Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Evolutionistic Faith
apostolos
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 25 (80503)
01-24-2004 4:58 PM


I would like to say at the outset that this is not an attack or slandering of any person that holds to a position different than the one I hold to. I do have a serious inquiry. While I expect this thread to be somewhat short and lacking in back-N-forth debate, I hope I can get some sincere responses. Here goes.
In my limited time on this site I have observed statements from many individuals holding to a position of evolution. With a few exceptions, IMHO, all of those I observed hold to a position of the non-existence of God. The similarity between myself and such a person is that we both recognize there is a system governing what exists. Whether its genetic traits being passed on to offspring or laws of nature or physics, etc., the basic issue is some sort of system of rules by which that which exists operates. The difference is in the ascription of authorship of these rules to a being. I stand with the Bible when it says that God created, set in motion, and sustains all things that exist. It seems to me an evolutionist would differ in not believing God is the author. It can not be empirically proven that God does not exist. Regardless or what evidence is examined, there is no way of proving that God is not dwelling beyond our limited perception, invisibly keeping all things going. I think it is obvious why I make my choice, but just in case let me say that I believe the Word of God is true and base my position off it and other factors that will go unmentioned.
The question I am raising is not about my position so please do not respond with an argument against it. Instead, as I think I have set forth clearly, I would like to focus on the choice evolutionists make. While not being able to prove the non-existence of God there is an assumption (perhaps presumption is a better word, I am not sure) that He does not exist. I am curious to know why you, as an evolutionist, have made the choice to exercise your faith in this way.
Again, I am not attempting to antagonize but am genuinely curious. While I have my own thoughts on the matter I will withhold them until such time as I see an adequate response. Thank you in advance for taking the time to respond.
Russ
[edit note: I had intended this topic to appear in the forum 'Faith and Belief' but mistakenly placed it here. If it is possible for an admin to move it I would appreciate it.]
[This message has been edited by apostolos, 01-24-2004]

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by PaulK, posted 01-24-2004 5:23 PM apostolos has not replied
 Message 4 by Mike Holland, posted 01-24-2004 6:00 PM apostolos has not replied
 Message 11 by sidelined, posted 01-24-2004 7:22 PM apostolos has not replied
 Message 12 by NosyNed, posted 01-24-2004 7:42 PM apostolos has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 2 of 25 (80507)
01-24-2004 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by apostolos
01-24-2004 4:58 PM


Firstly you are making a grave error in linking a belief in evolution to lack of belief in God. I might point to people like Kenneth Miller or to the astronomer Howard Van Till who shares your belief that God sustains all that exists.
You are making a second error in assuming that a conclusion that God does not exist must be an exercise in faith. As many people arguing for God claim, organised complex entities demand an explanation for their existence - they are unlikely to simply exist. Yet any proposed God is just such an entity and there is no real explanation for the existence of a God. Given that, in the absence of any significant evidence to the contrary it is quite reasonable to come to the tentative conclusion that God does not exist. Or is it the case that you never form an opinion on a priori considerations such as those I have pointed out ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by apostolos, posted 01-24-2004 4:58 PM apostolos has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Chiroptera, posted 01-24-2004 5:49 PM PaulK has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 25 (80511)
01-24-2004 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by PaulK
01-24-2004 5:23 PM


It is true that one cannot prove that God does not exist. Any kind of universe is consistent with the existent of some god, since all one needs to do is to claim that the existing universe is the way god wanted to create it.
On the other hand, it is possible, in principle, to prove, or at least demonstrate conclusively, that God does exist. All one needs are bone fide miracles, events that simply cannot be explained through natural laws (including the potential for human error). If nothing else, God could make a personal effort to demonstrate to me that she exists by directly speaking to me and consistently showing me one miraculous event after another.
It seems that if there is a god, she created the universe in such a way that there seems to be no known phenomenon that does not have a naturalistic explanation. If god exists, she is the god-of-the-gaps, and the gaps are very small indeed.
Sure, I cannot prove that there is no god, but, as one person stated so long ago (I have read different possibilities as to the exact person), I have no need for that hypothesis.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by PaulK, posted 01-24-2004 5:23 PM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by truthlover, posted 01-24-2004 10:57 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Mike Holland
Member (Idle past 483 days)
Posts: 179
From: Sydney, NSW,Auistralia
Joined: 08-30-2002


