Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
Fri May 12, 2017, 05:47 PM May 2017

Five rational arguments why God (very probably) exists

From the long article:

(The Conversation) The question of whether a God exists is heating up in the 21st century. According to a Pew survey, the percentage of Americans having no religious affiliation reached 23 percent in 2014. Among such “nones,” 33 percent said that they do not believe in God – an 11 percent increase since only 2007.
Such trends have ironically been taking place even as the rational probabilities for the existence of a supernatural God have been rising. In my 2015 book, “God? Very Probably,” I explore five rational reasons why it is very probable that such a God exists.


Just as a point, if 23% have no religious affiliation, only 8% do not believe in a deity.

In his commencement address to Kenyon College in 2005, the American novelist and essayist David Foster Wallace said that “Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship.”......


The philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre thus wrote that for much of the 20th century Marxism was the “historical successor of Christianity,” claiming to show the faithful the one correct path to a new heaven on Earth.
In several of my books, I have explored how Marxism and other such “economic religions” were characteristic of much of the modern age. So Christianity, I would argue, did not disappear as much as it reappeared in many such disguised forms of “secular religion.”


To read more:
http://religionnews.com/2017/05/11/five-rational-arguments-why-god-very-probably-exists/
54 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Five rational arguments why God (very probably) exists (Original Post) guillaumeb May 2017 OP
which god? trillions to choose from. nt msongs May 2017 #1
All reflections or aspects of the divine? guillaumeb May 2017 #2
Reality is not a popularity contest...nt uriel1972 May 2017 #3
I vote for Cthulhu. n/t Binkie The Clown May 2017 #27
I'm voting for that Flying Spaghetti dude. He's cool. lastlib May 2017 #32
Does "the rational probabilities for the existence of a supernatural," also apply to procon May 2017 #4
Pixies, I'd like a world that has a healthy dose of Pixies... NeoGreen May 2017 #7
HEY! kcdoug1 May 2017 #28
Yawn. DetlefK May 2017 #5
Allow me to yawn back. guillaumeb May 2017 #6
Oh come on! At least pretend to have a valid argument! DetlefK May 2017 #8
Ther is no "winning" of arguments on faith here. guillaumeb May 2017 #9
Religion is not so much a psychosis as it is fear of the inexplicable. procon May 2017 #11
One way to capitalize on fear is called patriotism. guillaumeb May 2017 #16
Agreed! Boiled down it comes to Here is stuff that cannot yet be explained so Dustlawyer May 2017 #36
That is a LOT of substance to ignore. JNelson6563 May 2017 #33
You just saved me a mountain of typing, and I am forever in your debt. AtheistCrusader May 2017 #42
Wallace's full Kenyon College commencement speech. Jim__ May 2017 #10
An excellent clip. guillaumeb May 2017 #19
Personally I don't even bother trying to rationalize the existence of God. hrmjustin May 2017 #12
Agreed. guillaumeb May 2017 #18
Could someone believe in a "god" but not believe in a "creator"? Binkie The Clown May 2017 #29
Perhaps. guillaumeb May 2017 #48
Only one begs proof. AtheistCrusader May 2017 #43
"the rational probabilities for the existence of a supernatural God" A HERETIC I AM May 2017 #13
not only are they illogical edhopper May 2017 #14
The most popular argument against God's existence Htom Sirveaux May 2017 #15
Freedom of action is paramount, otherwise the created have no free will. guillaumeb May 2017 #17
if I starve, was it my choice to be born in sub-Saharan Africa? uriel1972 May 2017 #20
In a perfect world, this would not be a problem. guillaumeb May 2017 #21
victims usually do not have edhopper May 2017 #24
Why is the world not perfect? Lordquinton May 2017 #40
Why isn't it perfect? n/t Humanist_Activist May 2017 #46
Did you just equate mental illness with choosing to go swimming? Htom Sirveaux May 2017 #22
Because the Creator apparently believes in free will, guillaumeb May 2017 #23
But that makes no sense! Htom Sirveaux May 2017 #25
It might make no sense to you, guillaumeb May 2017 #47
What about you, how are you comfortable endorsing this? Htom Sirveaux May 2017 #53
I cannot speak to the Creator's motivations. guillaumeb May 2017 #54
this edhopper May 2017 #26
+1000 Binkie The Clown May 2017 #30
There is no getting away from that reasoning! True Dough May 2017 #31
Do so a appreciate that quote... uriel1972 May 2017 #44
It's all part of a plan. trotsky May 2017 #45
Attempts to apply reason to unknowable things... neeksgeek May 2017 #34
First edhopper May 2017 #35
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply the existence of neeksgeek May 2017 #37
I didn't think you did edhopper May 2017 #38
I think it is freaking HILARIOUS how much it upsets you... trotsky May 2017 #39
No upset here. guillaumeb May 2017 #49
You are still mis-using the word "default." trotsky May 2017 #50
This reminds me of a workout coach that would yell ZERO at every rep if form sucked. AtheistCrusader May 2017 #41
several different concepts at once zipplewrath May 2017 #51
Yeah. trotsky May 2017 #52

