1) There are no godsWell, actually, being an atheist (in one common definition) only means number 1. An atheist believes there not to be a god. You can qualify this as much as you want (I do not believe in the existence of the god of the Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912, for example). The other things we believe are not contingent upon the unbelief of this or that god.
2) Theists are IDiots
3) Catholic priests molest children.
But still, I don't mind at all sharing what I believe. And I emphasize that these are beliefs, though not on faith. They are both informed by and amenable to evidence.
Oh, and there are rules:
The rules:1) Why is there anything?
1) Answers can't be limited to the shortcomings of theism (e.g. 'So who caused God?'). I'm looking for an exposition of New Atheist belief, not a criticism of theist belief. Mutual criticism will come once all beliefs are on the table. If New Atheist belief can only be expressed by negation of the beliefs of others, just say so.
2) Myers' "Courtier's Reply" gambit is fine. If you think that a question is nonsense, say so.
3) No changing the subject. New questions are welcome, once the old questions are addressed.
4) The Law of Snark Conservation applies; thoughtful courteous answers get thoughtful courteous replies.
Because 'nothing' is unstable. There are many more ways for there to be something than nothing, so it's the more likely outcome.
2) What caused the Universe?
Nothing did. It was not caused at all. Perhaps a spontaneous reaction.
3) Why is there regularity (Law) in nature?
Good one. I can't come up with an answer that doesn't lead to a new question ad infinitum. Let me rephrase that question: When two particles interact (say, two electrons) in one way in our galaxy, then why do they interact the same way in the Andromeda galaxy? I don't know.
4) Of the Four Causes in nature proposed by Aristotle (material, formal, efficient, and final), which of them are real? Do final causes exist?
I can understand 'material causes', but I have no clue what the other means. Must I now believe in God of Egnor?
5) Why do we have subjective experience, and not merely objective existence?
We experience things with our brain, and we have our own, rather than sharing with the rest. We call that subjective.
6) Why is the human mind intentional, in the technical philosophical sense of aboutness, which is the referral to something besides itself? How can mental states be about something?
Aboutness?! My spellchecker does not compute. The brain is made such that it can think about what we experience. What's the question again?
7) Does Moral Law exist in itself, or is it an artifact of nature (natural selection, etc.)
There is no Moral Law. That we are moral is an artifact of nature.
8) Why is there evil?
There are actions that are deemed evil, because they cause harm. When people harm others (including animals), we call that evil. People harm others for a number of reasons. Because it benefits themselves, because they don't know any better, because they see no other way out of a situation, for examples.
---
Hey, that was fun!
1) Why is there anything?
ReplyDeleteThe only thing we ever experienced is something, we never experienced "nothingness", so why do you think nothingness exists in the first place, and why should that be an alternative to anything? My answer: being anything is the only possible way something can be.
2) What caused the Universe?
For once: Only within our universe we observe causality, obviously before the existence of the universe, we don't know if causality applies, hence I can't even start to think of an answer, if at all one is needed. Since this answer would be about something out of our context.
3) Why is there regularity (Law) in nature?
Is there? I am joking, but I could give exaclty the same answer I gave in 1, we never observed the absence of laws, so it is entirely possible that existence comes with laws, in fact I think laws are the cause of existence.
4) Of the Four Causes in nature proposed by Aristotle (material, formal, efficient, and final), which of them are real? Do final causes exist?
Aristotle invented them at some point in history, simply out of his head. I don't believe in interpreting other peoples phantasies, I am sorry, but you could have asked about what your nightmares mean, they are as unsubstantiated as that. Still I can comment on the concept of purpuse: I think we are entirely out of purpuse whatsoever, and nothing "really" matters. Which absolutely does not imply that I think we have "meaningless" lives, since I also think, subjetivity matters at least to the subject, and I can respect that. As well as I demand that my subjectivity is real, and deserves respect. That said, I am happy with all of us having tolleratable/agreeable purpuses, that we should all pursue, nevertheless I don't think it will lead to something final or meaningfull in an objective sense.
5) Why do we have subjective experience, and not merely objective existence?
We have objective existence, cogito ergo sum is the essence of that. The problem is that we are unable to reliable communicate this existence to anyone else or to proof someone elses existence to us and vice versa... the subjective experience is a result of our complex interactions of neurons.
6) Why is the human mind intentional, in the technical philosophical sense of aboutness, which is the referral to something besides itself? How can mental states be about something?
A state that only has information about itself does not contain any general predictive value, but in order to work in our world we need to be predictive about things we are not. Thus we are intentional and about things besides ourselves.
7) Does Moral Law exist in itself, or is it an artifact of nature (natural selection, etc.)
Surely an artifact of perception, IMO all moral is subjective. How could something objective have an opinion about itself. That simply doesn't work, because again: information must be about something, and being objective means being everything, and once you are everything, you can not have info about something else. The whole concept of "objective" and moral doesn't go together in the first place...
8) Why is there evil?
I would like to see a good definition of evil. But since I already said that there is no objective moral, there is also no objective evil. Still one subject interprets some other action as evil, mostly when it is a disadvantage to itself. That we call evil, and thus evil is a consequence of circumstance, and as such the consequence of laws...
Nice questions :)
Cheers Arend
The comments to Larry's post has more answers.
ReplyDelete