The New Atheism, Science & Morality

with Glenn Peoples 6 September 2010

Category:

Education

Tags:

• New
• Atheism
• Atheist
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Sam
• Harris
• Christopher
• Hitchens
• Daniel
• Dennett
• Morality
• Science
• Glenn
• Peoples
• God
• Delusion
• Philosophy
• Religion

[Prodigalfather1]

@Mogley52 "natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing."

Natural laws do not create or cause anything despite what Hawking might argue about the philosophy of scinece. Laws describe what happen when a rock falls but they dont cause the rock to fall.

Atheism must account not only for the origin of abstract laws but how matter could exist eternally in the past in some form or other.

[Mogley52]

SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)

[Mogley52]

NOT ALL EVOLUTIONISTS even agree on the fossils used to support and reconstruct human evolution. The bones are incomplete. There's no certainty of the bones belonging to the same creature. They can reconstruct whatever they want from these bones, and they have. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read my article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE

[Mogley52]

EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can become contorted by gravity. Einstein's equations showed that the universe cannot be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator!

[DeaconVerter]

This guy knows what "begging the question" is. Yet he fails to indict religion as by far the biggest friend of this flawed method of argument. God has never been proved, yet clerics and authors the world over act as though it has been and build large castles in sand.

Harris may indeed have failed, but any fool should know to allay the suspicion of religious bias by first disowning the Bible as accurate history.

The religion/morality argument was killed by Euthyphro. Deal with it.

[DeaconVerter]

Terrible. First, where does HE sit on the religious spectrum. Red Flag! Here it's 'morality from God' vs Harris' 'morality from science'. This false dichotomy also hides other big problems with the religious moral argument. Then at 16:45 he says his and Harris' moral values are probably quite similar. Not if he's a Christian. Harris won't find an excuse for the kind of killing we see in the Bible. Christians say there are 3: if God ordered it or did it or liked it. Huge difference!

[nosyt42]

Lucid presentation!