procon

(15,805 posts)
4. Does "the rational probabilities for the existence of a supernatural," also apply to
Fri May 12, 2017, 07:05 PM
May 2017

ghosts, zombies, maybe unicorns, surely some witches, and what about Orcs, leprechauns, or Selkies? Its a very long list.

NeoGreen

(4,031 posts)
7. Pixies, I'd like a world that has a healthy dose of Pixies...
Fri May 12, 2017, 07:43 PM
May 2017

...and a light dash of Sprites, but no Imps please, they just spoil a party.

kcdoug1

(222 posts)
28. HEY!
Sun May 14, 2017, 10:09 PM
May 2017

Unicorns DO exist!!!!

I grew up on a unicorn farm in the seventies!!' If you don't believe go ahead. And ask the Flying Spaghetti Monster he'll straighten your ass out quick !

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
5. Yawn.
Fri May 12, 2017, 07:24 PM
May 2017

1.
Despite the many other enormous advances of modern physics, little has changed in this regard. As Wigner wrote, “The enormous usefulness of mathematics in the natural sciences is something bordering on the mysterious and there is no rational explanation for it.”

The scientific method was created in the 18th century by mixing mathematics with the occult experimentalism of the Renaissance. That's why math is an integral part of science. Science is a cultural offspring of math.

In other words, as something supernatural, it takes the existence of some kind of a God to make the mathematical underpinnings of the universe comprehensible.

Behold the God of the gaps!


2.
The great British physicist Roger Penrose in 2004 put forward a vision of a universe composed of three independently existing worlds – mathematics, the material world and human consciousness.

And the human consciousness is soooooooooooooo independent from the material world that we can manipulate it at will with drugs.

And let's ignore that some animals have more consciousness than a human toddler. It's as if the consciousness were a side-effect of the complexity of the brain...


3.
Yet, our nonphysical thoughts somehow mysteriously guide the actions of our physical human bodies. This is no more scientifically explicable than the mysterious ability of nonphysical mathematical constructions to determine the workings of a separate physical world.

These "non-physical thoughts" are physically tangible electrochemical signals between neurons that can be manipulated in a myriad ways.

We already have primitive Brain-Machine-Interfaces that can translate thoughts into digital signals.
We have bionic eyes. They are so far still way, way worse than a natural human eye (and expensive as shit), but hey, it's better than being blind.
We have bionic limbs with a sense of touch.

The supernatural character of the workings of human consciousness offers a second strong rational grounds for raising the probability of the existence of a supernatural God.

Oh Noes! The God of the gaps has returned!!!



4.
With these developments bringing standard evolutionary understandings into growing question, the probability of a God existing has increased correspondingly.

From a summary of this guy's book:
"Shapiro integrates advances in symbiogenesis, epigenetics, and saltationism into a unified approach that views evolutionary change as an active cell process, regulated epigenetically and capable of making rapid large changes by horizontal DNA transfer, inter-specific hybridization, whole genome doubling, symbiogenesis, or massive genome restructuring."

Oh, look! The darwinian theory of evolution now has a competitor in Shapiro's theory of evolution! Funny how his theory also ignores God... It's almost as if the author of the article misrepresented Shapiro's work to pretend to have an argument.



