Replies

Thank you for your reply and questions!

me: "Doctrinally pure" atheism requires...... an infinite past

you: Why? Aren't there atheist who believe in a Big Bang?

All physical cosmologies (inflationary, multi-verse, multi-world, imaginary time, ekpyrotic, cyclic, etc.) require an uncaused cause for physical causation itself (space/time), a prime mover, existing existence, i.e. God.

In the face of evidence from measuring the cosmic backround microwave radiation (the universe is expanding and thus had a beginning) - only a purist atheist would believe in an infinite past, i.e. a steady state multi-verse.

me: ... no direction

you: What do you mean when you speak about a "direction"?

Teleology, purpose for which "all that there is" exists - final cause in Aristotlean parlance, the last of four.

me: ... no distinction between life and non-life in nature

you: Why? Aren't there atheists who know the difference between their dog and - let's say - a salami...

In their worldview all that exists is matter in all its motions, which is to say the dog and the salami are made of the same quantum components and phenomena and nothing else, i.e. there is no "ghost in the machine."

Try getting a doctrinaire atheist to give you a straight answer to the question "what is life v. non-life/death in nature"

me: ... strong determinism (predestination)

you: Why? Isn't quantum mechanics enough to crush the idea of strong determinism?

The two most common instances of randomness in nature cited (radioactive decay and virtual particles) are neither one random. The first is clearly the effect of a physical cause - and both fail under the causation form: "if not for A, C would not be" IOW, if not for time events would not occur, if not for space things would not exist.

As with Chaitin's Omega (random number generator) - they are only pseudo-random (term coined by Wolfram), the effect of a cause.

Of a truth, one cannot say a thing is random in the system when he does not know what the system "is." And that is where the purist atheist falls flat on his face because he declares that all that exists is matter in all its motions, microscope to telescope.

me: ... no free will.

you: Why? Why no free will?

It is the logical consequence of strong determinism or predestination. The will, mind, consciousness, soul, spirit, etc. is merely an epiphenomenon of the physical brain in that philosophy/theology. An epiphenomenon is a secondary phenomenon which can cause nothing to happen.

At the root, atheism fails on causation across the board. It is not a rational philosophy, it is a statement of faith - a waving of the fist at God.

Thanks for the good-sounding reply.
All physical cosmologies ... require an uncaused cause for physical causation itself ...
Almost lyric, but a kind of personal opinion...

only a purist atheist would believe in an infinite past, i.e. a steady state multi-verse.
Thats your idea what an purist atheist should do. I'd say you're lacking imagination, these purist atheists are a creative bunch and can make up a god-less model for a non-steady-state universe...

ST: What do you mean when you speak about a "direction"? AG: Teleology, purpose for which "all that there is" exists - final cause in Aristotelean parlance, the last of four.
Ah, the "What is it good for" question... You are right, a purist atheist may just admire the beauty of it all.

In their worldview all that exists is matter in all its motions, which is to say the dog and the salami are made of the same quantum components and phenomena and nothing else, i.e. there is no "ghost in the machine."
But even in this world-view, there are less complex and more complex machines, the most complex being the living ones. And even without a "ghost in the machine", this complexity is something with a value..

The two most common instances of randomness in nature cited (radioactive decay and virtual particles) are neither one random. The first is clearly the effect of a physical cause - and both fail under the causation form: "if not for A, C would not be" IOW, if not for time events would not occur, if not for space things would not exist.
There you lost me: Yes, radioactive decay is random, yes, it's a physical process. Do you think the decay of an atom is triggered by a kind of inner clock?

PS: if not for A, C would not be - where the hell is B? Isn't it A² + B² = C² :-)

At the root, atheism fails on causation across the board. It is not a rational philosophy, it is a statement of faith - a waving of the fist at God.

GREAT essay/post, Alamo-Girl! Thank you oh so very much!

uncaused cause >>

SomeOne had to push that first domino.

You've summed up the talking points quite nicely, Alamo-Girl.

But the LORD has become my fortress, and my God the rock in whom I take refuge.

Psalm 94:22

You defend the fortress well, Alamo-Girl.