This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Rabbit is the question

flying goose's Avatar Jump to comment 10 by flying goose

To be honest I never really bought the Rabbit/teapot/spag monster argument. These either exist of do not exist in the material universe. Science can or some day will be able to verify the existence or not of these phenomenon.

Vernon's God lies beyond that kind of positivism. A point Miranda makes well.

How convenient that their God is unknowable and cannot be put into words! It’s pretty difficult to question and critique the truth claims of and to point out the real-life negative consequences of the belief systems of those who hide behind strings of meaningless phrases and who refuse to provide even a vague explanation of what in the hell they actually believe in.

But why would anyone take notice of such a being, if indeed it is possible to do so. If to know such a being is not possible, how would one know what it wants or desires in terms of our behaviour?

This God is a world away from the positivist God of Dogmatic religion.

Why then would such a God be attractive? This answer is that it in itself is not.

It is the negative way that is attractive.

Some people just don't want to be pushed around by any kind of positivism.

Science provides us a with a positivism we can rely on, we don't need any other kind.

Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:21:00 UTC | #427217