Posted: Dec 26, 2011 9:25 pm
Which says no more than natural theology is a failure. It does not suggest that God does not exist.Ironclad wrote:For Mick:
Natural Theology fails to tell me anything about the nature of the divine creature, it's arguments (to me) offer meandering nothingness beyond wishful thinking; Physico-theology does not have a leg to stand on - It's Arguments From Design fail in the face of (the/any I'm aware of) scientific method.
OK, the justification of agnosticism, got it.To steal a passage from H J Blackman ( Humanism, 1968) - ~ the onus used to be on the unbeliever (to have his beliefs taken seriously) when it was assumed that natural theology proved the primary truths of religion which explained and justified the world. ~ [thanks to Darwin, other researchers and scientists creating peer-available paperwork] ~ the collapse of natural theology means the obligation to justify his/her position has shifted from the unbeliever to the believer and cannot bounce back. The onus is inescapably on the theist. THAT is the justification of agnosticism.
I prefer the 'strong atheist' stance, being as the challenge (above) repeatedly fails, is effectively dead, and will most likely continue to embarrass itself over and again. Natural theology is a dead parrot, physico-theology is the cement shoes it wears.
This says no more than natural theology is a failure and will continue to be so. Ok, so what? This doesnt suggest that theism is false. Heck, there are theists who will agree with you that natural theology is a failure, though that's not what they base their theism on.
OK, so now here is your real reasons, though you havent mentioned any.I guess that could well be true, but the failure of these arguments leads us to turn to other areas for explanations of phenomena - the mountain of evidence for other 'real & natural' answers points quite firmly in the opposite direction from heavenly beings.
Why would it allow you to do this?Remember, the OP asks for reasons behind strong atheism. Each of the theologians failures allows me a step away, even from agnosticism.
It does to me, the two POVs make poor bed-fellows. I think the impact is ground-shaking.
lol. why's that?