A: There is no evidence for gods.

C: You are quite correct.

A: What? But you believe in God.

C: I do indeed -- on the strength of the evidence.

A: But you just admitted that there was no evidence.

C: There is no evidence for "gods." There is plenty of evidence for God.

A: Do tell.

C: Space is so constituted that it includes time; Space and time are so constituted that they could support matter. Matter is so constituted that it could support life; the universe is so constituted that it could yield life; life is so constituted that it could support personality, and consciousness, and morality, and rationality, and aesthetics, and emotion, and love; and people are so constituted to be able to understand and appreciate it all. All of these things represent evidence for Something Beyond matter and energy.

A: So you say.

C: There is no path to any of them from matter and energy alone. The earlier ones are prior to matter and energy. The later ones are beyond matter and energy.

A: Nobody argues that these things derive from matter and energy alone. There is also a chance component.

C: But there is no evidence for chance.

A: Many philosophers take chance to be an independent fundamental feature of reality.

C: But they have no evidence that it is any such thing.

A: Come on -- everyone believes in chance.

C: Everyone talks about chance as if it exists, but the word "chance" is just a placeholder for our ignorance. When we roll a die or flip a coin, the result is entirely deterministic. But we call it “chance” because of our inability to identify and integrate all the causal factors. Invoking "chance" is the ultimate argument from ignorance.

A: That's a curious position to take. But suppose, for sake of argument, I grant the point that there needs to be "Something Beyond". How can you possibly associate this "Something Beyond" with your god?

C: Well, this “Something Beyond” needs to be intelligent to be the source of intelligence -- because the alternative (the suggestion that intelligence is an accident) is… foolish. This “Something Beyond” needs to be good to be the source of morality -- because the alternative (the suggestion that goodness is an accident) is… evil.

A: This "Something Beyond" is already beginning to look too much like what you call "God" for my liking.

C: If the shoe fits...

Evidence (again)

MORE POSTS

blogging through that Sermon -- Law Fulfillment

blogging through that Sermon -- Light

blogging through that Sermon -- Salt

blogging through that Sermon -- Beatitudes#8