M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
Why would an atheist feel insulted just because somebody said that their arguments have actually helped him in his journey towards God? Are they scared? Its okay to be scared
- Status
H
hiinEnkelte
Guest
Al Moritz–excellent posts. I read chapter 1.4 and I find myself agreeing with it. Thanks!
W
Whadyamean
Guest
I don’t know. Why don’t you ask an atheist?Why would an atheist feel insulted just because somebody said that their arguments have actually helped him in his journey towards God? Are they scared? Its okay to be scared
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
S
Sair
Guest
Personally, there are plenty of religious arguments that have helped me towards the (provisional) conclusion that there’s no such thing as a personal god of the kind imagined by most religions.
Be that as it may, I’ve met plenty of theistic believers online who were likewise convinced by arguments in favour of atheism, that it makes more sense to believe in a personal god.
Maybe we’re all just contrarians…
B
Bobber90
Guest
Fascinating stuff. This is the most relevant bit:
I would have expected we agree up until now. But the crucial point is that we cannot see before the point at which the universe became transparent to radiation, and hypothetically, we cannot see the moment of the Big Bang (or ‘before’). Because of that, apparently we cannot know about the causes of the universe. One piece of the jigsaw puzzle will therefore always be missing – in fact, half of it! That is why we can only marvel at the hypothetical causes of the universe; we cannot assume to know that they were improbable and that consequentially, the features of our universe were too.
Another thing, you argue against ‘brute chance’, but do you know what it means? You say ‘brute chance’ (post 59) could only account for this universe if there was a statistical inevitability that the universe is created. Ie, you say that the universe could only have been made by chance if it had a 100% chance of happening. That is patently false. For all the accurate pursuit of science, research and writing you have done, I’m sure you can see that.
Ultimately, I do not think it is meaningful to talk about the probability of the universe, because we do not have the data. We can describe the universe as ‘fine-tuned’, but we cannot say it has been fine-tuned by a creator because chance alone is not good enough. We cannot say, therefore agnosticism on that issue.
The latter point is most relevant. As you have conveyed, there are features of the universe which are necessary for us to live; the tolerances are incredibly specific, and they are correct for life. The latter physicist is right to ask are the laws of physics balanced on a knife edge, and why? That is to say, what are the causes of the features of the universe? What are the causes of the universe?* But he is wrong to say that the features of the universe are unlikely before telling us about the causes of the universe.* Those specific values and constants are not unlikely, merely specific, and from that specificity you erroneously infer improbability. You seem to have brushed over the point that the probability of the causal process (if any) of the universe determines the probability of the features of the universe. Don’t you see? I can say that without assuming that the universe is of necessity the way it is, or even that this universe is highly likely. It is simply true that if there are processes which tend towards favourable universes, then our universe is likely, and vice versa.
I would have expected we agree up until now. But the crucial point is that we cannot see before the point at which the universe became transparent to radiation, and hypothetically, we cannot see the moment of the Big Bang (or ‘before’). Because of that, apparently we cannot know about the causes of the universe. One piece of the jigsaw puzzle will therefore always be missing – in fact, half of it! That is why we can only marvel at the hypothetical causes of the universe; we cannot assume to know that they were improbable and that consequentially, the features of our universe were too.
Another thing, you argue against ‘brute chance’, but do you know what it means? You say ‘brute chance’ (post 59) could only account for this universe if there was a statistical inevitability that the universe is created. Ie, you say that the universe could only have been made by chance if it had a 100% chance of happening. That is patently false. For all the accurate pursuit of science, research and writing you have done, I’m sure you can see that.
Ultimately, I do not think it is meaningful to talk about the probability of the universe, because we do not have the data. We can describe the universe as ‘fine-tuned’, but we cannot say it has been fine-tuned by a creator because chance alone is not good enough. We cannot say, therefore agnosticism on that issue.
T
tonyrey
Guest
T
tonyrey
Guest
You are assuming:
- We alone determine whether we are doomed
- We can choose to influence the course of events
- What we choose does (and will) influence the course of events!
