[lbo-talk] Re:theism vs atheism:the two party system

Jon Johanning zenner41 at mac.com
Sat Dec 11 10:40:36 PST 2004


On Dec 10, 2004, at 5:03 PM, frank scott wrote:


> huh? how plausible can they be if not well grounded? is it plausible
> that god made the universe, or that a big bang made it? who made the
> bang?

Plausible in the sense that models by which life could originate from non-life can be constructed on the basis of already-established scientific theories (see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life>, but we don't currently have enough information to decide which, if any, of them might be the correct explanation. But the fact that such models can be presented would seem to cast doubt on the proposition that *only* an intelligent designer can explain the origin of life.

Of course, one could still claim that an intelligent designer designed the whole universe, including the mechanisms which generated life, and then sat back and watched it all play out -- basically the old idea of "deism" <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism> (God as "the Divine Watchmaker"). But the question remains: how complex does the universe have to be to require an intelligent designer? What does "complexity" mean here? Is the universe actually complex in the relevant sense? And just how does the claimed process of "intelligent design" and "creation" of the universe work? Does it actually add to the knowledge of reality that science sans God gives us, or is it just theological word-mongering?

It's rather sad that Flew, who used to be able to deal with such questions quite incisively, seems to have regressed in his intellectual capacity to this degree.

As for the Big Bang and religion, see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang#Big_Bang_theory_and_religion>. (And also the discussion page for this Big Bang article.) The strictly scientific view (which has its dissenters -- see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Big_bang#Weaknesses_and_criticisms_of_the_Big_Bang_theory>) would be that the "big bang" is a reasonable inference from the presently available evidence, and that we have no evidence that would tell us anything about what might have happened before it. (If in fact there *was* anything before it -- it is quite reasonable to argue that time itself originated in the big bang, as well as space. But now we're getting a bit metaphysical.) Some people are dissatisfied with such a position, and simply have a hankering for some Big Guy With A Beard who somehow waved a wand and brought everything into existence. I doubt that the rest of us will ever change their minds on this point, so we will just have to agree to disagree.

Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________ In my religion there would be no exclusive doctrine; all would be love, poetry and doubt. -- Cyril Connoll (The Unquiet Grave)



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list