When Anxiety Attacks
7 years ago
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
This is the next to last part of my response to common answers people give to “Why I am not a Christian…” In particular this blog will address the view that belief in God is unreasonable.
Because we are finite beings, we will never fully understand and comprehend all of reality. To do so would be to know everything as is actually is… to possess all possible knowledge… to be God. So there will be limits to the Truth that we can know on our own. However, we can test enough elements of a worldview to determine whether or not it is a True worldview… whether or not it corresponds with reality. We can test Truth claims with logic to determine whether or not they are coherent with what we know of Truth and whether or not they correspond to reality. Christianity is one worldview among many. It is also a very cohesive worldview that corresponds with reality. No other worldview is as cohesive nor does any other worldview correspond as neatly with reality. As a result, it is a highly reasonable worldview. Many people object to it, however, and consider the biblical worldview to be “unreasonable”. In my personal experience the people who make this claim often subscribe to a scientific naturalist or materialist worldview. (I am using these two terms in the philosophical sense, meaning that a person believes the natural or material world is the sum total of existence. Nothing exists on a different plane or manner of existence outside the physical realm of elements, atoms, particles, etc.) This is actually an arguably self-defeating worldview based on circular reasoning. Let me briefly explain.
The materialist says there is nothing outside of natural physical phenomenon. How does he know this? Because science (which is a method of observing the physical, material realm) has not found anything outside the physical realm. And how does he know that science can prove the existence of every existing phenomenon? Because science tests the physical realm, and nothing exists outside of natural physical phenomenon. This circular argument is the basic, boiled down position of the scientific naturalist in its simplest form.
The thing is this circular reasoning also has a drastic side-effect for logic, reason, and choices. See, if there is nothing outside matter, then actual thoughts, ideas, values, etc do not exist. If everything that exists is made of matter, then all my thoughts, emotions, values, beliefs, etc are simply a result of a chemical reaction in my physical brain. They do not have a separate existence. The thoughts I have are only a result of atoms banging around in my head and of the conditioned responses of my past. Logic and reason are no longer valid, after all, who says we don’t think logic makes sense simply because the chemicals and atoms cause us to think it does. We can’t even trust our own evaluation, knowledge, and thought processes in a scientific naturalist worldview. So, if a scientific naturalist follows his logic to its consistent and inevitable end, he can’t even trust that he really knows that he is right and nothing else exists outside of the material realm. Scientific naturalism is a self-defeating position to hold.
Next time I’ll briefly look at one or two other practical implications of scientific naturalism.
Because we are finite beings, we will never fully understand and comprehend all of reality. To do so would be to know everything as is actually is… to possess all possible knowledge… to be God. So there will be limits to the Truth that we can know on our own. However, we can test enough elements of a worldview to determine whether or not it is a True worldview… whether or not it corresponds with reality. We can test Truth claims with logic to determine whether or not they are coherent with what we know of Truth and whether or not they correspond to reality. Christianity is one worldview among many. It is also a very cohesive worldview that corresponds with reality. No other worldview is as cohesive nor does any other worldview correspond as neatly with reality. As a result, it is a highly reasonable worldview. Many people object to it, however, and consider the biblical worldview to be “unreasonable”. In my personal experience the people who make this claim often subscribe to a scientific naturalist or materialist worldview. (I am using these two terms in the philosophical sense, meaning that a person believes the natural or material world is the sum total of existence. Nothing exists on a different plane or manner of existence outside the physical realm of elements, atoms, particles, etc.) This is actually an arguably self-defeating worldview based on circular reasoning. Let me briefly explain.
The materialist says there is nothing outside of natural physical phenomenon. How does he know this? Because science (which is a method of observing the physical, material realm) has not found anything outside the physical realm. And how does he know that science can prove the existence of every existing phenomenon? Because science tests the physical realm, and nothing exists outside of natural physical phenomenon. This circular argument is the basic, boiled down position of the scientific naturalist in its simplest form.
The thing is this circular reasoning also has a drastic side-effect for logic, reason, and choices. See, if there is nothing outside matter, then actual thoughts, ideas, values, etc do not exist. If everything that exists is made of matter, then all my thoughts, emotions, values, beliefs, etc are simply a result of a chemical reaction in my physical brain. They do not have a separate existence. The thoughts I have are only a result of atoms banging around in my head and of the conditioned responses of my past. Logic and reason are no longer valid, after all, who says we don’t think logic makes sense simply because the chemicals and atoms cause us to think it does. We can’t even trust our own evaluation, knowledge, and thought processes in a scientific naturalist worldview. So, if a scientific naturalist follows his logic to its consistent and inevitable end, he can’t even trust that he really knows that he is right and nothing else exists outside of the material realm. Scientific naturalism is a self-defeating position to hold.
Next time I’ll briefly look at one or two other practical implications of scientific naturalism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment