I posted two blogs about religious arguments and how they are illogical, Logical Fallacies and Arguments for God Part 1 and Logical Fallacies and Arguments for God part 2. I'm following up with a look at logic-based atheist arguments because I said I would. However, I am not familiar with many such arguments. If anyone knows any, please let me know
The first argument that I'll look at is the argument of Complexity. Before I look into the argument, I have to explain something. As a premise of this argument, it is initially assumed that god exists. It's a 'for the sake of argument'. This is not circular logic, which assumes, as a premise, the conclusion. All right, here we go: There is an argument that states that everything that looks designed is designed. Humans design things all the time and they all look designed. Nature appears to be defined. Let us assume that the previous is correct. Therefore, it is likely that some sort of god designed and created the Universe.
Humans have never created anything more complex than they are. Therefore, if there is a god, god must be more complex than the Universe. This would mean that god would have the appearance (not literally) of being designed, so who or what created god? If nothing created god, then why does the Universe have to have been designed? If something created god, where did that something come from? I don't like this argument. As of now, humans have not created anything more complex than us. However, I don't think it is reasonable to assume that humans cannot create something more complex. Therefore, I find this argument unsatisfying. There are many arguments that successfully attack the Judeo-Christian god. These arguments attack the contradictory nature of many characteristics attributed to this deity. I will compose a short list 1) Omnipotence- The old question 'can god create a mountain that god cannot move?' successfully does away with omnipotence. If god can create this mountain, he (I will use male pronouns because they are the most commonly associated with this god) is not omnipotent because he cannot move the mountain. If he can't create the mountain, he is not omnipotent because there is something he cannot create.
2) Omniscience- First, this rules out humans having free will. If what we choose is already known, we are not free to choose. Further more, if god is omniscient, he can't know what it is to be surprised or to anticipate. Therefore he cannot be omniscient.
3) Kindness- Sorry, I don't buy any argument that says an essentially good and kind god would have all the Egyptian first-born killed or any of the other horrible things that are described in the OT.
4) Omnibenevolence- Same beef with kindness.
5) All of these characteristics conflict with each other, even if they did not conflict with themselves. If god is omnipotent and omniscient, could he change the future, which he would already know? If god were Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnibenevolent how is there so much unnecessary suffering? I do believe that all of these are valid arguments, but they only refute god one specific god. Any creator god is refuted by the question of that god's origin. If this god created the Universe, then where did this god come from? Modern science does refute a lot of things that are attributed to various different deities.
The argument that I find most satisfying is the argument from necessity. Is a higher power necessary for our Universe to exist as it does? I do not believe this is so. I don't really understand physics and I am of the impression that there isn't a definitive theory for the origin of the Universe. However, any creator goes is suspect and I am under the impression that we have a good idea as to how things happened after the initial Big Bang. (I do have a basic understanding of the formation of cosmic objects and evolution and so on, but I'm not very good at explaining it and there are things I admit to not understanding, which is why I'm not going to go into it here.)
Maybe god can create a mountain he cant move, then when it was time to move it he could cut small chunks away and carry them off one by one.
Interesting... But if it is beyond his power to move the mountain as a whole, then he isn't omnipotent. Still, that is an interesting thought.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
I cant say I agree...because I do believe in God. Keep in mind that along with Christianity comes the mindset that God has a plan for everything, that somethings we cant explain, and that we should just trust in him and his power.
Honestly, if none of these points you brought up were valid, then everyone would Christian. And if Faith wasnt so strong in the hearts of people, then everyone would be atheist.
My point of this (and the previous blogs) is that faith is irrational. I'm not going to stop someone from having faith. Some people accept that. Many people don't. The problem is that a lot of people want to force their particular irrational beleifs on me.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
Its wrong, to try an force beliefs onto people. I dont try to force my beliefs on anyone, I just try to help them understand where I am coming from. A lot of atheists also try to "force" what they believe on people like me...I dont appreciate that much either. And, as dumb as it sounds, as a Christian, I understand that faith is irrational...I mean I'm putting my trust in someone/thing that I cannot see. But if you believe in evolution (and Im assuming you do)...you are also basing your belief upon faith. Isnt it irrational that out of nothing can come something...that chaos created almost perfect order? You do have faith that it happened though, right?
No matter which angle youre coming from, you have to trust in something. I chose to trust that there is a divine power, and you choose to trust that there is only the power of nature. I have the upmost respect for that...and I do believe that its not what you believe in...its that you believe in something with all of your heart. (yeah, its cheesy...but true). Be it God, or Evolution. Faith is important. And whether you like it or not, we all have faith in something.
The fact that you accept your faith for what it is is refreshing and, I think, shows great intellegence.
Where we differ in opinions is that evolution must be held on faith. There is evidence that supports evolution. There is a lot of evidence supporting evolution. While I can't explain it, I can understand it and it makes sense to me. I guess the only faith involved is similar to the faith that I'm not dreaming my whole life.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
I'm humanist myself however...
Modern physics seems to have a variety of theories on multiple parallel universes. As such, perhaps he could create a mountain he both could and couldn't destroy.... but going by that logic, so could I.
Now that's a good one. Got me thinking for a while. Alright, here's my answer.
