Here’s a quote from a forum among Objectivists-atheists- discussing the new atheist movement among scientists like Dawkins, Dennet, Sam Harris, and writer Christopher Hitchens.

“Actually Dawkins is a 6-6.9 on a scale between 0 and 7. And the only reason he is not a 7 is because it would require him to make the absolute positive statement “There is no God or anything remotely like it” which any good scientist would never make since we do not have complete knowledge about the universe.”

They say philosophy is the queen of the sciences and this should illustrate why.

Certainly, a scientist cannot claim omniscience, but on certain things a philosopher can by means of metaphysical principles, especially, genuine philosophic axioms. The power of drawing a principle whose validity precludes a miracle making almighty god, an eternal god, a non-material god, or a god of moral judgment, is possible by reference to axioms we know to be true and contradict what is presumed to be the nature of god. If theologians or “prophets” say god is X and reality can only be Y, then the issue of god can be dealt with soundly, directly, and with intellectual self-confidence. When a notion of god contradicts axioms, we can be certain that such a god does not exist.

The scientific atheism always has to leave room for the possibility of discovering a god requiring some growth or modification of a few pages in a textbook. Since the universe is so vast, presumable we have to leave room for the possible discovery of life on other planets.

A philosopher can make sweeping judgments about the universe using his axioms. If every bit of reality is what it is, then it can not be what it is not. So, an elephant cannot be Jesus. Jesus cannot be a talking fire because fires don’t talk. Fire cannot be the word of god.  God cannot be everywhere. What is is everywhere. Every specific thing is where it is. It is so much and not more, or finite. Infinite is not.

One reason why the New Atheists are likely to be forgotten is that their message leaves the door open for the possibility of god. Whereas a philosopher closes it the minute any notion of god contradicts established axioms.  Philosophy is the queen of the sciences.

Another illustration of this is the issue of abortion.  To claim that a fetus has a right to life  contradicts the women’s right to life. Since contradictions cannot exist, any theory of rights must not lead to a clash of rights. Otherwise, the theory has no way to resolve two equal claims. If it did, it would have to refrain from participating in such a debate as abortion, since it could not say which is right. The only way to resolve the contradiction and uphold a theory of rights, is to hold that the woman has a right to life from her birth to her death, and every point in between, establishing for her the right to terminate a pregnancy at any point that she is pregnant.

Lorenz Kraus 2009

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 26th, 2009 at 2:34 am and is filed under . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.