5.
In the Axial Age (commonly dated from 800 to 200 B.C.), world-transforming ideas such as Buddhism, Confucianism, the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, and the Hebrew Old Testament almost miraculously appeared at about the same time in India, China, ancient Greece and among the Jews in the Middle East – these peoples then having little interaction with one another.

Dude...

Really?

That's your argument?

Stuff happened at the same time, therefore there must be a God?

The development of the scientific method in the 17th century in Europe and its modern further advances have had at least as great a set of world-transforming consequences. There have been many historical theories, but none capable of explaining as fundamentally transformational a set of events as the rise of the modern world. It was a revolution in human thought, operating outside any explanations grounded in scientific materialism, that drove the process.

You do not want to go there.

You do not...

Ah, forget it. Let's go there.

The 17th Century was the late Renaissance. The scientific method did not exist yet. (It would come a century later.) What did exist was a flurry of scholars, mystics and philosophers who recognized that something was wrong with main-stream religion. They realized that there were answers that religion could not provide. They were looking for what's beyond religion. And they used methods such as magical rituals and materials, imagines, an early version of psychology, astrology, numerology, that fringe concept known as "laws of nature"... By mid-17th century, the Renaissance-occultism was already losing its reputation, because none of their theories were proven true. The rise of mathematics killed off the mystic parts of this research-movement, but when mathematics and experimentalism were combined, they resulted in the "scientific method" which turned out to be very reliable.
(I suggest the books of Frances Yates on this topic.)

The rise of the modern world. Science did that. Hard work did that. Errors and mistakes and dead ends and sacrifices did that.
It was the rejection of religious and magical concepts that did that.
But, hey, if it makes you feel better: Feel free to attribute the cultural revolution that rejects religious concepts to God.



6.
In several of my books, I have explored how Marxism and other such “economic religions” were characteristic of much of the modern age. So Christianity, I would argue, did not disappear as much as it reappeared in many such disguised forms of “secular religion.”

That the Christian essence, as arose out of Judaism, showed such great staying power amidst the extraordinary political, economic, intellectual and other radical changes of the modern age is a fifth rational reason for thinking – combined with the other four – that the existence of a God is very probable.


Wait.

Polls are showing that the fastest-growing religious segment are the people who have no interest in religion whatsoever, neither positive (like believers), nor negative (like atheists and agnostics).

That means that by that very same argument as the author made above, God probably DOES NOT exist because religion is disappearing.

But if you think that the survival of a particular cultural meme in a narrow segment of the human population is somehow proof for God's existence because it was him who made that meme stick around... then all I have to say is "Buh-bye."

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
6. Allow me to yawn back.
Fri May 12, 2017, 07:36 PM
May 2017

I especially loved the "religion is disappearing" meme that is apparently an article of faith among atheists. One assumes that 10,000 years from now, the same small minority of atheists will be making the same argument that religion will be disappearing very, very soon.

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
8. Oh come on! At least pretend to have a valid argument!
Fri May 12, 2017, 07:58 PM
May 2017

Ignoring issues may be how you "win" a religious argument, but that's not how it works in the real world.

As for the question whether religion is disappearing, feel free to check any poll on that topic.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
9. Ther is no "winning" of arguments on faith here.
Fri May 12, 2017, 08:04 PM
May 2017

There are theists and non-theists. And belief perseverance on both sides.

Evidence appears to show that humans have been religious for many thousands of years. If you believe in thousands of years of group psychosis that is your choice.

If you believe that being a non-theist makes you superior intellectually or that it indicates that you are possessing a special insight you are welcome to those feelings.

procon

(15,805 posts)
11. Religion is not so much a psychosis as it is fear of the inexplicable.
Fri May 12, 2017, 08:46 PM
May 2017

Humans are easily frightened and primordial man had an innate fear of everything from natural phenomena, fear of the unknown, to fear of death. Then someone figured out how to capitalize on fear and called it, religion. Nothing has changed.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
16. One way to capitalize on fear is called patriotism.
Sun May 14, 2017, 08:21 PM
May 2017

An arbitrary drawing of lines and convincing those within a particular arbitrary boundary that those outside the boundary are enemies.

