Fallacy of Composition | The Evidence Course | Session 3 / Part 4

[@mohammedyasin2087]

"What created order from absolute and utter chaos?" That's a really powerful question.

[@fortruegood8591]

Absolute and utter chaos? Do you even know the meaning of absolute in the first place? I seriously doubt it.

[@Monavah]

Inshallah this channel will blow up soon. Great content. Keep it up

[@HussainFahmy]

*_Jazak'Allah Khair_*

[@ThoughtAdventurePodcast]

Wa iyyakum!

[@nargis751]

Well done bro ❤

[@tofutofu137]

Jazakum Alaahou Khairan brother Sharif. Had to listen to the argument twice before I could understand it. MashaAlaah, tabaaraka Alaah, Allahou Akbar ☝️

[@wonderwalls3565]

I dont understand. I created a wall with bricks adn paint. Bricks were created. Paint was created. cement was created. and steel enforcements were created. so the wall was created as well. so whats true for the part is true for the whole as well in this instance. so whats fallacious here? Also bricks are made of atoms. so the wall is also made of atoms. Now I think we can see it can be falcious in some conditions like. The bricks were white so the wall has to be white. this could be fallacious but If I say the bricks were black. the paint was black the cement was black the enforcement were black so the wall will be black as well. Please someone give me feedback.

[@Wassim971]

Thank you for your efforts, may Allah reward you brother

[@pureevil4674]

2:30 if use use this logic then you can apply to this to god too. I.e why is he merciful and not merciless. Why is his wrath less than his mercy. Are these attributes created? Or are they intrinsic, if intrinsic then why

[@matthewbardos4424]

I do think we derive our sense of causality through observation, at least primarily. If you did not know what a bird was, then how would you know whether they hatch from eggs, or come from live birth or from some other method? We know they hatch from eggs because of observation correct? Please answer this.

[@rafique1539]

Frm what I understand, prior to our observation, we presuppose that everything has an explanation. In this case of birds, bcos we hv observed bfr that birds come frm eggs, so we can say quite accurately it’s specific cause and effect is frm eggs. Same as for fishes, there must be an explanation where it comes frm. But altho we hv observed that most fishes comes frm eggs, there r exceptions of specific cause and effect in the case of whales, where they give birth to their young. General cause and effect (explanation) is presupposed but specific or detailed cause and effect can be known frm previous observation/research/study..

[@matthewbardos4424]

@@rafique1539 Ok, so let's say that is true for the sake of argument. Then how can we specifically say where the universe came from without observing it's creation?

[@ozayrahmed574]

@@matthewbardos4424 are you asking how we know that the cause of the universe is God? If so, check out their podcast on necessary being to God.

[@rafique1539]

@@matthewbardos4424 the various arguments such as the kalam, necessary being, teleological etc to me reasonably points to a entity that must hv power, intelligence, will etc. That’s specific enough for me. If u disagree it’s ok, but then what do u think is the explanation for the existence of the universe?

[@matthewbardos4424]

@@ozayrahmed574 No I am not. I am asking this: do not humans primarily derive our understanding of causality through observation, i.e. watching the bird hatch from the egg? If we did not observe this process with the universe, then how can we say it was caused at all?

[@iswallbanoo9843]

Salaam only one God and it's Allah love here from South Africa Johannesburg