Published by DragonGrim in the blog DragonGrim's blog.
Hey, I’m posting my essay in my blog just in case anyone wants to comment on the content. I hope you will.
Having read your essay, I think you would enjoy reading Dinesh D'Souza's What's So Great About Christianity. He has a chapter (Chapter 11) dedicated to discussing the same issue you're tackling, along the similar lines.
It's out in paperback, but I suspect you could also get a copy in the local library.
I'm still not sure if you're trying to argue for theism with this essay. What you're saying is that with our current knowledge and capabilities, the universe appears to be a paradox. Concluding that there must be a god, based on this, doesn't really make more sense than concluding that thunder and lightning is the product of Thor's cart and hammer. In olden days, people didn't understand electricity, because they couldn't perceive it. There's most likely many things we haven't yet perceived about our universe, and so many things appear to us as paradoxes when they actually may be totally plain and simple.
Or...we may never be able to understand how the universe works. It could be like trying to explain to a dog that 2+2=4. No matter how many times you explain it, the dog will never understand it. It may be the same with us and the mechanics of existence, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't atleast try and look for clues, rather than falling back on backwards beliefs fabricated in a time when electricity was thought to be the wrath of god. "It must be the will of God" is a statement of resignation and failure in my oppinion.
@ Terry: thanks, I will check that out.
@ HorusEye: Hey, thanks for reading.
Really all this argument says is that the concept of God is not easily dismissed, especially since the universe is a paradox. In addition to it though, I think the only thing able to create a paradox is an imagination (that we know of.) such as this: Or I can create a paradox image by saying, “The world is a flat sphere.”
Our physical existence always plays be the rules – though I’ll admit that very small particles act weird, but I think that is because we don’t understand them yet. If the rules somehow didn’t follow logic, then I would still say it is a construct of an imagination. No matter how much we do not understand the workings of the universe, we understand the concept of infinity, and there’s no way around it, even if time is nonlinear.
God doesn’t have to be a creature out of any holy book. But if there is something with an imagination that can create, it is not far off from that.
You say that what isn't apparently logical must be created by an imagination -- what you forget is that logic is the product of our imagination. Logic isn't absolute. I can easily provide a logical argument for a six-sided triangle. Just imagine the triangle on the chalk-board is hollow, and voila, it has six sides. Or cut it out of a piece of paper, and suddenly it's a 2-sided triangle. The logical fact that a triangle has three sides only holds water as long as we all decide to perceive it the same way. In any other case, logic falls apart. That doesn't prove the existence of a god, though. It merely proves that logic is flawed, dependent on perception and that nature doesn't necessarily have to be subject to it. Logic is a limited tool we have invented through concensus. The universe existed before our logics did.
HorusEye, you’re providing me with some good morning brain-work! Thank you.
We can use imagination to break the rules of logic, but not show that it is flawed. A triangle is a product of imagination, whereas logic dictates that upon the condition that a triangle is defined as three (or whatever) sided, then it will have certain angles and whatnot. As organism, we adapted a mind that would deal with a physical world that follows logic. Our knowledge of time is both subjective and objective.
Separate names with a comma.