There seems to be a lack of acknowledgement of a grand design to everything - (believe me, I am no thumper) but I'd like to see a more open mind to the sheer vastness of existence from the atheists - they seem so limited in their perception. Science seems to always prove there is more to everything than meets the eye. Thoughts?
2007-03-13 04:25:29 · 30 answers · asked by The Hero Inside 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
So many seem to assume I am a Christian. Actually, I am more agnostic than anything. I believe in a God (so to speak) but I don't believe science and God are mutually exclusive.
2007-03-13 05:06:05 · update #1
Crow- I worked on that movie. You a fan?
2007-03-13 05:11:38 · update #2
I am athiest.
"There seems to be a lack of acknowledgement of a grand design to everything" - something can not be acknowledged until it is proven. There is no proof for grand design.
"I'd like to see a more open mind to the sheer vastness of existence" - I can't speak for all athiests, but I do not know any who would deny this fact. I completely agree that there is so much to the universe, and its complexities are enormous.
"they seem so limited in their perception" - it's always funny when a christian says something silly like that!
In short: The fact that we live in a complex universe that science cannot yet fully explain does not proove there must have been grand design.
2007-03-13 04:31:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I appreciate the simplicity of how we still get incredible things even working within the basic laws that exist in nature (no Supreme Being required).
However, there is no design involved. To even suggest that there is a designer is to take away a lot of things that could be designed - meaning the Designer has many traits and characteristics himself. These could not have been designed. The Designer is a very complex being that came about without a designer. So why would anything else need a designer.
Rather, I see the whole of the Universe as a beautiful flower blooming slowly within the simplicity of nature, one step adding onto another, adding onto another, what comes next only dictated by a few basic laws. The creativity is left up to chance.
2007-03-13 04:35:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
>Science seems to always prove there is more to everything >than meets the eye.
What's wrong with that? I'm an atheist; I'm also a scientist: and I certainly don't close my mind to the vastness of existence.
Nature is incredible and awe-inspiring, regardless of whether you think there's some deity involved.
And yeah, many biological things look as if they were designed: that's exactly what you'd expect from natural selection.
2007-03-13 09:55:35 · answer #3 · answered by garik 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just because something is complicated, it doesn't mean it needs a conscious creator.
God (if he was real) would be the most complicated thing imaginable, not a simple entity like it sounds pleasant to say - a God is a sentient being capable of knowing everything and creating everything within a universe. Something that well designed and complex would surely need a creator too?
In which case you have an infinite regression with even more complicated God's creating the later one. In which case, if you have a more complicated, 'better' God creating a lesser one, that first one wasn't by definition a God was he?
2007-03-13 04:38:33 · answer #4 · answered by Adam L 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think you are mixing things up. Of course the universe is incredibly vast and manifold and full of unknown things, but there is no evidence for design in it. When I see a river beautifully meandering through a landscape, I do appreciate the beauty of the place, but at the same time I do not think there is a designer behind it - it is just the result of water flowing down and taking the way of the least resistance. And the same or similar goes for all natural phenomena.
2007-03-13 04:39:39 · answer #5 · answered by NaturalBornKieler 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Nature clearly shows us that everything that is really complex is the product of natural processes and not intentional design. Intentional design processes only produce fairly simply things, and have yet to produce anything nearly as complex as a living being. The evidence is all around you: intentional design just isn't up to the task of producing truly complex things.
Most atheists are aware of that - it's the believers who are ignoring the obvious.
Now, when someone can go into a laboratory and design an entirely new kind of thing that has the complexity of a life form, I'll start to take intentional design a little more seriously (though of course as an explanation for how _we_ got here, there's another rather obvious flaw). As far as I know, there are no "intelligent design scientists" even _trying_ to design new forms of life, which leads me to believe that the ID people don't believe their own claims.
2007-03-13 04:29:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
Well at the same time aren't Christians just as narrow minded then. I mean they (and no, not all of them) say that the bible is the only true thing and for some of them creation is the only way.
I'd like to see a more open mind ot the sheer vastness of existence from the Christians.
And just for your information, Atheists are not narrow minded, we just don't believe in god.
2007-03-13 04:30:32 · answer #7 · answered by photogrl262000 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You clearly don't understand the mechanisms of natural selection. Natural selection answers the "design" issues across the entirety of living creation. It doesn't take a "designer". Evolution confers the advantage upon the organism with the best characteristic, enabling them to concentrate that characteristic into the next generation. We don't "ignore" design - it simply isn't there. You are projecting because it seems to you that it must be so. But that isn't how evolution works.
2007-03-13 04:35:35 · answer #8 · answered by Bad Liberal 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Design is the key issue that Dawkins struggles with. Because of it, he is open to the possibility of a Designer.
2 Quotes:
In a December 2004 interview with Bill Moyers, Dawkins stated that "among the things that science does know, evolution is about as certain as anything we know." When Moyers later asked, "Is evolution a theory, not a fact?", Dawkins replied, "Evolution has been observed. "
Dawkins believes that "the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis like any other."
2007-03-13 04:31:02 · answer #9 · answered by Jeff- <3 God <3 people 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I look up and see chaos. Not a "grand design" at all. Existence is vast, but that doesn't imply a damn thing.
That ID argument is basically that the universe is so complex that something more complex must have made it. Which in turn implies some even more complex to create that and so on in an infinite upward spiral of complexity. It isn't even logical
2007-03-13 04:31:14 · answer #10 · answered by Alex 6 · 7⤊ 0⤋