Message 4 of 25 (80514)
01-24-2004 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by apostolos
01-24-2004 4:58 PM


In one case, Apostolos, you are dead right. In another, dead wrong.
As you state, one cannot prove empirically that God does not exist. Equally, one cannot prove empirically that God DOES exist. One cannot prove empirically that there are not 73 Gods running the universe, or that God has a father - SuperGod, who in turn has a father - HyperGod. So with a total lack of empirical evidence for God, there is no reason to believe in it.
But you are totally wrong about evolutionists choosing their faith to not believe in God. The simple fact is that many people have chosen to base their beliefs on the evidence they see around them, rather than on what someone preaches. The result is that they don't believe in fairies or ghosts or flying saucers, but they accept evolution (along with many other scientific theories) because they think the evidence supports these theories. Religion and faith have nothing to do with it.
Mike.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by apostolos, posted 01-24-2004 4:58 PM apostolos has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 01-24-2004 6:26 PM Mike Holland has not replied

Itachi Uchiha
Member (Idle past 5615 days)
Posts: 272
From: mayaguez, Puerto RIco
Joined: 06-21-2003


Message 5 of 25 (80519)
01-24-2004 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Mike Holland
01-24-2004 6:00 PM


How can we explain a God that does not belong to our physical dimensions? In basic multivariable calculus you can prove mathematically an infinite number of dimensions. Our limited minds can only graph three : length,height, and width but that doesnt mean that the other dimensions simply dont exist because we cant see them.
Lets imagine that an ant in a two dimensional world wants to get inside a cookie jar to get the cookies. His only two dimensins are width and length. The ant isnt able to figure a way into the jar because there is no way in going around it. I am watching all this from a three dimensional world and i am able to notice that if he climbs all the way up he will reach the opened top,go down and get the cookie,go back up and leave. He does not realize this because he does not know what height is but i come in the picture and give the ant advice on how to get it.
Since we can prove mathematically that more than one dimension exists I pose the following question:
What if there is somebody in another dimension wathching down on us that wants to give us advice on how to live a beter life and help us with our problems but we just simply reject him because of no empirical evidence. Can anybody here jump to other dimensions toprovide us with such evidence?
If the problem in believng in God is empirical evidence then im afraid evolution faces the same problem since empirical evidence to suuport important things like the transitional fossls is not yet available

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Mike Holland, posted 01-24-2004 6:00 PM Mike Holland has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by JonF, posted 01-24-2004 6:37 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 6 of 25 (80522)
01-24-2004 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Itachi Uchiha
01-24-2004 6:26 PM


In basic multivariable calculus you can prove mathematically an infinite number of dimensions
In basic multivariable calculus you can manipulate mathematical conSTructs in an arbitrarily large (but, IIRC, not infinite) number of dimensions. Any correspondence between such manipulations and the real world has to be established on a cas-by-case basis. The ability to manipulate constructs in an arbitrarily large number of dimensions proves nothing other than the ability to manipulate constructs in an arbitrarily large number of dimensions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 01-24-2004 6:26 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Chiroptera, posted 01-24-2004 6:41 PM JonF has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 25 (80525)
01-24-2004 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by JonF
01-24-2004 6:37 PM


Actually, you can define and manipulate contructs in an infinite number of dimensions. But I agree with the point of your post: this does not necessarily have anything to do with the real universe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by JonF, posted 01-24-2004 6:37 PM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 01-24-2004 6:48 PM Chiroptera has replied

Itachi Uchiha
Member (Idle past 5615 days)
Posts: 272
From: mayaguez, Puerto RIco
Joined: 06-21-2003


Message 8 of 25 (80526)
01-24-2004 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Chiroptera
01-24-2004 6:41 PM


Chiroptera writes:
Actually, you can define and manipulate contructs in an infinite number of dimensions. But I agree with the point of your post: this does not necessarily have anything to do with the real universe.
Exactly my point. Are you saying because you cant see it it doesnt exist?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Chiroptera, posted 01-24-2004 6:41 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Chiroptera, posted 01-24-2004 7:12 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied
 Message 10 by JonF, posted 01-24-2004 7:16 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 25 (80531)
01-24-2004 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Itachi Uchiha
01-24-2004 6:48 PM


