RE: Origin of Articles
June 12, 2012 at 12:27 pm
(This post was last modified: June 12, 2012 at 12:30 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(June 7, 2012 at 11:27 pm)elunico13 Wrote: Now you're getting into science when you mention gravity. Science relies on the Law of uniformity. Don't you recognize that no one can account for these preconditions of intelligibility without the biblical God.
My experience is that everyone but a certain subset of Abrahamists can account for these preconditions of intelligibility without the biblical God. Some account for it with a different God, for instance, while some recognize that trying to account for it before you've sufficiently studied it is putting the cart before the horse.
(June 7, 2012 at 11:27 pm)elunico13 Wrote: So you haven't come up with any justification for logic according to your worldview.
That's what you keep asserting without supporting your assertion.
(June 7, 2012 at 11:27 pm)elunico13 Wrote: How do you account for the law of uniformity which science presupposes? Simpler terms... How do you know the future will be like the past?
Inference. It's not a law of logic, but it's very useful. Of course, the future may not be like the past. Maybe the rules will change. If that happens and we survive, science will promptly get to work trying to figure out what happened, and religion will promptly make something up.
(June 7, 2012 at 11:27 pm)elunico13 Wrote: Let me guess... "because the future has always been like the past in the past".
Something like that. Of course it's not knowledge, just reasonable certainty. And it's not just the inference that the earth will continue rotating around the sun because it's always done so, it's deduction based on the understanding of the forces in play: we know why the earth will continue rotating around the sun unless something major happens to change that, and we have a rough idea of when that will no longer be so because we understand enough to forecast how the future will be different from the past. How do YOU account for being able to extrapolate the future from the past, given that you believe in a being that not only can change the rules, but supposedly has changed the rules (stopping the rotation of the earth to facilitate a Hebrew victory, for instance)?
(June 7, 2012 at 11:27 pm)elunico13 Wrote: Lets see if you recognize the problem with the answer that I most commonly get from atheists.
Saying it's a problem doesn't make it a problem. Science is ultimately based on what works, it doesn't have to account for why what works works in order to be the best tool we've ever had for making discoveries about nature.