" Man at last knows that he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe, out of which he emerged only by chance. Neither his destiny nor his duty have been written down. The kingdom above or the darkness below: it is for him to choose". -- Jacques Monod
*+*
Jacques Monod was a Nobel Prize-winning French biologist and a friend of Albert Camus. He was a proponent of the view that life on earth arose by freak chemical accident and was unlikely to be duplicated even in the vast universe. Monod believed we are merely chemical extras in a majestic but impersonal cosmic drama—an irrelevant, unintended sideshow.
He used this bleak assessment as a springboard to argue for atheism and the absurdity and pointlessness of existence. (source: adapted from Wik.)
*+*
The question to ask would be, "how does Monod know this"? Does Monod, a finite being, have infinite knowledge? Does he know what he "knows" with scientific certainty, or has he extrapolated from science, a finite enterprise limited to the observable material realm, into the realm of philosophy and thought and the meaning of life?
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
7 comments:
Maybe he just did what religions do, and he mistook a hallucination as reality? For my part, I don't see why I should believe anything unless I see evidence for it, something that all religions/superstitions have a conspicuous lack of.
Anonymous said, “I don't see why I should believe anything unless I see evidence for it...”
I am supposing that Anonymous is an atheist and evolutionist (forgive me if I am wrong) but if he/she is, then he believes that a random assembly of dead chemicals came to life all by themselves. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE for this, but I guess he believes it anyway. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...just musing.
It's a good point. I don't see any way Monad could be certain about this.
The same applies to positing a god.
It seems to me a dose of humility is needed in these matters. Each of us should try to be as intellectually honest as possible, come to whatever conclusion we think makes the most sense, and keep open the possibility that we could be wrong.
Anonymous@9:14. There are at least five evidences for God implicit in your short post: 1. The universe exists. 2. Human beings exist. 3. Rational thought exists. 4. Human speech exists. 5. You evidently believe the universe is rational, comprehensible, and subject to "evidences".
But why, in an a-theistic universe, would you expect a) your undesigned brain to be a reliable emitter of thoughts, b) your undesigned brain to be a reliable sifter of incoming information, and c) there to be a tight correspondence between rational thought in humans and reality-as-it-is?
Your entire line of thought presupposes rational, sensible, and sense-making universe. In other words, a theistic universe.
Atheists owe a lot to God -- their atheism would be impossible without Him.
Furthermore, the fact that you don't "see" evidences for God validates the biblical truth that there are those who are spiritually blind and who cannot or will not either see or seek their Creator. Your atheism strengthens my faith in biblical theism.
Thank you for your post!
"I am supposing that Anonymous is an atheist and evolutionist"
I am not the person you directed this to, but I must respond anyway.
Atheism has nothing to do with evolution! Why you put the two together is beyond me - but my guess is ignorance on your part. The rest of your post confirms as much... ("evolutionist" - you wear your ignorance like a badge of honour!)
"he believes that a random assembly of dead chemicals came to life all by themselves. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE for this..."
Actually - there is ~evidence~ for this and a pretty solid hypothesis. It's still in the 'hypothesis' stage though - but that's fine because it means that scientists are actively studying and experimenting this to gain knowledge.
You gave up the second you said 'god did it'.
RKBall: "There are at least five evidences for God implicit in your short post:"
Oh please... you manage to say the dumbest things here...
"1. The universe exists."
Yes it does... and the (scientific) evidence points to a big bang. No - it's not just a idea but an actual testable theory with evidence and everything!
"2. Human beings exist."
Like the universe, science has taken most of the 'magic' out of this. That you think this points to a god is merely the result of your religion - not evidence for it.
"3. Rational thought exists."
Forgive me here - but I'm not sure you would know what "rational thought" was! It's quite sad really....
"4. Human speech exists."
"speech"?? Wow, you actually had me laugh out loud at that one! Speech is evidence of god.... that's a good one.
"5. You evidently believe the universe is rational, comprehensible, and subject to 'evidences'."
And this is evidence for god how exactly?
"But why, in an a-theistic universe, would you expect a) your undesigned brain to be a reliable emitter of thoughts"
I wouldn't "expect" it... it's the product of evolving in the environment that we did. It happened, science explains why and how, and that's how we learn.
"b) your undesigned brain to be a reliable sifter of incoming information"
Again, "expecting" it to happen isn't relevant. It happened and science is explaining how and why with each new discovery!
If you can manage to shed god you'd be surprised at the wonderful advances science has made!! (disclaimer: you don't ~need~ to shed god for this, but that makes it a little easier.)
That you don't 'believe' in evolution (a scientific fact) simply announces your ignorance of science.... until you can get over that you'll never learn the truth.
Joe Agnost.
And what, exactly, makes you think that I don't "believe in evolution"?
RKBall: "And what, exactly, makes you think that I don't 'believe in evolution'?"
I thought we'd discussed it before...
If you understand evolution ("belief" has nothing to do with it as it's a fact) then I take that part of my post back - or direct it to the anon poster that used "evolutionist" as if it were a real word.
joe agnost
Post a Comment