I am saying that mathematical constructs do not necessarily have anything to do with reality. I am a graduate student in mathematics, and I have no trouble accepting that the concepts that I am working with are a human invention. I do not believe there exists any "infinite dimensional spaces" (even though I work with them as concepts); or, at least, I will not believe there is any physical reality to an infinite dimensional space until someone provides evidence that such a thing exists.
I do believe things that I can't see exist - as long as there is other evidence for there existence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 01-24-2004 6:48 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 10 of 25 (80533)
01-24-2004 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Itachi Uchiha
01-24-2004 6:48 PM


Are you saying because you cant see it it doesnt exist?
No, we're saying that because it's mathematics it doesn't necessarily have any relationship to the real world. All mathematics is manipulating symbols by a set of rules. That's all there is. There is no more. (However, there is art and elegance in figuring out how to manipulate the symbols to achieve some desired end configuration of symbols).
Sometimes those manipulations produce something that we can correlate with something in the real world. Other times they do not; the manipulations are abstract and have nothing to do with reality.
The fact of being able to manipulate mathematical symbols as if they were objects in any number of dimensions does not prove the actual existence of any such dimensions. If you wish to claim the existence of dimensions beyond those we sense, you need actual real-world evidence that is best explained by the existence of such dimensions.
There are some pretty strong indications that the existing evidence may best be explained by eleven-dimensional M-theory or something pretty close to it. The indications aren't strong enough yet for anyone to claim that the existence of eleven dimensions is established. The extra dimensions, if they do exist, are wrapped up in a way that's so weird it's probably impossible for humans to visulaize them accurately.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 01-24-2004 6:48 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 11 of 25 (80536)
01-24-2004 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by apostolos
01-24-2004 4:58 PM


apostolos
In response to your request
I am curious to know why you, as an evolutionist, have made the choice to exercise your faith in this way.
This is a difficult reply since it must seem like dodging but I sincerely do not have faith in evolution in the sense that it is not my impression that faith has any place in rational thinking. Either the evidence weighs in favor of evolution or creationism or something altogether different from both of them. The evidence weighs hugely in favor of evolution and not creationism or any other worldview.

'Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts.'
(Daniel Patrick Moynihan)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by apostolos, posted 01-24-2004 4:58 PM apostolos has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 12 of 25 (80538)
01-24-2004 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by apostolos
01-24-2004 4:58 PM


My Answer
I am curious to know why you, as an evolutionist, have made the choice to exercise your faith in this way.
It has already been noted that "as an evolutionist" indicates a misunderstanding. What you want is "as an atheist" which is a separate issue from understanding evolution.
Ok, that said, "have made the choice to exercise your faith" is an odd expression to me. One form of god or another just doesn't seem to be a very useful or meaningful concept. It isn't a particular "choice" made at some point. It is a non-choice. I just don't see any good reason to consider any of all the different gods (both mentioned here and elsewhere -- and if you read over the Christian postings here you do see different gods ) as all that interesting other than as a socialogical phenomenon.
I think I have a small flicker of understanding of why you might have to ask this question. This is something which is, perhaps, of overwhelming importance to you. It is hard for you to understand that it is of so little importance to my that it isn't something I have to think about a lot or "make a choice" about. I work up some interest in it to engage in conversation about like I do when the local NHL or football team is the subject. To be polite.

Common sense isn't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by apostolos, posted 01-24-2004 4:58 PM apostolos has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Chiroptera, posted 01-24-2004 7:49 PM NosyNed has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 25 (80542)
01-24-2004 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by NosyNed
01-24-2004 7:42 PM


Re: My Answer
Apostolos has conflated the concepts of evolution and atheism, and as a result there seems to be some confusion as to the intent of his question. sidelined seems to think apostolos is asking about acceptance of evolution, whereas I (and NosyNed, it seems) think he is asking about disbelief in god. Do you want to clarify, apostolos?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by NosyNed, posted 01-24-2004 7:42 PM NosyNed has not replied

apostolos
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 25 (80551)
01-24-2004 8:56 PM


