Main menu:

Site search

Categories

April 2008
S M T W T F S
« Mar   May »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Tags

Arguments for God's Pure Actuality

Blogroll

Ethics: Artistic Integrity

Ethics: Rule Utilitarianism

Review of "Natural Atheism"

Review of "Satisficing and Maximizing"

Review of "The Improbability of God"

The Argument from Scale: Oh My!

The universe is too big, says Nickolas Everitt. And why has much time passed since the beginning of the universe until humans came onto the scene? It’s just so… “inapt,” unfitting given what theists take God to be, unlike even the Genesis account. (The Improbability of God, 2, 1)

So far this is the funniest atheistic argument I’ve ever encountered. But I plead guilty to harboring such thoughts myself: before becoming Christian in a letter to a friend I asked: What about the dinosaurs? For what possible reason did these preposterous lizards exist?

Instead of my usual attempt at analysis, I’ll leave this one as an exercise for the reader.

(OK, here are some hints. Also, when I asked Dembski why it was necessary to go through the TRIZ-imitating process of evolution/intelligent design which took billions of years, he replied that solving mechanical biological problems seems to have taken place according to TRIZ, but TRIZ itself need not have been the methodology chosen. The point is that the becoming of the universe, of life, of humans, of civilizations obeys the rules laid out in TRIZ. God could have created things already fully formed, and did — it’s called heaven and angels. For humans He chose a more roundabout process. Could there have been a third option? That’s for Everitt to surmise.)

Comments

Pingback from Fides Quaerens Intellectum » Dmitry Takes on The Improbability of God
Time April 22, 2008 at 4:07 pm

[...] First Mover/Cause Argument, Quentin Smith and the Big Bang, Quentin Smith and the Big Bang 2, The Argument from Scale, The Anthropic [...]

Comment from Sulliman
Time April 25, 2008 at 9:46 pm

I’m reminded of something Chesterton wrote:

“If evolution simply means that a positive thing called an ape turned very slowly into a positive thing called a man, then it is stingless for the
most orthodox; for a personal God might just as well do things
slowly as quickly, especially if, like the Christian God, he were
outside time.” (Orthodoxy)

Comment from Tim
Time May 14, 2008 at 8:33 am

For a few more remarks on Everitt’s argument from scale, check out the long review here.

Comment from Dmitry Chernikov
Time May 14, 2008 at 10:40 am

Tim, I’m not familiar with Thomas Chalmers’s arguments. What does he say?

Pingback from Pages tagged “unfitting”
Time May 25, 2008 at 2:30 am

[...] tagged unfittingOwn a WordPress blog? Make monetization easier with the WP Affiliate Pro plugin. The Argument from Scale: Oh My! saved by 4 others     smpfilms bookmarked on 05/25/08 | [...]

Write a comment