07-22-2008, 08:53 AM
a lot of pro-religion arguments come out of how our humanity and biology is so intricate that it could not possibly be an accident. i heard an argument along the lines of "believing there is no god is like saying you can throw a bunch of pieces of an electric can opener in the air, and have it 'randomly' put itself together and function before it falls. it doesn't make any sense, that could never happen, unless someone had a hand in it. " Something like that... i think i butchered it. fix if you can.
but i don't agree with this argument. that's assuming way too many things: 1) that we had a predetermined function, 2) there was a finite number of instances for things to happen any other way, 3) that we aren't accidents, 4) that we are complicated beings (as in, maybe we are actually simple in the big picture of things) and probably a bunch of other things that i can't think of.
i think it's more like tossing a bunch of pieces of whatever in the air and expecting it to fall and function somehow, whatever it ends up being able to do. odds are still low for that, but you just keep doing it until it works. why not?
but i don't agree with this argument. that's assuming way too many things: 1) that we had a predetermined function, 2) there was a finite number of instances for things to happen any other way, 3) that we aren't accidents, 4) that we are complicated beings (as in, maybe we are actually simple in the big picture of things) and probably a bunch of other things that i can't think of.
i think it's more like tossing a bunch of pieces of whatever in the air and expecting it to fall and function somehow, whatever it ends up being able to do. odds are still low for that, but you just keep doing it until it works. why not?