Insurmountable gap?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-04-2014, 07:29 PM
Insurmountable gap?
I was interested in knowing what folks thought about this idea: The uniformity in nature (or the laws of the universe) is an observable phenomenon who's cause is not a scientific subject. This is essentially embodied in the debate between Humeans (who argue that the uniformity has no discernible cause) vs the Necessitarians (who argue uniformities must have some intangible cause which explains their existence). This topic will forever remain a subject of philosophy because the scientific method cannot be applied to it. A theist can adopt a Necessitarian perspective, attributing the cause to God. Assume here that God has a limited meaning of "intangible cause for the existence-of/uniformity-in nature". In this way, it would be a theory to explain an observable phenomenon, but impossible to test. At the same time, it’s a “gap” which science can unquestionably never fill (because the scientific method cannot is not applicable to it). Conclusion: the classical “god of the gaps” is an irrelevant discourse because there is in actuality a permanent gap outside the reach of science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2014, 07:48 PM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(16-04-2014 07:29 PM)lots2learn Wrote:  there is in actuality a permanent gap outside the reach of science.

Citation needed.

"It's a most distressing affliction to have a sentimental heart and a skeptical mind.”
― نجيب محفوظ, Sugar Street
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like evenheathen's post
16-04-2014, 08:03 PM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(16-04-2014 07:29 PM)lots2learn Wrote:  Assume here that God has a limited meaning of "intangible cause for the existence-of/uniformity-in nature".

Why should we do that? We all know what you really mean when you say "gawd". Equivocation and trying to sneak deities in through the back door is bullshit.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
17-04-2014, 04:27 AM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(16-04-2014 07:48 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(16-04-2014 07:29 PM)lots2learn Wrote:  there is in actuality a permanent gap outside the reach of science.

Citation needed.

Why? It's a proposition I'm making, and if it's wrong I'd like to hear why.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2014, 04:36 AM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(16-04-2014 08:03 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(16-04-2014 07:29 PM)lots2learn Wrote:  Assume here that God has a limited meaning of "intangible cause for the existence-of/uniformity-in nature".

Why should we do that? We all know what you really mean when you say "gawd". Equivocation and trying to sneak deities in through the back door is bullshit.

That is the definition I'm positing for my very specific proposition. I'm making my definition clear up front so that the conversation doesn't go off topic into personal gods or other logical contentions with godlike attributes.

You can use a different word if you like. My proposition stands either way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2014, 04:39 AM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(17-04-2014 04:27 AM)lots2learn Wrote:  
(16-04-2014 07:48 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Citation needed.

Why? It's a proposition I'm making, and if it's wrong I'd like to hear why.

The problem is that we don't actually know what is and isn't outside of the reach of science, or even whether there is anything that cannot be ultimately explained using the scientific method. This is because we do not know what we do not yet know.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like Mathilda's post
17-04-2014, 05:48 AM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(16-04-2014 07:29 PM)lots2learn Wrote:  I was interested in knowing what folks thought about this idea: The uniformity in nature (or the laws of the universe) is an observable phenomenon who's cause is not a scientific subject. This is essentially embodied in the debate between Humeans (who argue that the uniformity has no discernible cause) vs the Necessitarians (who argue uniformities must have some intangible cause which explains their existence). This topic will forever remain a subject of philosophy because the scientific method cannot be applied to it. A theist can adopt a Necessitarian perspective, attributing the cause to God. Assume here that God has a limited meaning of "intangible cause for the existence-of/uniformity-in nature". In this way, it would be a theory to explain an observable phenomenon, but impossible to test. At the same time, it’s a “gap” which science can unquestionably never fill (because the scientific method cannot is not applicable to it). Conclusion: the classical “god of the gaps” is an irrelevant discourse because there is in actuality a permanent gap outside the reach of science.
If I'm understanding this correctly (which is disputable) the argument is basically 1+1=2 has always equaled that and most likely will equal that in the future. And because the mechanism that causes this is not currently known therefore god?

1. This assumes that we either will never understand it, thus god, or we will understand it but we will understand it to be god.

The argument as posted is a god of the gaps argument, with a helping of false dichotomy and special pleading.

Here's the thing, were any of this true, Christian apologetics would not exist. One does not have to bend in multiple ways to defend electricity or aerodynamics. - Banjo

god's love is unconditional on the condition you do every thing he says. - Betty Bowers
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Blackhand293's post
17-04-2014, 06:22 AM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
Who in the fuck left the back door open (again) and let in another 3rd rate WLC 'philosophical' apologist in here? Dodgy

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
17-04-2014, 06:24 AM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(16-04-2014 07:29 PM)lots2learn Wrote:  I was interested in knowing what folks thought about this idea: The uniformity in nature (or the laws of the universe) is an observable phenomenon who's cause is not a scientific subject. This is essentially embodied in the debate between Humeans (who argue that the uniformity has no discernible cause) vs the Necessitarians (who argue uniformities must have some intangible cause which explains their existence). This topic will forever remain a subject of philosophy because the scientific method cannot be applied to it. A theist can adopt a Necessitarian perspective, attributing the cause to God. Assume here that God has a limited meaning of "intangible cause for the existence-of/uniformity-in nature". In this way, it would be a theory to explain an observable phenomenon, but impossible to test. At the same time, it’s a “gap” which science can unquestionably never fill (because the scientific method cannot is not applicable to it). Conclusion: the classical “god of the gaps” is an irrelevant discourse because there is in actuality a permanent gap outside the reach of science.

*whose cause

False dichotomy, argument from ignorance, unsubstantiated assumptions.

Choice 3: Physical reality could be no other way. This may not be beyond the reach of theoretical physics.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2014, 06:55 AM
RE: Insurmountable gap?
(16-04-2014 07:48 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(16-04-2014 07:29 PM)lots2learn Wrote:  there is in actuality a permanent gap outside the reach of science.

Citation needed.

Yes, how do you come to that conclusion?

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: