Wait… who is the first-year undergraduate? Dawkins? Or Michael Ruse…

Like every first-year undergraduate in philosophy, Dawkins thinks he can put to rest the causal argument for God’s existence. If God caused the world, then what caused God? Of course the great philosophers, Anselm and Aquinas particularly, are way ahead of him here. They know that the only way to stop the regression is by making God something that needs no cause. He must be a necessary being. This means that God is not part of the regular causal chain but in some sense orthogonal to it. He is what keeps the whole business going, past, present and future, and is the explanation of why there is something rather than nothing.

I thought “appealing to authority rather than reasonable argument” was the mistake every first-year philosophy major made?  I love that sentence that starts, “They know…”  It really reads: They knew (through reasonable argument) that Dawkins’s argument was right, so (desperately) they simply asserted what they wanted… without any reasonable argument.  And they stuck their tongues out and said “nyah nyah.”

via Does Evolution Explain Religious Beliefs? – NYTimes.com.

About mkevane

Economist at Santa Clara University and Director of Friends of African Village Libraries.
This entry was posted in United States. Bookmark the permalink.