[morostheos]

I basically see the chaos theory as an atheist's attempt to explain things that are explainable only by the existence of God. Sure, it's very interesting and definitely points to some kind of natural order, but it (usually) replaces God with some observed statistical probabilities.

[Myles Domini]

If your friend has found God through 'chaos theory' good, he wouldn't be the only one. But chaos theory like all scientific theories is physical not metaphysical and has no firm conclusions. If, for him, it has worked praise God. Yet one must remember the Catholic doctrine of analogy by which whatever we discover about God via analogy exposes an even greater difference between ourselves and God. If we know God as the cause of the universe through philosophy we must also not be so keen to think we can identify the mechanism of creation.

The argument for God's existence from Chaos Theory is quite complex and like all philosophical arguments is not guaranteed to make an impact--indeed its not one of my favourites. If it has worked for your friend dont discourage it obviously but dont put all your faith in it either. Just remember what we know of God from analogy only exposes what we dont know. The mechanism is as mysterious as the creation.

My advice would be to feed your friend with Catholic philosophy now that the soil seems to be ready for seedlings to be sown therein.

[TheOliverOrder88]

Hey thanks alot.

I was really confused about it.

[photosynthesis]

....is chaos theory some sort of math thing? math = bad

[Myles Domini]

Chaos Theory is basically what Al said but the arguments for God's existence based on chaos theory are intensely complex. If memory serves--forgive me its been a few months since I sat my 'Christian Doctrine of Creation paper' and over the summer my hard drive died -- they focus around God making a minor intervention in a far of corner of the cosmos, which via the butterfly effect allowed the conditions needed for human evolution to arise her in the solar system. It gets extremely complicated with mathematical theorem put forth to suggest at what time of the universe's development this intervention was made and is based upon deterministic reasoning e.g. antecedents lead to undeniable effects. Because of this its main supporters (to my recollection) are also hard determinists of the Calvinist cloth though I believe a more Catholic way of looking at is possible. Yet, as I've lost my notes I cannot say unfortunately (my lovely essays... )

One thing I do remember though is, as I said, its not one of my favourites. The doctrine of analogy allows God's mechanism's to be known to Him alone. Such theories though helpful in substantiating belief in the Truth can over extend themselves by claiming to know the 'how's' of Divine action. It is always better, I opine, to seek consonance between the current leading scientific theories and Catholic philosophy rather than definitively attach God to any of them. In the words of the Catechism:

[quote]31 Created in God's image and called to know and love him, the person who seeks God discovers certain ways of coming to know him. These are also called proofs for the existence of God, not in the sense of proofs in the natural sciences, but rather in the sense of "converging and convincing arguments", which allow us to attain certainty about the truth. These "ways" of approaching God from creation have a twofold point of departure: the physical world, and the human person.

[/quote]

Man's knowledge of God comes from converging probabilities that make an act of the intellect plausible, which in turn is confirmed in an act of will generated by God's grace. A scientific proof of God is not extant and we should not push Catholic philosophy beyond its boundaries in attempting to seek one. When theistic philosophers tie themselves too much to the philosophy of the day they can end up in William Paley's trap of being made to look foolish by further scientific advances. The advantage of the arguments of Catholic Natural Theology is that because they respect God's freedom of action, and only reason that such action would've been neccessary, they can reapplied regardless of the scientific model being advanced at the time and thus they have persevered for 800 years. Blurring the lines between scientific proof and philosophical proof can only do damage to Natural Theology in the long run.

[Didacus]

The Chaos theory is one of the youngest, if not the youngest branch in scientific thinking nowadays. It is increasingly finding mroe and more ways of being useful in analysis of all sorts. It is not just a simple 'pinch' in the air all sorts of abstract ideas.

For instance, modeling based on the chaos theory cna adequately predict outcomes with great accuracy that contemporary science cannot in a linear fashion.

A study i once read had simulated a populationi research, and suceeded in predicting the movements of the population as ressources became scarce and the land was invaded. Based on initial conditions and historical accounts, the results surprisingly matched the progression of the population.

Another example is that given initial conditions of reactions between molecules, simple reactions can in theory be reproduced 9some work is starting in this field). the result of the research would be a program being able to provide adequate results of reactions (chemical) without any laboratory experimentation. This is approaching Star-Trek stuff here, where the 'supercomputer' simulates all sorts of things imagineable. its not all impossible.

The chaos thoery as a whole, is showing great and enormeous potential for future generations, and honestly, if it was all to do over again, I would seriously consider studying this subject as a field of expetise.

Alas, my choices have brougt me to be a simple engineer... but i remain a lover at heart and a poet in spirit.