The argument against God

[lukec]

CR- I just read the article, and it seems pretty biased and almost petty, to be honest. And it starts out with dubiousness- why would a mathematician's (15% believers) belief in god hold more sway than a biologist's (6% believers) disbelief? Then, the concept of a mathematician's heaven is established, but no sources are cited to show that mathematician's "believe they commune with this realm of timeless entities through a sort of extrasensory perception." It seems a bit hard to believe.

There are also some odd, insubstantiated claims, for example

But grappling with its flawed logic has led to a deeper understanding of existence, causation, time and infinity.

It really feels as if the author has more of a problem with the stance Paulos has taken than anything else. Little barbs like "His stock market book told how he was suckered into losing a bundle on WorldCom stock, but never mind," seem designed to convince the reader of Paulos' fallibility.

I got off topic there. Apologies.

Anyway. That main quote:

''A physicist, a biologist and a mathematician walk into a bar. Bartender says, “Any of you believe in God?” Which of the three is most likely to say yes?..........

Answer: the mathematician.''


This could be less misleadingly put:

"One random representative from each field of physics, biology, and mathematics walk into a bar. Bartender says, 'Any of you believe in God?' Are any of the three likely to say yes?........

Answer: Nope."