re: Scientist says he found definitive proof that God exists

quote:

---

quote:

---

“To me it is clear that we exists in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

---

this doesn't sound like "God" to me

---

Honest question, why not?

Does it sound "too mechanical" for the usually spiritual belief in God?

Possibly think about it like this: Regardless of the idea of the "kind" of universal intelligence, this "being" has to understand the underpinnings of the human existence innately. The way that we've grown, evolved, HOW we do things is all tied to the ability to determine a "ruleset" from our universe. Even the simple idea of logic "If A then B," like "If I touch a fire, I get burned," is a consistent rule that we have to develop both instincts and tools to work around. These require a a further exploration of rules and ideas that allow us to solve the problem. Solve the problem....within the ruleset of the universe. A rule is essentially a limitation, right? Our entire existence and evolution itself is about finding and breaking perceived limitations over and over again. That's growth. But the only way we are allowed to grow is because the universe itself does "make sense," it's governed by rules that we can determine, understand, and work within to continue growth.

If there were no rules, we'd be completely inept at determining anything. So God in this case, or a "being" in another, is almost required to create a ruleset for existence.

Now the interesting thing in this debate is Kaku's use of the word chance. That's extremely telling to how he views this question. And on that note, he's right.