Re: The logic of atheism

prabbit1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> prabbit1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>>> What evidence do you have that no god of any type exists?
>
>> I'm gonna make two /very/ small stretches in answering your
>> rhetorical question.
>
>> The first is that all gods have as an essential property
>> some sort of supernatural characteristic. The second is that
>> ``supernatural'' is merely a synonym for ``really, truly,
>> honestly, I really really mean it, no exceptions at all,
>> perfectly, absolutely, impossible.''
>
> No, it's not. It's a synonym for "violates the laws of
> nature." I.e. it does something that natural law says can't
> happen.

Exactly. And for ``natural law'' to have any meaning, it has
to be unbreakable, even by Superman. If Superman can break
it, it's not a natural law, though it may well be a rather
emphatic ``natural suggestion.''

> Now that doesn't make it impossible, it just makes it impossible
> inside our universe and under our laws of nature. Now a supposed
> god could exist outside our universe. It could also, if it's
> really a god, suspend or break the laws of nature. There's
> nothing inherently illogical about such.

But, as I explained in my last note, it all depends on
the...ah...nature of the natural law in question. And that's
because, you see, certain natural laws aren't ``just'' universal;
in Sagan's terms, they're literally Cosmic. That is, they would
apply equally well in /all/ universes (assuming, of course, that
it even makes sense in the first place to write of more than a
single totality).

Take something trivial, like 1 + 1 = 2. (And, if you would, do
please spare me the sophomoric jokes that re-define the terms--the
binary answer of ``10'' or the Boolean answer of ``1,'' for
example. I'm talking about the fundamental concepts the standard
definitions of those terms describe, not godawful puns made on the
words we use to describe them.)

It doesn't matter at all /what/ universe you're in; if you start
with one thing, and add another thing to your brand-new collection
of things, you've now got two things. And no super-powers could
possibly change that.

Oh, sure, sufficient super-powers could certainly convince a
careful observer that the answer is different. Heck, you don't
even need super-powers--even a second-rate stage magician can do
it with the drop of a length of rope. But they're not violating
any laws of nature--just your sense of credulity.

So, since we've now established that there's at least one natural
law that not even a supernatural being could violate, we've
forever vanquished the supernatural. While it may remain the case
that there really is some ``rain god'' somewhere that could
``magically'' cause an ``unnatural'' rain storm to appear out
of nowhere, it becomes readily apparent that it's really our
understanding of the laws of nature that's been violated--not
those laws themselves. Given the same understanding as the rain
god and the same access to resources, anybody could do the same
thing--just as anybody with a bit of curiosity, intelligence,
skill, and persistence can pull off the rope trick.

Cheers,

b&

--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Letter to the Editor: God set the universal clock
    ... > Without such a force and laws to control it, there would be a state of chaos. ... > But the universe is not in chaos, for all heavenly bodies follow an orderly ... God designed all this and set up laws for the operation of all things ... The non-chaotic aspects of nature are due to the laws of nature. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Archbishop more or less admits theres no God
    ... That means he is no more a 'god' than ... If he created the laws of the universe, ... That would seem to fit with the current evidence. ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: Vista beta vs. OSX
    ... >>> The universe has no conscious vendetta against us. ... >>> argument that evolution happened by blind chance into human technology. ... > Human laws are made by people (and sometimes attributed to God). ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Archbishop more or less admits theres no God
    ... the universe to ensure nothing goes faster than light because ... physical laws amenable to life. ... That would seem to fit with the current evidence. ... many people find God "too convenient"), ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: Vista beta vs. OSX
    ... >> The universe has no conscious vendetta against us. ... > verifiable "LAWS" which control the operation of the Universe, ... Human laws are made by people (and sometimes attributed to God). ... >>> Scientists may uncover the gifts of God which He has placed ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)