RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
May 6, 2013 at 9:04 am
(This post was last modified: May 6, 2013 at 9:15 am by Neo-Scholastic.)
LPS, for now let’s take what you say as given: that appealing to transcendent principles “kicks the can down the road”. My response is that curiousity and rational inquiry is all about seeking deeper and more thorough understanding of the world. Let me give an example:
I’m in my car with three of my friends: a mechanic, a physicist, and a priest. Now my car is very old and so they are all wondering if my car even starts and I say, “Of course! Every time I turn the key, the car starts. The turning the key is the cause and the car starting is the effect. It’s just a fact.”
The mechanic then says, “There’ much more going on. When you turn the key, it starts a whole chain of cause and effect. The key activates the starter motor that moves the pistons, until the spark plugs ignite the gas and the engine starts to run on its own.” And that he says, “is how everything works. Those are the real facts.”
The physicist says, “Actually, the chain of causes and effects goes much deeper than that, not just the movement of the parts, but the chemical reaction of combustion, and even deeper into to the fundamental forces of energy and matter.” And that he adds, “explains everything that needs to be explained.
Then the priest says, “And here I thought the car started because we want to go bowling.”
The point of my story is this. The mechanic knows more than I do. The physicist knows more than both me and the mechanic. And while the priest may know nothing about cars or physics, he does know something that adds to our understanding of the world: the contribution of intelligent agency. As it applies to my critics, the key starting the engine is not a brute fact; there is more to be known. The operation of the engine is not a brute fact; there is more to be known. And I’m saying if we call the laws of physics a brute fact, then we have stopped short. There is more to be known, especially with respect to why the law of cause and effects works.
In addition, positing the existence of god or transcendent influences will not stop reasoned inquiry. One unique feature of the Christian thought is the belief that god can be known. “God did it” is not the end of my curiosity; it is the beginning. God did it, but I still want to know how, why and understand more about His nature. The minute you say, that’s just a brute fact, you have stopped thinking about it. And it’s okay to presuppose something as a brute fact IF it explains everything that needs to be explained. Laws of parsimony only apply between two theories with equal explanatory power. LPS, you haven’t saved a step. Instead you’re leaving half of the problem on the table.
I’m in my car with three of my friends: a mechanic, a physicist, and a priest. Now my car is very old and so they are all wondering if my car even starts and I say, “Of course! Every time I turn the key, the car starts. The turning the key is the cause and the car starting is the effect. It’s just a fact.”
The mechanic then says, “There’ much more going on. When you turn the key, it starts a whole chain of cause and effect. The key activates the starter motor that moves the pistons, until the spark plugs ignite the gas and the engine starts to run on its own.” And that he says, “is how everything works. Those are the real facts.”
The physicist says, “Actually, the chain of causes and effects goes much deeper than that, not just the movement of the parts, but the chemical reaction of combustion, and even deeper into to the fundamental forces of energy and matter.” And that he adds, “explains everything that needs to be explained.
Then the priest says, “And here I thought the car started because we want to go bowling.”
The point of my story is this. The mechanic knows more than I do. The physicist knows more than both me and the mechanic. And while the priest may know nothing about cars or physics, he does know something that adds to our understanding of the world: the contribution of intelligent agency. As it applies to my critics, the key starting the engine is not a brute fact; there is more to be known. The operation of the engine is not a brute fact; there is more to be known. And I’m saying if we call the laws of physics a brute fact, then we have stopped short. There is more to be known, especially with respect to why the law of cause and effects works.
In addition, positing the existence of god or transcendent influences will not stop reasoned inquiry. One unique feature of the Christian thought is the belief that god can be known. “God did it” is not the end of my curiosity; it is the beginning. God did it, but I still want to know how, why and understand more about His nature. The minute you say, that’s just a brute fact, you have stopped thinking about it. And it’s okay to presuppose something as a brute fact IF it explains everything that needs to be explained. Laws of parsimony only apply between two theories with equal explanatory power. LPS, you haven’t saved a step. Instead you’re leaving half of the problem on the table.
(May 6, 2013 at 8:29 am)Faith No More Wrote: The supernatural must be ruled out until it can be demonstrated to exist, and a lack of a natural understanding of a process is not evidence for the supernatural. Unless you can demonstrate that a natural explanation is impossible, the supernatural must be dismissed.This attitude is part of the problem. Dividing the world into two realms, one for the natural world consisting of quantifiable interaction between matter by means of cause and effect. And a second realm of values and ideas restricted to qualifiable mental properties like sensation, intention, and meaning. This Cartesian divide is the convenient fiction behind the scientific method. It intentionally ignores half of the phenomena to focus on natural processes, to the exclusion of mental phenomena. And that's a good thing, but only so long as we recognize that we have installed an artificial barrier. Like the old cliche says, "If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail."