What I meant...
Ok, here goes. I have been thinking since post #8 about how to better express my meaning. I am honestly frustrated because I thoght I expressed it pretty clearly. While I am closer to getting this back on track I am still grappling with the exact syntax to effectively direct it. So in other words, just hold up and bear with me a sec alright?
First, evolution vs. creationism = irrelevant. This is precisely why I put in the editorial note saying I originally meant for the thread to be in "Faith and Belief". I still would rather have it there if it can be moved, unless of course the Admins feel it belongs here more than there. So what I am saying here is that it isn't about evolution. I do not see evolution as a valid scientific method or worldview. THIS IS NOT THE POINT. Even if evolution is true, it does not exclude the existence of God because He could still be the sustainer of the evolutionary system you hold to. This is what I am getting at. I am not saying that belief, adherence to, loyalty to, faith in, etc. an evolutionistic world view begins with a rejection of God. I am referring to cases in which the two coexist.
Second, let me clarify what I am asking by a quote.
It is a non-choice.
This is not true and I will prove it with an illustration. If I set and an apple and an orange in front of you and say choose which you will eat, you will make a choice. "I choose neither." Fine, you still made a choice. A non-choice is a choice, at least in this case. It is a choice to not believe. The idea of a higher (I would say supreme) entity which governs the system in which all existence take place has been presented. Vote yea or nay. Or to be more accurate: Vote yea or do whatever else other than voting yea you want. A decision to not believe in God is a decision to believe something else other than that God exists.
Ok. So now back to my question. Why? Some of the posts so far have, to some degree, expressed the type of answers I was looking for. It seems the rest attempt to redefine belief and faith. The question is not whether evolution is a faith (even though I maintain that it is). The question is "Do you believe in God or do you believe something else" with a presumed answer of "something else" and a follow up question of "Why do you choose to believe so?"
A few brief statements of futher clarification.
I am not asking because I can't relate to God not being important to you. I ask because a choice has been made. I have my own speculations on why that choice was made but as I said in my first post I am holding back on posting them until such a time as I think an adequate level of response has been reached.
I am not separating between "evolutionist" and "atheist". Please examine my question again:
I am curious to know why you, as an evolutionist, have made the choice to exercise your faith in this way.
My question is clearly pointed to the specific person of an evolutionist who does not believe in God. I can see now why this can create confusion but try to think of it as if I had asked atheistic plumbers. I am talking to the atheist but the atheist with the specific worldview of evolution.
Just a sec while I review this post again...
Ok then. Please excuse an apparent lack of literary quality. I have been expressing these things pretty much as they come to me, so there is an obvious lack of quality when compared to some of my other posts. I think, with this post, and especially with it coupled to my first post, I have set forth clearly what I am looking for. If not please let me know what the area of confusion is.
And just to beat redundancy with a big gnarled stick:
As an evolutionist who does not believe in the existence of God, you have made a choice of belief against the existence of God and for some other belief, whatever that may be. I would like to know what motivates you to choose the way you do. Individuals to whom this question does not apply need not respond.
Ok, I hope the covers it.
Russ

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by sidelined, posted 01-24-2004 10:16 PM apostolos has not replied
 Message 18 by truthlover, posted 01-24-2004 11:06 PM apostolos has not replied
 Message 19 by Mike Holland, posted 01-24-2004 11:13 PM apostolos has not replied
 Message 20 by MrHambre, posted 01-25-2004 9:00 AM apostolos has not replied
 Message 21 by PaulK, posted 01-25-2004 9:16 AM apostolos has not replied
 Message 22 by Chiroptera, posted 01-25-2004 1:05 PM apostolos has not replied
 Message 23 by NosyNed, posted 01-25-2004 1:15 PM apostolos has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 15 of 25 (80561)
01-24-2004 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by apostolos
01-24-2004 8:56 PM


Re: What I meant...
apostolos
I am not sure if you fully understand your own question.Look at the examples you are using to assert the point you wish to make.First you have this.
If I set and an apple and an orange in front of you and say choose which you will eat, you will make a choice
Then you somehow think that this is in the same vein as this choice.
As an evolutionist who does not believe in the existence of God, you have made a choice of belief against the existence of God
In the choice between an apple and an orange you have evidence from which to make the choice.It is not the same in the choice of there being or not being a God.Until evidence is presented belief is not possible.
Why is it such a diffcult concept to realize that understanding based on evidence is not the same as faith.

'Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts.'
(Daniel Patrick Moynihan)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by apostolos, posted 01-24-2004 8:56 PM apostolos has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by manfree, posted 01-24-2004 10:32 PM sidelined has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024