I just finished the book I borrowed from rob curiously titled "There Is No God" except the word "no" has been replaced by the word "a" (ie Anthony Flew changed his mind and now he thinks he y a un dieu). anthony is a philosopher (not a scientist). he talks about his beginnings during the first half and his discovery of the divine and "evidence" on the second part. and in between, he makes jabs at scientists particularly atheist biologist and writer for the public understanding science none other than richard dawkins.
anthony presents us with legitimate philosophical questions.
what started it all. the first cause argument. he accepts the premise that god would be immune to the same standard he places on everything else. that everything has a beginning. i find this absurd if not plain convenient.
the most compelling for me, although i remain skeptical, is the fine-tuning argument. an argument from design which pertains to the "fine tuning" of the physical constants of the universe that enabled it to exist. that it suggests an intelligence.
my contention would be is that the explanation would have to be naturalistic. science continues to find the answers to the big questions (life, consciousness, the beginning and order of the universe, the beginnings and mechanism of evolution). not knowing the answers to these big questions is not evidence at all which appear to be another main point taken.
0 comments:
Post a Comment