Sunday, June 25, 2017

gods Denied - The Supreme Irony Of Atheists Making Probability A Creator god

It appears that the fundamental numbers, and even the form, of the apparent laws of nature are not demanded by logic or physical principle. The parameters are free to take on many values and the laws to take on any form that leads to a self-consistent mathematical theory, and they do take on different values and different forms in different universes.

Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, The Grand Design 

It is one of the supreme intellectual ironies of our age that the most dogmatic of materialist-atheists, in their quest to put down the idea that a universe, under the current model of the Big Bang, which had an absolute beginning, can imply to people that the universe, as it is found by science, is most probably explained by a conscious, intelligent, Creator, God - have had to resort to turning the mathematics of probability into their own creator god, an unintelligent creator with all of the powers of God the Creator.  Only their creator acts robotically, without consciousness and without intelligence, it just being that way because that's how they can get their chosen equations to balance.

That is an effort that started almost as soon as the Big Bang was proposed as a logical conclusion resulting from Einsteinian Relativity.  Atheists didn't trust it because one of the people who made that discovery - the logical argument, not the physical confirmation of it -  Fr. Georges Lemaitre, was a Catholic priest as well as an eminent physicist and cosmologist.  The efforts to restore the atheists' favorite model of a past-eternal universe has been continual, landmarks in that effort are such things as the assertion of the (far more competent) Richard Dawkins of his time, Bertrand Russell asserting that the eternal universe was a fact in the late 1940s, well after some of the most convincing confirmation of the Big Bang had been published, and decades later when the editor of the preeminent science journal in English, Nature, John Maddox issued his frothing diatribe against the Big Bang in the 1990s.   It is an effort that still is taken up by atheist ideologue-cosmologists such as Sean Carroll and Lawrence Krauss.  I, for the life of me, can't see much else that motivates much of current cosmological assertion than trying to turn it into a means of getting rid of God  You'd think that they would be more credible if they found ways to modify or overturn Einstein in so far as his theories led to that conclusion.  But they want to have it both ways.

I have a strong feeling that Bertrand Russell was enough of a philosopher and enough of a logician to understand that their current practice, far from denying the reality of a god, has made a god out of probability,  Though I haven't run across anything from Russell commenting on that, an effort that was underway during his last two decades with the mania for multiverse cosmology.  I suspect that what he might have known about that, things like Hugh Everett's 1950s  many-worlds model seemed so patently ridiculous to him that he saw it as exactly the kind of scientific-intellectual decadence he had predicted in 1929.   That was when he read Eddington's description of then, current physics and cosmology and despaired.  He found that profoundly depressing whereas Eddington didn't.  But, then, Eddington was a Quaker who believed in God and he understood that science wasn't properly a religion or a method of asserting ideological positions.

Considering this, I'm reminded of other atheist gods in history, certainly none so fervently believed in by many atheists as the dialectic, that god as adopted by Marxism leading to the deaths of scores of millions.  There have been others, I would assert that Natural Selection is endowed with such divine attributes - certainly when they claim it gave rise to consciousness and intelligence.  And there are Western atheist assertions that  about things like Taoism and Buddhism.  If you take some of them seriously, you could name the Tao and the Dharma as similar atheist gods, though I think that is mostly Western ideological distortion of a far more subtle, far less materialistic, far less easily pinned-down set of ideas.  Some of the stupider atheists I know treat things like fashion and fame and conventional thinking as all powerful gods, you find them all over the internet, especially among those whose educations or lack of attention don't permit them to even read about things like the probabilistic god on even a popular level (sci-fi doesn't count),

Maybe it is inevitable that atheist gods, not called that, their actual identity denied, are invented.  It is certainly an incredible irony, considering the attributes given to probability among atheists who should certainly have the intellectual equipment to see what they're doing.



  2. Yes, Steve that part about "stupider atheists" does refer to you and your Eschaton friends.