That suggests that god has a dual nature to make up for his contradictions. Each half compensates for the other. Therefore, one half can create the mountain, but not move it. The other couldn't create it, but could move it. Very nice bit of philosophy there. However, that really means that there are two gods, neither of whom have any contradictable quality, but, put together, have all the qualities of god that would be illogical in a single entity.
Interesting. I guess the problem is that that's technically polytheism.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
Simply visit the Internet Infidels. They have the largest library of information on the web along with a great message board full of intelligent posters.
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/index.php
http://www.infidels.org/library/index.html
Regards
I agree with most of your post, and I have a few things to add. Evolution is considered to be evidence that God doesn't exist, and yet the existence of God has become ambiguous enough to encompass evolution. Although there are still ardent supporters on the side of creation (of man by a single god), intelligent design is meant to say that God deemed evolution necessary, and allowed for it. Considering that side gives me the chills and I almost return to Puritan days and believing in predestination.
Another point about God's existence is if He does exist, then did he create incontinence? The loss of control over bowel movements? Tooth decay? (Joseph Heller fans should recognize Yossarian's diatribe.)
Cheers from Union Jane
"I have only ever made one prayer a very short one: "God, make my enemies ridiculous." And God made it so." --Voltaire
"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." --Eleanor Roosevelt
Evolution refutes the story of Creation according to the OT and all other Creation myths that I know of. Directly, it offers no evidence against any sort of god. What it does do, however, is remove the necessity of god to explain our existence. Most ID that I've encountered misconstrues the theory of evolution and mostly just takes the stance that, because we are complicated, we must have been designed.
I don't think that the existence of suffering really offers any evidence against god in general, although it does put some qualities the Judeo-Christian god is supposed to have in question
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
I was being inconsistent in my reply to your blog. I have actually met a few devout Christians who insist on the intelligent design theory. The purpose of intelligent design doesn't refute the existence of God, and supports existence. Intelligent design decrees that God allowed for evolution. He deigned it necessary. (That appears logical for supporting the "God exists" argument--after all, we couldn't stay Neanderthals forever.) God placed the evidence of evolution, the dinosaur fossils found in rock layers, man's footprints beside those of dinosaurs, to provide an explanation for evolution that still fit within the creation theory. God didn't create Man perfectly, but rather as a developing masterpiece. So the theory goes.
I haven't heard of intelligent design of defending the complexity of humans and therefore we must have been designed. I found that statement interesting, if a little incomplete.
Mentioning how God created ailments was my way of questioning the existence of God, if He is so perfect and loving and forgiving. I suppose I'm like Yossarian in the fact that I don't believe in the God who isn't completely benevolent and loving. For the record, I'm not a diehard atheist who scorns those who believe in and love God. Religion provides a structure of morals that in being observed, improve society.
Cheers from Union Jane
"I have only ever made one prayer a very short one: "God, make my enemies ridiculous." And God made it so." --Voltaire
"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." --Eleanor Roosevelt
There really isn't much to say about the complexity version of the intellegent design theory. As far as I can tell (and I may be misinformed), all it is is the old 'if it looks designed, it is designed an humans look designed' argument.
It is easier to argue against specific deities than the possible existence of some sort of higher power. The existence of evil and disease has no effect on the hypothesies of some deities. For the god that most people are probably familiar with, the Abrahamic god, it does have a ngative effect. That god is seen as being good and benevolent and forgiving as well as a host of other qualities that don't gel with what we know that goes on in the real world.
If some sort of deity exists, it either doesn't interfere at all, is malevolent, or is benevolent but incompetent.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
Although some scientists think there can be one. Origin of organisms- yeah, we've got it more or less figured out. Origin of the solar system-yeah, we've got that general idea, too. What caused it all to happen- Now that is the question. I ponder this a lot, and I like to hear new ideas that others have. I have my own theory (it may or may not coincide with your own), somewhat physics-related, but naive as any other. I don't think that some "driving force" as I like to call it would actually sit down and say "Hey, I'm going to design something!" but the more I learn about molecular structure, DNA, biochemistry, etc. the more I am convinced that something gave us a push in the right direction, even if it was just a little catalyst as opposed to a blueprint.
I think you've got the deist view point, which is, as far as I'm concerned, the most sensible god.
Now a days, I'm intrigued by the evolving multiverse theory. I can't really explain it, but Hawkings does a pretty good job. (If you want advanced physics in layman's terms I'd suggest a Briefer History of Time)
“I am the King of Rome, and above grammar”
Emperor Sigismund
I enjoyed reading this blog very much, and although I have a lot to say Im not very good at explaining it in words, so excuse my lack of true intelligence here. I was raised in a fairly christian family. We werent people who attended church every sunday, but made sure we got their on holidays and as much as we could. When I was about 13 I started to really think about wheather there really could be a God up their somewhere. My theory was then, and partially continues now, that if their is a god so powerful enough to create this earth we live on, how is it their is so much suffering. People killing people, groups bombing other groups because they share diverse beleifs, children are torn from their homes only to show up dead on some river bank 3 months later...People are being raped, abused, beaten, and tourtured every day and as much as I try I cant get myself to beleive that someone so powerful cannot put an end to all of this evil. I would love more then anything to beleive again, I just find it hard to do so given the facts we witness each and every day of our lives.
I hear you on that one.
“I am the King of Rome, and above grammar”
Emperor Sigismund