Thursday, November 26, 2020

Atheism, theism and science

Today, the world’s population is divided between two competing, irreconcilable systems: atheism and theism. They are irreconcilable, because they start from opposite fundamental axioms (God does not exist and God exists). The approximate distribution of the population is this:

  • About 10% convinced atheists, willing to defend their ideas.
  • 10-20% convinced theists, who try to live according to their beliefs.
  • 10% agnostics, who in theory don’t accept either of the two axioms, although in practice they tend to approach one of the two opposite poles.
  • 60-70% indifferent, either because they don’t care about the debate; or because they live as if God does not exist, without considering whether He exists; or because they have beliefs, but don’t let them affect their way of life.

Atheists, starting from the axiom that God does not exist, draw the following conclusions:

  • Only the material world exists, made of everything we can measure. What cannot be measured, now or in the future, does not exist. Deep down, this is another way of stating their axiom, i.e. that God does not exist. This overlooks the problem that we don’t know what matter is (in the broadest sense of the term) and the incontrovertible fact that science will never get to know it thoroughly. See this post in this blog.
  • The universe appeared as a random fluctuation of the vacuum. Since God does not exist, the universe could not be created or designed by anyone. The problem of the origin of the vacuum and its properties is overlooked. I spoke about this in this blog post.
  • The evolution of the universe (and of life on Earth or elsewhere) is the result of pure chance. This overlooks the problem of what is chance, which has been shown to be mathematically indefinable. See this post in this blog.
  • The apparition of man was a purely random phenomenon. Consequently, our consciousness must be an irrelevant epiphenomenon and we are just programmed machines, while reason is nothing but an adaptation that ensures the conservation of our species. This overlooks the fact that then we can’t be sure that our reason will lead us to true conclusions (they would just be useful conclusions), which renders this whole set of conclusions from the atheist axiom worthless. See this post in this blog.
  • If man is just a programmed machine, we cannot have dignity or a right to live. The value of our existence is purely utilitarian, and could even be pernicious. Hence the defense of abortion and euthanasia. Our leaders, whose age is usually intermediate, do not feel threatened by abortion or euthanasia (their old age is something so distant that it may never come). See this post in this blog.
  • If God does not exist, He could not incarnate as a man. Therefore, Christ was just a man, his resurrection is a myth invented by his followers, and Christianity is based on a lie, and therefore should be eradicated. Other religions can be provisionally tolerated as long as they are useful to combat Christianity. Then their turn will come.

Christian theists, starting from the axiom that God does exist, draw the following conclusions:

  • If God exists, there is something else apart from the material world, as God is not material and is not a part of the universe (I exclude the pantheistic hypothesis, which is basically another form of atheism). Therefore, there are things that cannot be measured. In particular, in addition to matter, in the universe there could be another fundamental component that we can call mind or spirit. The fact that we’ll never know everything about matter and the universe is not a problem.
  • The universe was designed and created by God. There are serious indications of the existence of such a design, such as the fine tuning of the fundamental constants. See this post in this blog.
  • The evolution of the universe (and of life on Earth or elsewhere) is the result of design, which may be undetectable. Our existence was foreseen by God. As beings capable of using reason, image of God, we are one of the purposes of creation (there could be others). See this post in this blog.
  • Our consciousness is the clear emergence in living beings of the other fundamental element of the universe (mind or spirit). Therefore, it is not an irrelevant epiphenomenon, but one of the most important properties of the cosmos. See this post in this blog.
  • If man is the most important being we know in the universe, our dignity must be respected. In particular, we have a right to life since the moment of our conception to the moment of our death, which must not be sped up. Abortion and euthanasia are indefensible crimes. See this post in this blog.
  • If God exists, and has created the universe, the cosmos would be (saving distances) comparable to a novel or a play devised by God. Therefore, nothing can prevent his appearing within his work as one of his characters, as William Somerset Maugham did, for instance, in The Razor's Edge. Therefore, it is not absurd to say that God became incarnate as a man, died, and rose again to save us from eternal death. The resurrection of Christ, witnessed by hundreds of people, would be a fact. Christianity is based on truth, and therefore must be defended. I talked about this in this blog post.

What can science say about this debate? Not much. If God exists and has created the universe, He must be undetectable by science, which can only study the material world, of which God is not a part. Therefore, science cannot distinguish between the two axioms mentioned above. It can't provide proof, just inklings.



The same post in Spanish

Thematic Thread on Science and Atheism: Previous Next
Thematic Thread on Science and Religion: Previous Next

Manuel Alfonseca

No comments:

Post a Comment