i'm currently reading a chapter within a chapter about 'The Worship of Gaps' - science trying to fill gaps, theists attributing that gap to something only possible through god... etc., etc. about irreducible complexity, intelligent design, natural selection, 'Mount Improbable' and so on...
i just felt compelled to share a little excerpt from my recent readings... it's a quote of a quote really - dawkins is quoting an unnamed 'eloquent blogger' to help strengthen his argument.
Why is God considered an explanation for anything? It's not - it's failure to explain, a shrug of the shoulders, an 'I dunno' dressed up in spirituality and ritual. If someone credits something to God, generally what it means is that they haven't a clue, so they're attributing it to an unreachable, unknowable sky-fairy. Ask for an explanation of where that bloke came from, and odds are you'll get a vague, pseudo-philisophical reply about having always existed, or being outside nature. Which, of course, explains nothing.it feels as though believing in god goes against human nature... how can you not know something and not be even remotely curious? how is it possible to turn off something like curiosity and just brush it off but attributing it to something you understand even less? bah! i'm going to get myself into trouble here... i'm not as eloquent as i'd like and my thought are pinging about in my head like a pinball machine so it's coming out garbled... i'll just leave it here for now.
No comments:
Post a Comment