"Plugging in the numbers" is one of the best ways to solve complex algebra problems and logic games. This morning, while solving some Evidence problems, I wondered if it might be a good way to solve for God.
Assume God's existance, then evaluate the corollaries. Assume Atheism, then evaluate the corollaries. Compare the corollaries. Occam's Razer is one place to start. The second law of thermodynamics is another.
Thomas Jefferson and a host of likeminded deists followed this logic to a belief in a distant higher power, but this is as foolish as settling for a workable plugged in number without solving the rest of the problem. IF God existance is a simpler and better explaination for life (observable sociology) then Atheism, the next step is to plug in different values for God's character and reapply Occam's Razer. Which God explains life in the clearest terms?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Sounds logical to me. Granted, I'm not the most logically minded person on the planet, but I suppose that makes me all the more willing to embrace the concept that Occam (or Okham)presents. It's entirely true that Creationism proposes a simpler origin than that of Evolutionism. One word of caution, however: Most atheists would argue that although a beleif in God offers a simpler answer to the question of origin, it does not pose a simpler way of life. Why carry on an existence where you will ultimately have to answer to a higher power, when you could choose to "shave off" the excess deity and beleive you're an innocent ape?
Old Neighbor,
I approve of your new photo. Canines are man’s best friend.
LONG LIVE THE REVOLUTION!
I'm not saying this is a sure fire path to theism, just an interesting side road that may end up at the same place.
There's nothing simple about evolution. It's mathmatical complexity and improbability fly in Occam's face.
I guess this post was incomprehensible. Maybe it only makes sense to me. Ah well....
I'll try something a little more practical and down to earth.
Paul: Yes, I'm Joel's sister. I go to SAU too, and I know Barry (somewhat) He and I have never had one of those lengthy, philosophical (or otherwise) discussions that He is so famous for. But I'm sure that won't last for too long. Nice to meet you, if you can truly meet someone in the blogging realm.
I have also enjoyed your blogs, though I do not profess to comprehend them all. Joel is the true genius of the family. I just try to stay in his shadow and hope that I'll at least appear intelligent, though that in itself may speak to my lack of intelligence.
God Bless :)
Christy, is quite the little genius!
I, as her roommate, have the right to say so! :)
As for "plugging in the numbers", I would most likely make some sort of awful addition blunder in the midst of the complexity... so I'll not attempt to derive the derivative of the afore stated problem... however if you wish an equation my brothers Joel or Jon V. would be quite competent... from my humble point of view.
Upon more lengthy consideration.... I do believe that joy would definitely be an important variable in your equation.
And as for me, the trek up to the ridge trail to watch the setting sun spill its left over goldness into the valley - bypasses any need for an equation in my simple mind.
PS. to my last comment... As alluded to - I'm another Southern student who has recently been introduce to the world of blogging :) and I've had fun reading your blog, and appreciate your insights! Thanks!
Caitlin,
Thanks for making comments on my blog. Joy would be a good variable. As puddleglum said in "The silver chair" (something along the lines of) "I don't care if there isn't a sun, l'll have a better life if I keep on believing that it exists, so I will" Fine thoughts to keep in mind during these dark days of final exams:-)
Christy,
Brains find expression in many ways. sometimes people aren't as smart as they sound. I'm honored by the presence of your comments on my blog. no apologies needed!
I've just reread this post and I can't believe I didn't post on it before. You're completely right, why stop halfway through the problem-solving process? If one was truly interested in finding the meaning for life via an algebraic process, one would be foolish to stop after the first step. I'd love to see this idea followed through to see what conclusions were reached!
Post a Comment