Absence of Evidence (The limitations of science)

by dhw, Saturday, March 01, 2008, 15:52 (5906 days ago) @ John Clinch

Many thanks for your detailed explanation, which makes clear how the misunderstanding has arisen. No, your paraphrase is not accurate. In fact you have completely missed the point. You quote me: "Dawkins thinks that the combined knowledge of the finest brains, working on the findings of generations of earlier fine brains, will soon be able consciously to put together the ingredients and breathe the spark of life into them...which will prove that life came about through unconscious chance." The point that I make here, and again and again in the "guide", and which I have chosen as one of two forms of "madness" with which to conclude it, is that if it needs supreme intelligence to understand, let alone recreate something, one can hardly take that as proof that the original creation needed no intelligence at all. - There is no presupposition on my part about what scientists will be able to achieve. Physical life exists, it must have had an origin, and of course science will advance in its understanding of the origin. But if it takes a supreme degree of consciousness to understand life and perhaps one day to recreate it, I don't see how you can be so certain that it didn't need consciousness to create it in the first place. You have taken your "leap of faith" that science will eventually support your belief in the creative genius of unconsciousness. I keep my options open. - This is only half the problem, though. I have equal difficulty with the notion of George's famous Grand Old Designer. We needn't go into that now, since you have the same difficulty. The difference between us, however, is that since I lack your faith, I am willing to consider other options and their implications (e.g. the possibility of different forms of existence, which this website has just got onto under the thread of Near to Death Episodes). - What is a "good reason" for being an agnostic? My inability to decide whether the world is a product of accident or design is not the only problem, as you would see from different sections of the "guide", but it is a hugely influential factor. If it seems a poor reason to you, that is because you already know what science will discover, whereas I don't!