At least parts of the universe are intelligent and behave rationally. That is if you think humans are sometimes intelligent and do sometimes behave rationally and are part of the universe.

Hmm. Hard to see how we can reference anything other than human, animal, or AI intelligence, since this is all we know to be intelligent.

So - with respect to your view, we know enough about life now to know that intelligence is contained within animals with brains and complex nervous systems. These brains and nervous systems come from evolution, a process that is well-understood.

Anyway, your hypothesis is that the big bang and a wide range of its results is an intelligent process. Can you be more specific as to why you hold this belief?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

You've already answered your question. If indeed the "big bang" is the opening source of our universe and the concomitant processes follow thereby then the fact that you have intelligence or that intelligence exists perforce proves that the "big bang" is intelligent.

Just to be clear, I don't see the opening source of our universe as the "big bang" but played this game for some type of clarity. Also, if the 'big bang" is deterministic as implied in paragraph #1 then the randomizers come to effect but the theses still holds. LOL

The question can become' did intelligence exist at the beginnings of the universe ? Are the Alpha and Omega intellectual process ? This calls for comprehension of what "intelligence" is exactly, and its presence in the human soul.

The difficulty is that within man, he did not always count nor logicalize (Aristotle) and the reality is we are evolutionary beings who crawled before walking and if we speak to higher things then we are in the right forum, Religion, God and Theology with a smattering of real science.

I'm suspicious that you are trolling, but I will humor you either way. How is intelligence existing within the universe proof that the big bang is intelligent? Is your premise that anything that is intelligent must have been brought into being by intelligence or something intelligent? This is itself an argument that needs justifying, since through natural selection, life with no evidence of intelligence developed into intelligent life.

I dont think we know yet the balance between determinism and randomness that would best explain our universe's way of being, but this does not support or refute an argument for a God.

We need to be careful not to obfuscate the definition of intelligence. Can you define it using a dictionary website for a sanity check for us?

Can i clarify that you mean the big bang is intelligent and not a God that caused the big bang?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Wasn't speaking to the "G" word and I'm not advocating the "big bang " theory. One thing I do finsd interesting is that the scientists speak of a beginning cycle of "extreme heat" which fits with other perceptions of "beginnings".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

If these men are correct and are using intelligence (which they are) to bring forth their speculation then they are presenting that same intelligence which mandates within the universe.

If I throw a ball and it follows a parabolic path and I bring the mathematics of parabolas to bear I would be using intelligence but the behavior would also be considered "intelligent". quietly..the mathematical axioms and machinations within the human being are within the entire universe as man is in the universe as a part of and yet distinct.

Going far ahead, the question is; does man create his mathematics or intelligence or is it part of the creative process with mankind involved ?

This idea of the "Spirit Within" which mathematizes (Erf is somewhere here) is philosophically sound and has a history which I forgot. I'm using mathematics as a face of intelligence for it is the easiest for us to understand.

If you demand an "Unmoved Mover" or some such concept at the beginning of time(according to the premise of this thread) then I won't argue but in science they are dealing with concepts which only allow weights and measurement within time. You are not allowed to speak of the "G" word.

In fact you are only allowed to use the concepts and forms which are brought forth from our world of the senses which includes all machinery, telescopes, microscopes,radar detecting devices, etc... this unequivocally means that matter created matter though the individual scientist might argue this for he may be a Buddhist or Hindu or transcendental Christian but all results are weighed and measured and others anathema.

This is why it is called "scientific materialism" and does carry an atheistic bent. The entire structure of present science is material and in fact looking at our present culture this material or atheistic bent is our environs but we move along oblivious of its lack of moral tone.

The religious have brought forht a history of revelation and in fact have lost their revelatory comprehension of the spiritual world or the 'Kingdom of
God". They believe the scientists and do not appear to be attempting to bring forth the truths of the spiritual world within a scientific mind set . These truths can be gained and in the long run these very truths will be gained through science when the individual scientist leaves the "material' medium of exchange.