Why suffer the oxymoronic obfuscation of theism?

    Why  should one beieve or disbelieve in the supernatural?

     What counts as evidence for it? We naturalists-rationalists find none. Why, none can present it self, because that would go agianst our conservation of knowedge. Nature presents no divine intent as Lamberth's teleonomic argument notes and thus cannot affirm His very existence but can affirm that no divine intent presents itself so that as active God, He cannot exist! Alexander Smoltczyk states that He is neither a principle nor an entity nor a person, but without being an entity or a person, how could He make Himself that very explanation?That is more theological shenanigans just as is  Paul Tillich calling Him the Ground of Being or Geing Itself!

     Also, none can exist,because despite John Hick's epistemic distance argument, no ambiguity exists to view any matter as teological.

     How could He function when per Reichenbach's argument from Existence that Existence is all, no transcendence exists behnd or beyond it. No one can do probability statements or fine-tuning arguments,because nothing exists with which to compare it! And supernaturalists beg the question of directed outcomes to make all teleological arguments. The argument from reason and to design are the other two. The former argues that as we all depend on reason to reach the truth, how can natural selection, without that Divine Director, favor our finding truth? What an absurdity?  Obviously, those who survived had truth on their side. Now, by trial and error and with instruments we find the truth. Would Alvin Plantinga aver then that, as he does in the problem of evil, perhaps the Devil makes for errors? No! So much for obscurantism!

    The argument to design uses the pareidolias of intent and design  to find the designer when reality only presents teleonomy and patterns. Science finds only teleonomy- causalism- mechanism-no directed outcomes instead of vitalism-- directed outcomes and patterns instead of designs. Scientists are studying why and how people find non-existent patterns,  and pareidolia of design for patterns. This is Lamberth's argument from pareidolia.

     Per Angeles's argument, cause,event and time presuppose previous ones, an thus no God the Big Banger is needed. And science finds no need for God the Sustainer as the quantum fielfs whence comes universes, in accordance with the law of conservation, exist eternally! To bring is God one uses Deus ex  machina - the man behind the curtain! That curtain obfuscates reality!

Views: 97

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by mlg.lamberth on August 28, 2011 at 7:13pm
 Thanks, Steph  S
Comment by Steph S. on August 28, 2011 at 1:16pm
This is great!  Thanks for posting this.

About

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

Latest Activity

Idaho Spud posted a video

Tim Minchin | "The Good Book" | w/ Lyrics

"The Good Book" by Tim Minchin *All rights to Tim Minchin* Lyrics: Life is like an ocean voyage and our bodies are the ships And without a moral compass we w...
1 hour ago
Loam Gnome commented on Daniel W's group Godless in the garden
2 hours ago
Loren Miller commented on Loren Miller's group Quotations – Momentous, Memorable, Meaningful
5 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to Tom Sarbeck's discussion Science As A Personal Journey
11 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck posted a discussion
11 hours ago
Patricia commented on Daniel W's group Godless in the garden
15 hours ago
Loam Gnome commented on Daniel W's group Godless in the garden
15 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to tom sarbeck's discussion The USA Is Becoming More Secular in An Important Way (Despite the Pessimism of A Few of Us)
15 hours ago

© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service