RE: Arguments against existence of God.
December 4, 2018 at 12:51 pm
(This post was last modified: December 4, 2018 at 12:56 pm by Deesse23.)
(December 4, 2018 at 10:30 am)Cherub786 Wrote:(December 4, 2018 at 10:18 am)Jehanne Wrote: I don't know where you are getting your information; even if true, the majority to most scientists are atheistic:
Wikipedia -- Demographics of atheism: Geographic distribution
Ditto for most philosophers:
The Largest-Ever Survey of Philosophers: What Do They Believe?
It's immaterial whether majority of scientists are atheists or not. The point is that majority of cosmologists and physicists acknowledge the truth that the universe is not eternal, and they generally agree that they have no solid explanation for how and why the universe came about.
They say that the beginning of the universe is a "singularity". Now it is all theoretical, based on mathematical formulas and so many assumptions.
Even these atheist scientists are forced to admit that the questions about the nature of the cosmos and how it came into being naturally lead to belief in God, as Dawkins said:
I think that when you consider the beauty of the world and you wonder how it came to be what it is, you are naturally overwhelmedwith a feeling of awe, a feeling of admiration and you almost feel a desire to worship something. I feel this, I recognise that other scientists such as Carl Sagan feel this, Einstein felt it. We, all of us, share a kind of religious reverence for the beauties of the universe, for the complexity of life. For the sheer magnitude of the cosmos, the sheer magnitude of geological time. And it's tempting to translate that feeling of awe and worship into a desire to worship some particular thing, a person, an agent. You want to attribute it to a maker, to a creator.
Nice setup man, i just cant decide if its intentional or if you just read what you WANTED to read.
So, please allow me to help you in correctly reading his quote:
#1 they generally agree that they have no solid explanation for how and why the universe came about
And what does a scientist and every other intellectual honest human being say when they have no explanation: "I dont know"
What does somebody like you say in this case?: "cosmologists and physicists acknowledge the truth that the universe is not eternal"
Well if you knew it was "true" beforehand, before scientists investigated and found no evidence, then you should call one of em and present your evidence. Just out of curiosity: What was your evidence that let you "know" the truth?
#2 you almost feel a desire
Please, can you translate "almost" for me. I am not native english speaker. It is like in "almost pregnant"?
#3 And it's tempting to translate that feeling of awe and worship into a desire
While you are at it, please xplain what "tempting" in such a context means. Is it like "I like to do it but it seems wrong to me"?
#4 You want to attribute it to a maker, to a creator
Almost sounds to me as if, considering his prior statment following the work "almost" (see #2) as if he wanted to point out that all of what he explained is tempting to almost attribute all of it to a creator, but knowing better, respectively knowing ultimately nothing, he withholds his belief. Sounds to me like someones rational mind stayed in control of his emotions. What do you think is the desirable thing to do for a scientist (or anyone else) in this situation, in lack of a solid explanation (see #1)?
Pro tip: argument from ignorance
Cetero censeo religionem delendam esse