Cosmology: Latest theories of everything (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Friday, August 04, 2017, 04:10 (2668 days ago) @ dhw

TONY: If we can not KNOW, why is faith irrational? It is the only alternative left.

DAVID: There can only be chance or design. dhw hunts for third ways which don't exist.

DHW: Faith: “strong or unshakeable belief in something, esp. without proof or evidence” (Encarta). Don’t get me wrong on this. I am not attacking faith. But it is obvious that the evidence either way is not strong enough to support a general consensus on the subjects we discuss and since, as you say, none of us can KNOW the truth, there has to come a point at which belief abandons reason. Hence irrationality. Faith is NOT the only alternative left. The alternative to faith is to remain open-minded. That obviously applies to the choice between chance and design, but I am even open-minded enough to consider forms of design that do not depend on David’s personal concept of a god.

Ah, but my old friend, even the option of remaining open-minded is a form of FAITH. It is FAITH that we WILL eventually have enough information to be able to, not make a choice, but to not NEED to make a choice because the answer is utterly obvious. And that is, to me, where your logic fails.

If Agnosticism is a type of Faith, then we have three types of Faith:

• Faith that there is a God of some form.
  
• Faith that there is NOT a God of some form.
  
• Faith that one day we will KNOW if there is a God of some form.

Now, if you have no Faith in God, and are not Agnostic, then your only recourse is Evolution. if you have faith that we will one day KNOW, you withhold making a choice, then you do not WANT to make a choice. The question becomes WHY don't you want to make a choice. Obviously, Evolution does not hold up to critical inspection. But the alternative is God. So the question is, if evolution is discarded because of lack of evidence, and the only alternative is God, then WHY are you afraid to commit to there being a God? Is it because if you have to commit to acknowledging that there is a God, then you must also make a choice between a Personal God or a Nebulous God?

Having to make that choice leads to another choice that must be made. If it is a nebulous God, why did he do it? If it is a Personal God, why did he let things get to this state? The idea of a Nebulous God is, in its own way, as terrifying as Evolution, because it means there is no point to any of this. And if there is no point, you have to answer hard questions about pain and suffering. What could possibly be worth all the pain and suffering in the world if all of this is pointless? Why bother?

The choice of a personal God is even more terrifying, because then comes the question of accountability. Were we wrong? Did we make choices that make us too unworthy as to be be beyond redemption? Why did he allow all of this pain and suffering? What kind of special asshole must he to let it go on like this?

So, I would like to know why YOUR brand of faith is better or worse, in your eyes, then other brands of faith. And yes, it IS better in your eyes because it is the brand of faith YOU CHOSE. (I don't mean that to sound as caustic as it does, but I know no better way to phrase the question.)

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.