RE: Two babies discussion.
February 13, 2015 at 10:44 pm
(This post was last modified: February 13, 2015 at 11:03 pm by Lek.)
(February 13, 2015 at 10:13 pm)Jenny A Wrote:(February 13, 2015 at 10:10 pm)Lek Wrote: I didn't come as a result of discarding the God hypothesis. It came from studying nature and learning to apply the knowledge we found to make our lives easier. I'm sure that as early people were praying to their gods, they were busy searching for food, constructing shelters, making clothes, etc. - just as theists do today.
Exactly. What useful has come of the god hypothesis. Everything we do on our own is evidence against it. Anything for it?
How does doing stuff on our own, as we are designed to do, in any way speak against the existence of God? God didn't design us to just sit around and wait for him to do everything for us. The fact that that we haven't found out how to create matter out of nothing or understand the concept of infinity is support for a non-material creator.
(February 13, 2015 at 10:19 pm)Esquilax Wrote: You ask why we're so different, and then answer that question in the very next sentence: we're better at gaining information about the world than they were. We have established methods for doing so that were unavailable to them, and none of those methods have borne out any god claims.
In relationship to knowing everything about the universe, I'd say if the ancients knew 1%, we know 1.1%.
Quote:More importantly, your god sense isn't universal, in that all over the world, it's a different god. People do not believe in the same god everywhere, and somehow, the god they believe in is usually the one they were brought up to believe in.The fact that people don't believe the same thing about God is evidence that there really is a "god sense". If we all believed the same thing, you could reason that we were all indoctrinated to believe in a god.
