PDA

View Full Version : Are these God of the Gaps?



Sam99
2013-Apr-13, 12:22 PM
Regardless if these atheists say scientists are working on the big problems; Science at the end of the day canít explain the universe, itís utterly incapable. So god is a possible explanation.




Science canít explain the universe; by definition it just leads to more questions raised and more conditions that need them self explained and we have no good reasons to believe otherwise. So god is a possibility.

Strange
2013-Apr-13, 01:31 PM
What do you mean by "explain the universe"? Science is doing a pretty good job so far. Clearly, it can never explain "everything" (I don't think there will ever be an end to questions). So, I suppose you can use God to answer all the currently unanswered questions but what happens as those questions are tackled and answered? You just end up shuffling God around to new questions. ("sorry mate, you can't stay there, we've answered that one now. Why don't you take a seat over there. For the moment..." Not very dignified :))

HenrikOlsen
2013-Apr-13, 01:36 PM
So far no one's shown that a god is a necessary condition for the Universe's existence either, so whether you think there's a god in the cracks or not it really up to you to decide for yourself.
But don't expect everyone else to agree with you on which one(s), and don't try to force your belief on anyone else if you value a quiet existence.

Solfe
2013-Apr-13, 02:21 PM
I sort of reject the idea that atheism is an alternative to belief in god. The choices are Vanilla, Chocolate or Strawberry and an atheist is saying they don't like ice cream.

The second component is that a religion is a codified believe and faith system, where atheism isn't because each atheist has their own ideals that they ascribe to. Atheistic ideals are selected at the individual level, not at the group level. Perhaps it is faith in science, or the human endeavor or a logical selection of "right vs. wrong" or any number of other things. You can lump atheists together, but in reality, all groups are not going to be very good descriptors of the individuals.

I don't generally like the concept of "the god of the gaps", either. The whole logical, scientific description of reality is a human described, the gaps are merely the observation that people don't know everything. There is no god in gaps, it is simply the absence of information or understanding for the moment. Trust that people will figure it out is a type of faith, but it doesn't have to be an endorsement of some sort of religious figure.

Sam99
2013-Apr-13, 02:21 PM
What do you mean by "explain the universe"? Science is doing a pretty good job so far. Clearly, it can never explain "everything" (I don't think there will ever be an end to questions). So, I suppose you can use God to answer all the currently unanswered questions but what happens as those questions are tackled and answered? You just end up shuffling God around to new questions. ("sorry mate, you can't stay there, we've answered that one now. Why don't you take a seat over there. For the moment..." Not very dignified :))

Hi

Doing some reading on the cosmological argument irrc, some philosophers argue we need an ultimate explanation, nothing is good enough. Like the universe "just is" or an infinite casual chain still needs explaining. So they bring up God. I agree there will never be an end to the questions even with God. I cant see a true explanation being possible, its a myth.


So far no one's shown that a god is a necessary condition for the Universe's existence either, so whether you think there's a god in the cracks or not it really up to you to decide for yourself.
But don't expect everyone else to agree with you on which one(s), and don't try to force your belief on anyone else if you value a quiet existence.

Yes that makes sense, ty

Noclevername
2013-Apr-13, 02:29 PM
You see an unidentified light in the sky. Alien spacecraft are a possible explanation. Does that make alien spacecraft the default most likely explanation?

One can claim that an entity is responsible for the unexplained. Is it Yaweh, Zeus, Odin, Brahma, Marduk, or L. Ron Hubbard? Or something we've never heard of on Earth?

beskeptical
2013-Apr-13, 02:53 PM
It's not a gap god explanation until you fill in the gap with a god. Science has no problem with the concept of, we don't yet know.

As for the hypothesis, god could explain X that science has not yet explained, the problem with that kind of hypothesis is that it has absolutely no suggestive evidence. The idea of an hypothesis is not to simply, say invisible pixies could explain X, an hypothesis is generally formed because some evidence suggests it as an explanation.

All the evidence points to the conclusion, gods are mythical beings humans invented. No evidence suggests real gods exist so hypothesizing that some fictional beings are responsible for questions science has not yet answered makes no sense.

Sticks
2013-Apr-13, 02:57 PM
This thread is closed as it contravenes the no religion rule.

Sam99 you are strongly advised to re-read the forum rules, or else you may be infracted