We Got Lucky

Science During Review 2006, Gia asked me which I felt provides the human race with answers, closest to the truth, Science or Religion. Recently, Rob left a rather lengthy reply to my answer which I rebuked. I wonder what they both think of this article from The Guardian which disputes the notion of intelligent design, even though there are a curious an elaborate set of coincidences apparent in nature's fundamentals, explaining instead the possibility that it's just that in the multiverse we all got lucky:
"The root cause of all the difficulty can be traced to the fact that both religion and science appeal to some agency outside the universe to explain its lawlike order. Dumping the problem in the lap of a pre-existing designer is no explanation at all, as it merely begs the question of who designed the designer. But appealing to a host of unseen universes and a set of unexplained meta-laws is scarcely any better."
Mostly it says everything that I said at Christmas and comes to the same conclusion, that the answer is in nature not philosophy. But the comments are a real 'wow' zone with someone even suggesting that its possible that science might discover that there is an all powerful being at the centre of all this. Do I need to quote from Douglas Adams? Oh alright then:
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. Q.E.D."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
In other words if God only exists in faith and we somehow prove that he was actually there where does that leave us and them?

No comments:

Post a comment