RDFRS US:
The mission of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science is to support scientific education, critical thinking and evidence-based understanding of the natural world in the quest to overcome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and suffering.
The Magic of Reality
for the iPad
Sean Faircloth:
Attack of the Theocrats!
Comment 14 by AtheistEgbert
These sort of issues come up against a fundamental logical issue.......which is the question : What would one expect the universe to look like if it did have a purpose ?
To my mind....the conclusion may well be correct, but there's erroneous logic used to get there. We're in 'all ravens are black' territory.
It is a similar issue to the manner in which some argue that the laws of nature mean there is no God. But then, surely one would equally conclude that a universe with no laws at all could not be presided over by any self-respecting God. The trouble is that we have no idea what a universe presided over by a God would actually look like.
A nano-scale scientist in our own brains would likely conclude......correctly.....that there was nothing going on but the laws of physics. Why, then, would he ever conclude that what was going on contained intelligence, purpose, meaning, etc ? After all.....even when those things do exist they are themselves indistinguishable from nature on the molecular scale. And isn't that precisely our own position in relation to the universe ?
The conclusion that the universe has no purpose is more an intuitive one based on 'common sense'. I don't think ( for the reasons given above ) that it is something one can derive purely from logic.
Permalink Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:43:47 UTC | #931916