Dustlawyer

(10,494 posts)
36. Agreed! Boiled down it comes to Here is stuff that cannot yet be explained so
Sun May 14, 2017, 11:50 PM
May 2017

it must be God! Give me a break!

The mystery of why you cannot convince me that there is a God, because I must be a God, that's it! (Sarcasm, I cannot get my shift key to work without shoving down really hard and I keep hitting the wrong keys, Damn me!)

Jim__

(14,063 posts)
10. Wallace's full Kenyon College commencement speech.
Fri May 12, 2017, 08:11 PM
May 2017

It's not exactly on topic, but since it was referenced in the OP:

[center]

[/center]
 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
12. Personally I don't even bother trying to rationalize the existence of God.
Fri May 12, 2017, 11:37 PM
May 2017

You either believe or you don't.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
18. Agreed.
Sun May 14, 2017, 08:26 PM
May 2017

And one either believes that there is no Creator or one does not. Neither belief is provable.

Binkie The Clown

(7,911 posts)
29. Could someone believe in a "god" but not believe in a "creator"?
Sun May 14, 2017, 10:13 PM
May 2017

Suppose "god" is an emergent consciousness that arose as an epiphenomenon of a pattern of electromagnetic fields on a galactic scale billions of years after the big bang. Given the limitations of the speed of light such a disembodied consciousness might take a million years to form a single thought. Human existence might be a flicker so brief that in the time between our emergence and our extinction, "god" doesn't even notice that we ever existed.

Of course, such a "god" would be utterly irrelevant to the human race, so for practical purposes it might just as well not exist.

edhopper

(33,484 posts)
14. not only are they illogical
Sat May 13, 2017, 09:10 AM
May 2017

but some are dishonest characterizations of what people like Gould and Dennit said.

Really weak and unconvincing.

Htom Sirveaux

(1,242 posts)
15. The most popular argument against God's existence
Sat May 13, 2017, 09:23 PM
May 2017

is the argument from evil/suffering. The most popular response to that argument is "free will". And yet there are conditions in the universe that diminish free will, like mental illness. If God cares so much about free will, why not prevent mental illness that impacts free will?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
17. Freedom of action is paramount, otherwise the created have no free will.
Sun May 14, 2017, 08:25 PM
May 2017

If you go swimming all day and suffer a sunburn, is it the Creator's fault?

uriel1972

(4,261 posts)
20. if I starve, was it my choice to be born in sub-Saharan Africa?
Sun May 14, 2017, 08:58 PM
May 2017

Choice is limited by a large number of factors, very rarely if ever will there be a choice free of constraints.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
21. In a perfect world, this would not be a problem.
Sun May 14, 2017, 09:35 PM
May 2017

But given that the world is not perfect..............

edhopper

(33,484 posts)
24. victims usually do not have
Sun May 14, 2017, 10:01 PM
May 2017

free will to not suffer.

Why is the free will of horrible, evil people more important that the harm and torment of victims?

Htom Sirveaux

(1,242 posts)
22. Did you just equate mental illness with choosing to go swimming?
Sun May 14, 2017, 09:53 PM
May 2017

Because mental illness that diminishes free will isn't really itself a chosen thing, and that's what I was talking about. If free will is so valuable to the creator, why allow illnesses that diminish or abolish it?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
23. Because the Creator apparently believes in free will,
Sun May 14, 2017, 09:58 PM
May 2017

and allowing things to evolve as they will. But I cannot speak for the Creator, this is merely my interpretation.

Htom Sirveaux

(1,242 posts)
25. But that makes no sense!
Sun May 14, 2017, 10:04 PM
May 2017

God believes in free will, but God's not going to protect it or ensure that all his creatures have it? By the way, this also leaves God siding by default with those who have the strength to impose their will, since God apparently doesn't intervene to protect the free will of rape victims, for example. Why should the free will of the rapist to rape be honored, and not the free will choice of the victim not to be violated?

This seems like a very libertarian conception of God, where any intervention in the marketplace reduces freedom, even if it would actually enhance the freedom or other well-being of consumers.

