freako104 said:
no if you reject something you dont have to believe the opposite just that there are two major theories people go by.
In general, yes, this is true, but I was wondering if this is kind of a special case. I can't really think of a plausible alternative to the two, and frankly, I haven't heard one from anyone else yet (ok, the dream state idea
maybe). I understand if it's not one, it doesn't HAVE to be the other, but in this instance, I think it
may very well be the case. Of course, there
can be option three, but I'm not aware of an option three that makes sense to any of us
YET. That is why I started to think of it this way. I remember simple logic, I realize that logically, this isn't a valid arguement. However, it isn't
necessarily wrong either.
You have to make some assumptions to come up with a logically valid way that this could be the case I guess.
Ok, either the universe, life, etc etc was created, or it wasn't. It must be one or the other. This is a yes or no question, this is true, or its false. Ok, now if it wasn't created, how did it come into existence? Some form of evolution or another almost certaintly has to be the answer. I guess my assumption was that if it wasn't created, it MUST have evolved (because currently no other option is really even conceivable, I think we all argeed that the dream state hypothesis was more of a religious (faith based) and creator based idea) . Therefore, if you reject one, you accept the other. Maybe there is an alternative to EVERY form of evolution (in the sense of the universe, and life evolved absent a creator), but I can't even begin to imagine what it might be.