Let's first look at whether time can have an end. Leave a Reply Cancel reply Enter your comment here I imagine most people long for an afterlife because they don't want their own consciousness to cease at death. Previous authors have stated that if the parameters had been just a little bit different, then life would not be sustainable anywhere in the universe. If we can describe the origin of the universe with natural means, God does not exist.
| Uploader: | Kazralar |
| Date Added: | 28 February 2011 |
| File Size: | 61.22 Mb |
| Operating Systems: | Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X |
| Downloads: | 13403 |
| Price: | Free* [*Free Regsitration Required] |
I don't know why I put myself through this to be quite honest. One of my books, The Unconscious Quantumrefuted the assertion that quantum mechanics supports the existence of psychic phenomena such steger ESP. Stenger's central thesis is a simple one, and he identifies himself as holding a minority viewpoint even among scientists in frankly stating it: Focuses specifically on debunking creationism and intelligent design and drawing the conclusion that both are little more than nonsense.
Mar 16, Mark rated it really liked it Shelves: Stenger can and does conclude that the existence of God is more improbably than not.
God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist
For someone so dedicated to If anything, the title is disingenuous. The problem they have is that science views humanity as an accident of evolution while most religions place humanity on a hyoothesis just below God, saints and angels.
In the following three chapters, Stenger turns to familiar arguments of a theological or quasi-theological nature.
Stenger discusses the scientific evidence and dissects traditional and nontraditional arguments in favor of the existence of God, including the theory du dailed, Intelligent Design, and concludes, "Earth and life look just as they can be expected to look if there is no bypothesis God.
The hiddenness problem is compelling. I think so, although I do respect the attempts of some theologians to try to come up with a rational basis for beliefs that are compatible with science. In the chapter on "Cosmic Evidence," you discuss the concept of time and the notion that the universe "need not have a beginning.
This spurious discrepancy immediately calls into question the credibility of both authors and both gospels.
Physicist Victor Stenger uses his background in science to create a hypothesis based on claims of God's existence. For example, the discussion relies heavily upon the reader's grasp of the concept of entropy, which is something even many engineering students struggle with in their thermodynamics courses.
He is also critical of Fine tuning arguments, and says they misunderstand the more reasonable weak anthropic principle. Peter's basilica in Rome. So the subtitle should more accurately be: Stenger's project is bad news for those who follow in the footsteps of Stephen Jay Gould and the U.
He showed that most of the railed parameters are dependent on one another--only four of the parameters are truly independent.
Great use of logic and thinking outside the box. It's easy to identify as a "soft" Christian, and almost as easy to identify as agnostic "leave me alone, and I won't trouble you to examine your beliefs". In short, the contra argument "if there is a possibility of any god existing, then my God must exist, and you'd do well to get right with Him right away" is a colossal non-sequitur for what should be reasons obvious to anyone practiced etenger elementary reasoning in any other context.
God: The Failed Hypothesis - RationalWiki
Imagine the book was a text book and it was taught, just as it is in a university course, and then a test about the book was given to students. Despite the fact that science has revolutionized every aspect of human life and greatly clarified our understanding of the world, somehow the hyptohesis has arisen that it has hte to say about the possibility of a supreme being, which much of humanity worships as the source of all reality.
Religion flies you into buildings". At first glance it is an irony that one of the gods Stenger doesn't claim to be able to refute is the one believed in by the most obnoxious of Christians and, not coincidentally, those most hostile to scientific teachings where these conflict with scripture or the policy objectives of their political allies. Just a few feet from the front door sits a center cap of new releases on sale.
You can count backward as well as forward.
What I learned from Victor Stenger’s book, “God: The Failed Hypothesis” | Science-Based Life
If you find the remaining alternatives--outright atheism; a God who is separate and apart from the universe, does nothing for humans, and does not respond to their prayers; or the vengeful, deceptive, hidden God of John Calvin--all distasteful, then the fact that you're faced with a difficult choice is yet further evidence that God is not inclined to give you a lifetime of easy decisions.
I'm sure some would, but even they would probably be better off with some other atheist books. When I recognized that I was not being controlled by supernatural forces but am on my own, I found that fact immensely relieving. There is no reliable evidence that any significant suspension of the laws of reality has ever occurred.
It's not that he makes terrible arguments. Chapter 6 examines biblical veracity.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий