How to decide is there a deity (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, January 07, 2009, 10:26 (5606 days ago) @ David Turell

David has summarized his reasons for "deciding to leave agnosticism (to some degree)". - I think it must have been Clare who contacted you. She did a great job! Your contributions have been and continue to be hugely informative, and are always given with great patience and tolerance. For anyone who hasn't read your book, Science vs. Religion, I can only say that I found it vastly more informative and coherent than Dawkins' The God Delusion. As I'm still an agnostic, however, there are clearly many unresolved problems for me, and I will try to respond to your summary. - 1) Religious theology: Like most things human, religion has its good side and its bad side. Fundamentalism and indeed intolerance of any sort appals me, and religion has a lot to answer for. But some of the kindest and gentlest people I know are devout believers. As regards the theology, I would suggest that if there is/was a designer, all the religions function in their own way as metaphors ... they are an attempt to grasp something which by its very nature is ungraspable for finite creatures like ourselves. But of course the vastness of an endless, mindless universe is equally ungraspable, and then the metaphor would be an attempt to make sense of non-sense. - 2) Cosmology: you say "the universe is meticulously designed for life". It seems that way. But there is a fine line between detecting patterns and imposing them (see below on the subject of a creator). The big bang may have been a beginning but ... following on from BBella's argument ... if it did happen, it may still have been "a" beginning and not "the" beginning. In 7 billion years' time (a blip in eternity), when scientists predict the end of our own galaxy, something else will take its place. And given a possible infinity of beginnings in a possible eternity of time, who knows what might eventually emerge? This is an atheist argument, and it's no more and no less believable than the suggestion that this infinite and ever changing mass of materials has an intelligent mind of its own. - 3) Darwin: you say, "Evolution occurred, the issue is the method by which it went from simple to complex, chance or coded programming..." I agree, and it's a crucial point in the argument against atheism. I would also ask how simple is the simple, if it could not only replicate itself, but also contained the potential for all these later complexities. It is indeed difficult to believe that chance could have such creative powers. And yet, given infinity and eternity... - 4) "Realize that no one knows the ultimate truth. Do not personalize the greater power. That is anthropomorphism, a terrible error." The decision concerning design v. chance is only a first stage for me. If we lose our identity when we die, it won't matter one way or the other whether we were designed or not. It would simply be a matter of intellectual curiosity in the here and now. But if we retain our identity (a possibility if we follow the OBE, NDE, paranormal line of thinking), then the nature of a possible designer becomes important. Anthropomorphism = the creation imposing patterns on the creator, but you can look at it the other way... namely, that the creation reflects the creator. This is why the discussions with Mark have been so interesting for me: if we assume deliberate design, it's not unreasonable to assume that there was some kind of purpose, and that what was designed reflects something of the designer. I don't see that as an error ... it seems logical to me. "Then reach conclusions." It may be possible. But I'm still more inclined at the moment to follow your preceding advice: "Sit there and think. Get rid of all preconceived junk from what was concluded earlier and keep your mind open." That was the point I'd reached when I opened up this website. Thanks to you, George, Mark, BBella and many others who have contributed throughout this first year, I'm glad I did. You're right, it's fun, but it's also enlightening and helpful. Sitting and thinking can be a lonely business, but discussing and exchanging ideas is good for the soul or the cerebrum or the electrical impulses or the quanta....