Is Truth an Accident? Re: [FoRK] Is God an Accident?

Dr. Ernie Prabhakar < drernie at radicalcentrism.org > on > Fri Sep 22 07:02:52 PDT 2006

Hi all,

On Sep 22, 2006, at 6:17 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>> In particular, one could just as easily deconstruct belief in  
>> love, justice, truth, happiness, sex, civilization, technology --  
>> even math -- as mere "accidents", no?  Once you start down this  
>> path, where do you draw the line?

> They're all just names we use to describe /observed/ concepts.  
> Who's observed any evidence of a god?

Huh?  Do you "observe" justice?  Or do you "observe" coercive force,  
and choose to believe it is evidence of "justice" or "injustice"? Do  
you observe love, or do you merely choose to impose the concept of  
"love" on what is merely a neurochemical responses inspired by the  
subtle manifestations of the survival instinct?

I (like most Christians) have observed a variety of acts that I  
interpret as evidence for truth, justice, and love, and I observe a  
strong correlation between them and (very specific) strains of belief  
in God.  If that isn't evidence for belief, what is?

> If you find that you believe in god surely you at least have to  
> concede that god is either negligent, wilful - or that our  
> conception of god's purpose and goals for us is severely out of  
> whack, no?

I find God just as confusing -- and approachable -- as physics.  That  
is, I assume it makes sense to the extent I'm willing to put effort  
into it.

And if you insist, I'm willing to concede your conception of God is  
severely out of whack. :-)

> If atheism is a belief, then bald is a hair color.

And if atheism is not a belief, then it is mere skepticism, no?  In  
which case, I would think my argument holds: when do you stop not  
believing in everything?  Whose theory is bald now? :-)

-- Ernie P.

P.S. I'm offline from 8 AM PDT until Sunday night, so forgive me if I  
drop out...


More information about the FoRK mailing list