A Scientists Approach to Creation (Origins)

by dhw, Monday, January 21, 2013, 19:47 (4323 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I conclude that whether God exists or not is unknowable, and I am trapped with that knowledge. You think you can go further. So does Tony. So do George and Dawkins. And so the paradox is that in our approach to the unknowable, you go one stage further than me with your conclusion, but I go one stage further than you with my speculation, because I do not stop at the unknowable. As Tony so rightly says, I am stubborn!-DAVID: You are right. Tony and I and millions others conclude that the unknowable can be conceived and accepted. You cannot. But you are not one stage further than we are. Whether chance was the mechanism is also unknowable. It is just one of the two unknowable possibilities. Take your choice or fence sit.-In my post I called God and chance two equally unbelievable theories. However, your response is based on a misunderstanding. I was replying to your comment that God himself (i.e. his nature, as opposed to his existence) is unknowable, and so we should not anthropomorphize him because "we are trapped with that knowledge and we can go no further." That is the subject on which Tony and I are both speculating, and that is the sense in which he and I are going one stage further than you.