"I think that the hypothesis of theism is the most exciting scientific hypothesis that [one] could possibly hold. The idea that the Universe was created by a supernatural intelligence is a dramatic important idea. If it were true it would completely change everything we know. We'd be living in a totally different universe. Now, that's a BIG thing! I am sorry but it's bigger than personal comfort and nice stories. The idea that the Universe has lurking beneath it an intelligence, a supernatural intelligence that invented the laws of physics, invented mathematics. That is a stupendous idea! If it's true. And to me it simply dwarfs all talk of nobility, and morality and comfort and that sort of thing."
You can probably expect an objection: "these are not interesting problems for science/me". This is often motivated by reasoning "not testable = not interesting", i.e. the question is rejected on philosophical (or even method) grounds, not based on evidence.
And then they proceed to pick evidence Z governed by natural laws and claim that "I don't need God to explain Z".
Add Design? Where did all the speciation come from, to deal with one of the elemental categories of existence? It's clearly not natural selection, with the millions of blueprints for different organisms -- and also we'd have to explain where the originals to natural select from would have come from.
I vote for the universe, which creates itself as it evolves, as what god is. That translates to it being a sacred place -- where it would have been better for us to see god figures as mystics who pierced the veil to the bigger picture and could report about that but not from on high!
Very excited about both the debate and these 11 writings as you prepare!
I think 'supreme being' is a good way to define 'God'; it grants you elasticity without overcommitment and allows for a more interesting debate.
Just in:
"I think that the hypothesis of theism is the most exciting scientific hypothesis that [one] could possibly hold. The idea that the Universe was created by a supernatural intelligence is a dramatic important idea. If it were true it would completely change everything we know. We'd be living in a totally different universe. Now, that's a BIG thing! I am sorry but it's bigger than personal comfort and nice stories. The idea that the Universe has lurking beneath it an intelligence, a supernatural intelligence that invented the laws of physics, invented mathematics. That is a stupendous idea! If it's true. And to me it simply dwarfs all talk of nobility, and morality and comfort and that sort of thing."
-- Richard Dawkins
https://youtu.be/DbjHyz_7fCg?si=nP-JX-EOcww-UKFu&t=1442
You can probably expect an objection: "these are not interesting problems for science/me". This is often motivated by reasoning "not testable = not interesting", i.e. the question is rejected on philosophical (or even method) grounds, not based on evidence.
And then they proceed to pick evidence Z governed by natural laws and claim that "I don't need God to explain Z".
When you say "X better explains Y", do you mean "Y is more likely under X than under notX" or something more specific?
More likely under, yes.
Excited for the debate!
Did this debate happen?
Fools rush in...
Add Design? Where did all the speciation come from, to deal with one of the elemental categories of existence? It's clearly not natural selection, with the millions of blueprints for different organisms -- and also we'd have to explain where the originals to natural select from would have come from.
I vote for the universe, which creates itself as it evolves, as what god is. That translates to it being a sacred place -- where it would have been better for us to see god figures as mystics who pierced the veil to the bigger picture and could report about that but not from on high!
For which of the 10 things is God the only possible explanation?
existence :)