It was google for like-minded people or tear my hair out in exasperation. The cause: there was a piece in the NY Times about a proof for the existence of God. To simplify, but only a bit, the proof (called the ontological argument) says that if you can conceive of God then God must exist. Which seems the quintessence of a circular argument. My exasperation is that nobody seems to understand the null hypothesis which is one of the fundamental principles of scientific reasoning. Or maybe that people's reasoning hasn't advanced from the witch scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Tags: Monty, Python, hypothesis, null

Views: 12

Replies to This Discussion

The only logically consistent argument for supernaturality is scientifically ludicrous. It goes something like this: if God is responsible for some of our actions, then he must be responsible for all of them. But wait, there's more. If aliens landed on earth and tried to catalog all life forms, humans and apes would be grouped together, or at least very closely - our DNA is 98% the same. So if humans have a soul, so too must apes. To say otherwise is the height of anthropocentric arrogance. So by induction from apes to all species, down to single celled eukaryotes. But eukaryotes probably evolved from prokaryotes. And on to RNA, proteins, amino acids, all of chemistry: the argument goes on to every particle in the universe. It's not only numerically absurd; it also breaks causality, relativity, etc. So the null hypothesis (the real one that is) looks pretty safe. But safe is not the same as impossibly proving the null hypothesis. Aha! shouts the theist in syllogistic glee. Since you can't prove there's no God , therefore there's a God. Yes Virginia, and it floats, therefore it's a duck.
Thank's for bringing this to my attention. I must have missed this article. I agree with you. What an absurd claim that is, that god exists because mankind believe he exists. Rediculous! That's the opposite of proof to any sane minded person. Unfurtunately, it seems so, that man's reasoning has not advanced from the witch scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

MJ

Latest Activity

Joan Denoo replied to roland707's discussion Thoughts on Buddhism?
14 minutes ago
Pat replied to James M. Martin's discussion World Wrestling's Steve Austin on Why Same Sex Couples Should be Allowed to Marry
28 minutes ago
Warren Jappe commented on Steve Shives's video
55 minutes ago
Warren Jappe posted a video

It's good to be anti-Islam

...but not anti-Muslim. Christians burned alive, beheaded, crucified and tortured to death http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/christians-are-being-bur...
1 hour ago
Pat replied to Raj's discussion Bible: all laws must be obeyed
1 hour ago
Pat replied to Polaroidxxx's discussion Atheist Confetti
1 hour ago
John Jubinsky added a discussion to the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
2 hours ago
sk8eycat replied to Steph S.'s discussion Noah movie religious controversy
2 hours ago
Sentient Biped replied to Raj's discussion Bible: all laws must be obeyed
3 hours ago
Loren Miller replied to Polaroidxxx's discussion Atheist Confetti
3 hours ago
Steve Shives posted a video

Chapters Eleven and Twelve - An Atheist Reads Simply Christian

The examination of N.T. Wright's Simply Christian continues with a look at Chapter Eleven: Worship, and Chapter Twelve: Prayer.
4 hours ago
booklover replied to James M. Martin's discussion World Wrestling's Steve Austin on Why Same Sex Couples Should be Allowed to Marry
4 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service