(June 6, 2010 at 2:19 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote: If there is some intended pattern for humans, it would mean that god is doing some explanation isn't it?
Sure. You'd have to assume that the pattern was something that humans could see iff they took the right 'stance'- i.e. faith. You then end up with a kind of circular argument- iff the humans have faith, they see the pattern, and seeing the pattern is what allows them to have faith. The pattern only 'intends' anything in the view of an observer, and to be an observer of the pattern, you must have faith.
I've never been a fan of circular arguments, and this one strikes me as complete bollocks. Its a good example of the sort of bizarre ontological tangles you end up with if you push theistic arguments to their (il)logical conclusions.
He who desires to worship God must harbor no childish illusions about the matter but bravely renounce his liberty and humanity.
Mikhail Bakunin
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything
Friedrich Nietzsche
Mikhail Bakunin
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything
Friedrich Nietzsche
