|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
|
| |
| ChatGPT | |
| Total: 916,918 Year: 4,175/9,624 Month: 1,046/974 Week: 5/368 Day: 5/11 Hour: 0/2 |
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: What Is The Positive Evidence For Atheism? | |||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member  Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Modulus writes: That isn't to say that Dawkins is arguing that evolution is gnostic about god, it just means that god is no longer a necessary explanatory entity. I disagree completely. (I imagine that really surprises you.  ) Evolution doesn't change anything about the need for God. It doesn't matter what the methodology was that used for us to be who and what we are. The fact remains that we exist and that we perceive the universe in a particular way. Science has nothing to say about why we or anything else exists. Edited by GDR, : No reason given. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Modulus writes: Sure there are still gaps in our knowledge, and you are free to squeeze god into them. However, evolution did explain a territory that was completely dominated by theistic explanations. I'm not trying to squeeze God into anything. My understanding of science, correct is I'm wrong, is that the results require physical evidence. Let's say that science is able to delve back and show how the first cell could have been formed from non-organic material. Science would still not be able to answer why it happened at all.
Modulus writes: However, science does have a lot to say about why we exist. We are here because our parent's genes successfully copied about 50% of themselves each. Our parent's were here for the same reason. Now, 4 billion years of explanation for why we are here is a pretty damned impressive chunk of god's domain invaded. Sure we can still invoke god during that 4 billion year history, but the point is it is no longer necessary to do so. No longer does the startling complexity of life necessitate a designer, another, less incredible, explanation exists for most if not all of that. As Reagen would have said, "there you go again". You are talking about a long complex process to get us where we are today and then because we have discovered the process you say that we have done away with the need for God. I'll try again with a point I made to NJ. Lets' say that geneticists had discovered that man's DNA indicated that he had come from soil in the area of Sumeria 6000 years ago, and then lo and behold the DNA of women showed that their history went back to some guy's rib around the same time. Now you could make the claim that science had answered all the questions and now we don't need God anymore. Just because we make a discovery of our biological history tells us nothing about the need for a creator. I repeat, science is agnostic. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
NJ writes: If God purposed anything, then He controls the direction. We would be the ship, but He would be the rudder, no? If evolution is a totally unguided process, then how does someone like GDR reconcile that? It seems to me that he won't be able to occupy both positions. He has to get rid of one in order for the other to be true. I've never claimed that evolution is an unguided process. I'm not prepared to say whether God started the ball rolling in such a way that everything was laid out at that time, or if He had a hand in the genetic mutations that haved occured as the process unfolded. (I'm inclined towards the latter, but that is just conjecture on my part.) Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
