i am an atheist so don't take this to be more than what it is. i think when
arguing with a theist, it may be a good approach to introduce the idea of
selectively closed systems. we often find ourselves haggling over
words...like evidence, proof, omnipotence, etc. to be honest, neither an
atheist nor a theist can be correct in assumption. selectvely closed systems
theory cuts through most of that. here's why. if g does exist, we certainly
have no evidence for him. a theist would argue that the universe is
evidence. endless arguments ensue at this point. we have no other
indications of g's interaction with us. so the best way i see to discuss
further would be to take what we do know and argue that.
a selectively closed system can allow either input, output or both. we
choose selectivity in order to throw a bone to theists in assuming g created
the universe. since we haven't observed the dissolution of matter and energy
within the universe, it is safe to say g's closed system is one allowing
output only - assumes g created the universe. we cannot know about the
actors within a closed system. we can only infer based on how one of its
actores interacts with us. if we propose g exists in this kind of system, it
doesn't seem to matter as much if g did in fact create the universe.
under the definition of that system type, there can be no way for most
religions to be valid. this is especially the case when a religion claims
exclusivity. one cannot directly know anything about g within that system.
indirect knowledge seems to be the only way g would be evidencing herself.
of what value is that to us? we cannot perceive her existence and we only
have a "creation" to let us know something about g. there is no way for us
to have a personal relationship with her under these conditions. and, all
else is just an infered guess. that means all that is preported to have been
said of g is false. direct or indirect communication to us from g, outside
of what we can physically validate, is for not! rules, edicts, etc. simply
don't stand.
there are open and closed systems of different varieties from which to
choose. this type seems to most appropriately meet experience. it becomes
irrelevant to debate g's existence and inane when theists continue to do so.
we simply cannot know.
what's you 0.02?
.
|
