Through A Scanner, Darkly


This sounds terrific, right up until you give it a moment’s thought. You then realize that the presence of a creative deity in the universe is clearly a scientific hypothesis. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more momentous hypothesis in all of science. A universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference.

On what reason-able basis does Mr Dawkins assert that a Universe with a God would be a completely different Universe from one without ( as far as our perceptions and possible limits of knowledge are concerned )? And what would that difference be? How, on earth, would we be in any position to register that difference? He goes on to add …

God could clinch the matter in his favour at any moment by staging a spectacular demonstration of his powers, one that would satisfy the exacting standards of science.

And this above, is what Mr Dawkins calls difference? Mr Dawkins would have us believe ( God Bless His Soul ;), that the only kind of universe in which / out of which God could exist is that in which said Entity would be required to satisfy the exacting demands of Science. Now, that is interesting

Maybe Mr Dawkins misses the point that a lot of theists seem to imply – the fact that Richard Dawkins exists, has been able to do what he has done and now, says what he is saying above – is living testimony to the desired “spectacular demonstration of powers”. What more could you ask for? ( Who was it who said that God Does Play Dice ? ;)

You note that you need to get down to looking at the “Ultimate Boeing 747” Argument subsequently.


About this entry