Getting bored with arguing with theists, I thought it might be easier if I just give up and join the club. I've been trying to find a God hypothesis that comes close to working for me. There are none out there that completely satisfy my needs.
Though I'm not prone to believing God stuff without evidence, from my point of view it is legitimate to concoct hypotheses and check them against what my reason and senses tell me. Here's one.
There is a God. He created the universe as we have come to know it through our senses, reason and science. He wanted nothing more than to create a universe to see what would happen. He is not omniscient, so he was curious. Being alone, but otherwise a good scientist, he is very hands-off and observational.
He has seen humans evolve with no input from himself other than the initial conditions. He looks on with amusement at all the speculations, guesses, hypotheses about how the universe started. He is amused that some, the theists, guessed right, but went overboard in speculating about him. Basically, other than the guess that there was an agency, him, all religions got everything else totally wrong. He has no interest in morality, that is in making decrees he expects us to adhere to. He pays no attention to prayers and certainly doesn't answer them.
In fact, since he has left no trace of himself, and has made no communication with us, he is amazed and amused by the great intelligence of the atheists who suppose he does not exist, knowing that if he were in their position he'd conclude the same. In fact, given he has left no evidence of himself, he's surprised there are beings still dumb enough the think he exists.
He's so pleased with the atheists that, despite having no former plans, he is considering taking up one of the theists' wrong beliefs - that of the afterlife. But, the twist is that everyone who has died a thoughtful reasoned atheist, he will recreate as equal partners to himself, as gods - thinking it would be nice to have some intelligent conversation. As for the theists, he wouldn't in all eternity want those freaky dictatorial idiots around with any godly powers - he'd have religious wars on his hands that would put the vindictive ancient Greek gods to shame. No, the theists can be left to return to other forms of matter - to go up in smoke or be eaten by worms.
Now on the surface this seems a dumb hypothesis to me, because there's no evidence to support it. Buut hey, hold on! There isn't supposed to be. Perfect! This overcomes some of the problems with the usual theist hypotheses - that God intervenes. And I can say God is unknowable - this is only my hypothesis, I don't know if it's true, and I'm not claiming it is, so I don't have to justify it. It can't lose.
Still, to be on the safe side, in case this is the truth, I'd still be better consigning it to the bin like all the other divine hypotheses - I wouldn't want God to think I think he's there. But on the whole this is a far better bet on which to use Pascal's Wager.
If you can find any flaws with this hypothesis, then by all means contribute. But don't expect an argument from me, I'm an atheist.
Thursday, 22 April 2010
Thursday, 25 March 2010
God On My Mind - BBC
This new programme from the BBC pulls together some strings from evolutionary biology and neuroscience to attempt to explain religious and other beliefs.
I think these programmes will only be available to UK listeners, but if I can find a transcript I'll put up a link.
From the programme information...
Part 1: Evolution:
"We are programmed by our genes to believe in supernatural powers and to obey moral codes. Is this because it gave our ancestors an evolutionary advantage? Iranians, Scandinavians, Papuans, chimpanzees, twins and wedding rings offer some startling answers."
Part 2: Neurology
"Almost half the population claim to have felt the presence of a power beyond themselves. But what happens in the brain during religious experiences? If magnetism can produce visions, then what price mysticism and meditation? What's the difference between sainthood and schizophrenia? And why are many believers convinced that God speaks to them in their dreams?"
I think these programmes will only be available to UK listeners, but if I can find a transcript I'll put up a link.
From the programme information...
Part 1: Evolution:
"We are programmed by our genes to believe in supernatural powers and to obey moral codes. Is this because it gave our ancestors an evolutionary advantage? Iranians, Scandinavians, Papuans, chimpanzees, twins and wedding rings offer some startling answers."
Part 2: Neurology
"Almost half the population claim to have felt the presence of a power beyond themselves. But what happens in the brain during religious experiences? If magnetism can produce visions, then what price mysticism and meditation? What's the difference between sainthood and schizophrenia? And why are many believers convinced that God speaks to them in their dreams?"
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Political Islam
There may be plenty of British Muslims that are perfectly peaceful, want nothing more than to be allowed to follow Islam on a personal basis.
But that isn't where the trouble for democracy lies. This Telegraph article, and this Channel 4 Dispatches programme, show the real intent of many 'politicised' Muslims. But it's not as if being 'politicised' is restricted to a few fundementalists. Islam is both a religious and a political movement, and it's long term intentions are made clear over and over again. And the concept of infiltrating organisations that have views or policies that are incompatible with Islam (i.e. with Sharia) with the intent of taking control and applying Sharia wherever they can, is perfectly compatible with the long term aims of Islam.
Pay attention!
But that isn't where the trouble for democracy lies. This Telegraph article, and this Channel 4 Dispatches programme, show the real intent of many 'politicised' Muslims. But it's not as if being 'politicised' is restricted to a few fundementalists. Islam is both a religious and a political movement, and it's long term intentions are made clear over and over again. And the concept of infiltrating organisations that have views or policies that are incompatible with Islam (i.e. with Sharia) with the intent of taking control and applying Sharia wherever they can, is perfectly compatible with the long term aims of Islam.
Pay attention!
Monday, 22 March 2010
Thin Blue Line
Are you worried you know nothing at all about our environmental problems? Do terms like Greenhouse Gas, Climate Change and the like have you concerned, but you simply don't understand how basic atmospheres work and how important they are to life? Then check this programme out while you can.
Thin Blue Line, Brian Cox, BBC iPlayer
This is probably one of the best popular explanation of why we need an atmosphere that's appropriate for life, and how fragile atmospheres can be. There's no doom mongering, just pure unadulterated enthusiasm for how our planet's atmosphere works. In the context of other planets and moons you get a real feel for how special our planet is, and why we should consider, at the very least, what we are doing to it.
Thin Blue Line, Brian Cox, BBC iPlayer
This is probably one of the best popular explanation of why we need an atmosphere that's appropriate for life, and how fragile atmospheres can be. There's no doom mongering, just pure unadulterated enthusiasm for how our planet's atmosphere works. In the context of other planets and moons you get a real feel for how special our planet is, and why we should consider, at the very least, what we are doing to it.
Friday, 8 January 2010
Sunday, 20 December 2009
Sunday, 22 November 2009
They're Up The wall
The BBC news report on Women of the Wall shows the hypocracy of the religious mind, and the lack of a sense of humour that makes them fail to spot irony.
"...rabbi Ovadia Yosef denounced women's prayer groups that wear the tallit at the Western Wall as acting to promote a feminist cause and not out of piety." - A well-put pious argument rabbi, and not at all promoting male domination of the relgion, eh?
And, don't the women get it? They're claiming unfair treatment on religious matters in a society dominated by dogmatic relgious males? Why bother. Pick a relgion where women are already treated as equals - granted you're going to have to skip all the mainstream religions. Sod it, become atheists.
"...rabbi Ovadia Yosef denounced women's prayer groups that wear the tallit at the Western Wall as acting to promote a feminist cause and not out of piety." - A well-put pious argument rabbi, and not at all promoting male domination of the relgion, eh?
And, don't the women get it? They're claiming unfair treatment on religious matters in a society dominated by dogmatic relgious males? Why bother. Pick a relgion where women are already treated as equals - granted you're going to have to skip all the mainstream religions. Sod it, become atheists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)