B
Bobber90
Guest
It does exactly that, from the point of view invoked by considering fine-tuning. However, I do not think it is meaningful to consider the probability of the universe as a whole, so all we are left with is the probability of things within the universe.
All that reasoning is fine-ish, but I’d rather describe those possible universes as potentially possible universes. Given that we don’t know about what caused our own universe, how can we know what other universes might be? We do not know what is possible. We can theorise what would happen if x, y, z were different, but this gives us no license to assume that they could actually be different. So they remain potential possibilities.
B
Bobber90
Guest
lol! This was more a depressing joke about how helpless we are, given that all it takes is a rogue state with attitude to engulf the earth in nuclear war. I would love to think that the choice to press the button would somehow not result in nuclear retaliation.You are assuming:
- We alone determine whether we are doomed
- We can choose to influence the course of events
- What we choose does (and will) influence the course of events!
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
The whole universe is its collective parts. You do realise that don’t you?
B
Bobber90
Guest
That is why it is difficult to talk about the probability of the universe as a whole, because that is to speak from a perspective which I don’t think has grounding. We cannot know the causes of the universe from inside it, and we cannot learn that we are in a multiverse of many universes, so we cannot judge the likelihood of this universe forming, etc etc. All we have is an in-universe perspective. If you had another point, I can’t see it yet…
H
Holly3278
Guest
No offense but you were the one who misunderstood him so you should be the one to do any apologizing, not him.
T
Tsuwano
Guest
No, no, you’re not in trouble at all. And in fact, as a Catholic, I accept your judgement that Catholics often fail to inspire. It’s certainly a fault I find with myself in that I often fail to live out my faith or live up to what Jesus has called us to. I often fail to inspire, and for that I truly am sorry. It’s something I often confess in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Christianity is not so much a badge of superiority as it is a cry and acknowledgement of a need for God’s grace. So, you’re absolutely right to point out that Christians, or Catholics if you will, fail to inspire when they are unable to approach faith with humility. I hope you won’t allow the fault of Catholics like myself prevent you from exercising your own humility. It would truly be a dreadful world if no one strove for humility.Your opinion is duly noted and appreciated, really.
If you can’t see how tbc’s response was an attack then I can accept that, it is after all a subjective term. Like I said in my previous post, it is impossible to offend me, but it is possible however, to fascinate me, as people often do. Usually they disappoint me, but every once in awhile they’ll do something inspirational. Unfortunately, it appears that this will not be one of those times.
If the OP or tbc could find it within themselves to apologize, I would actually find that quite inspirational, because it would go against all the norms of forum behaviour. People find it very difficult to say they’re sorry, especially on an impersonal forum such as this one. If they choose not to say that they’re sorry, then I can accept that, but I would much rather be inspired. I suppose that is asking too much though. After all, they’re only Catholics.
I’m really getting myself in trouble now ain’t I…ahhh that’s life.
A
Al_Moritz
Guest
You’re welcome! I am glad that you are able to see the issues clearly. I assume that this will also lead you to rethinking the strength of the teleological argument.Al Moritz–excellent posts. I read chapter 1.4 and I find myself agreeing with it. Thanks!
As much ground as the teleological argument loses on some scientific findings such as evolution and the origin of life *), it more than amply compensates on the scientific finding of cosmological fine-tuning.
*) which is now highly likely to be accounted for by natural causes, see my article for the evolution website Talkorigins.org:
earthfusion.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html
H
hiinEnkelte
Guest
Yes I am definitely rethinking this argument. Perhaps I just never put too much stock in natural theology?
I will start by reading that entire link you sent me previously.
W
Whadyamean
Guest
I do, but how does that make me an atheist??? This is the kind of stuff that is rampant that makes me question the critical abilities of many on here.Was it not you who claimed the post to be insulting?Or am I mistaken?
W
Whadyamean
Guest
While intellectually constructed proofs from incomplete data are vastly entertaining, the case for discovery by negation seems to me to hold the best possibility of arriving at a functional understanding.
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
When did I claim you were an atheist? This is the kind of stuff that is rampant that makes me question the critical abilities of many on here.
- Status