Htom Sirveaux

(1,242 posts)
53. What about you, how are you comfortable endorsing this?
Thu May 18, 2017, 06:06 PM
May 2017

I'm assuming it doesn't make sense to you just as it doesn't to me, since you also aren't claiming to be the creator.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
54. I cannot speak to the Creator's motivations.
Thu May 18, 2017, 10:00 PM
May 2017

I can only speak to my beliefs regarding the nature of that Creator.

Binkie The Clown

(7,911 posts)
30. +1000
Sun May 14, 2017, 10:16 PM
May 2017

Especially the "god" of the Bible who seems to really get his rocks off on pain, suffering, and death.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
45. It's all part of a plan.
Tue May 16, 2017, 09:01 AM
May 2017

A cruel, vicious plan that deliberately includes pain and suffering because the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the universe couldn't think of a better way to do things.

neeksgeek

(1,214 posts)
34. Attempts to apply reason to unknowable things...
Sun May 14, 2017, 10:58 PM
May 2017

Frustrate me. Take that word "supernatural." By definition anything supernatural is "beyond nature" or in other words, not subject to the (evidently) logical laws of nature. I'd go so far as to say the truly supernatural is beyond mortal comprehension. So how can we analyze the supernatural with logic? I'm not a trained philosopher nor a theologian. But. Why does anybody who already believes in a deity, need any proof? Are they trying to use this argument to convince those of us who don't believe?

edhopper

(33,484 posts)
35. First
Sun May 14, 2017, 11:31 PM
May 2017

some evidence that anything supernatural exixts, before we talk about it's eplanation being unknowable.

neeksgeek

(1,214 posts)
37. Sorry, I didn't mean to imply the existence of
Mon May 15, 2017, 01:12 AM
May 2017

The supernatural. Just the opposite. It's late and I've been up a long time.

edhopper

(33,484 posts)
38. I didn't think you did
Mon May 15, 2017, 07:22 AM
May 2017

I was just elaborating on what you said. Late for me too.
I worded it poorly. Sorry it sounded confrontational.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
39. I think it is freaking HILARIOUS how much it upsets you...
Mon May 15, 2017, 09:47 AM
May 2017

that the number of non-religious people is increasing.

BTW, none of your five arguments were convincing. Sorry.

How about you first work on getting all religious people to agree on which god(s) exist(s), then you can work on establishing your arguments as to whether it (or they) exist(s).

Because remember: you are an atheist w.r.t. every other god any human has believed in.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
49. No upset here.
Thu May 18, 2017, 12:53 PM
May 2017

Just a recognition that atheism represents a tiny minority. Belief in a deity seems to be the default position for humans and has been for as long as humans have been around.

A small point, but they were not my arguments.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
50. You are still mis-using the word "default."
Thu May 18, 2017, 02:10 PM
May 2017

When you figure out the proper terminology in this discussion, let me know.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
41. This reminds me of a workout coach that would yell ZERO at every rep if form sucked.
Mon May 15, 2017, 08:14 PM
May 2017

'Herp derp reason 1'

ZERO

'Herpa derpa doo reason 2'

ZERO

etc

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
51. several different concepts at once
Thu May 18, 2017, 04:55 PM
May 2017

There seem to be several different concepts being discussed all at once.

1. A creator: A sentient existence that structured the universe
2. A deity: A sentient existence that currently engages the universe
3. A supernatural entity: A sentient existence that manipulates the current universe
4. Organized religion: groups of individuals agreeing on the nature of the above
5. Faith: The belief or adherence to a set of concepts derived from above.
6. Speculation: The curious consideration of something.

The vast majority of the planet speculates about a deity. The vast majority of the planet suspects #2. Large numbers of people engage in #5. #4 sees general declines when observed over long periods of time. But there are notable periods of reverse trends, especially on a global basis. I suspect #3 is becoming a bit less popular but I suspect #1 is still larger than #5.

The one that I rarely see discussed is #1-3 but that is neither benevolent nor worthy of worship.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
52. Yeah.
Thu May 18, 2017, 05:11 PM
May 2017

Mainly because in these types of discussions, it benefits the theist GREATLY to jump from definition to definition in order to avoid the inherent contradictions in each one.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Five rational arguments w...