Thursday, 24 November 2011

Proving the Unprovable.

After years as an atheist I am sad to report I was wrong, God does exist. I know he exists because I think child abuse is wrong. You also know child abuse is wrong so you must also believe God is real, right? Well no actually, if you screamed "Non sequitur" at your computer screen you'd be right, you'd also be in need of some stress relief, I mean screaming at your computer.... chillax.

The assertion I opened with is not mine but originates from website proof that God exists ( possibly the most infuriating website I've ever had the displeasure to surf (and I've visited several DirectGov sites), the site is the work of the bizarrely named Sye Ten Bruggancate and his organisation Sinner ministries ( you can probably guess from the name that they're going to be at the fundamentalism end of the Christian spectrum). The site throws you a series of seemingly simple multiple choice questions, but that's the trick with the multiple choice format. Sye can use it to direct you to the conclusion he desires by simply forcing you to chose the answer that closest describes your position, also he's able to conflate things which simply do not co-exist.

Lets take a quick tour:

Question 1: Absolute truth exists?

A, Absolute truth exists
B, Absolute truth does not exist
C, I do not know if absolute truth exists
D, I do not care if absolute truth exists.

Hmmm, answer D seems pretty fucking pointless to include quite frankly, anyone so disinterested would simply navigate away from the page. Maybe replace it with "Absolute truth may exist but we may never know it, as knowing the absolute truth would require near omniscience. We can never know, for example, an electron's precise speed and its position. The only thing we can ever know to absolutely true is that we can't know the absolute truth." Or maybe "Truth is an abstract concept and is therefore subjective. Each person's absolute truth only holds until it is proven erroneous." That's not an option so I have to plump for A. Next question....

Question 2: Laws of logic exist?

A. Yes

B. No

OK. yes laws of logic do exist, but do they hold in all circumstances? In the world of quantum psychics it is quite possible for a particle to occupy multiple positions simultaneously, other wise known as the super position this contradiction holds until the particle is"observed." This flies in the face of the example given on Sye's site "a car cannot be both in the parking lot and outside at the same time," maybe not, but a fermion could (if I was being picky I could say the car could be parked half in and half out of the lot). Once again I'm forced to pick an option that doesn't exactly fit my position. A it is.

Question 3: Laws of mathematics exist?

A. Yes

B. No

Easy, that's a big yes. Mathematics is one of the few things we can be totally sure of.  A.

Question 4: Laws of Science exist?

A. Yes

B. No

Again this is more complicated than presented. Much like question 1 laws of science do exist but we do not have and may never have complete understanding of them. The example given is that of gravity, but does gravity function the same in all circumstances as our experience tells us it does on earth. Stand at the event horizon of a black hole and let me know as you're spaghettified. Reluctantly A. Here we arrive at the real issue I have with the site...

Question 4: Do Absolute Moral laws exist?

A. Yes

B. No

You may of noticed Sye drop in the word absolute there not used before, this to aid his semantics if you select no. Absolute moral laws do not exist, morality is subjective based on your upbringing, experience, belief and biology they are personal to you and you alone. sure we share many of the same concepts of right and wrong but identical they ain't. Moral laws can not be absolute, if we (the human race) cease to exist, they cease to exist, unlike the laws of science and mathematics moral laws depend on us to maintain them. So click  B. No.  You're then faced with a hideously disingenuous choice....

A, Child abuse is not for fun and is absolutely morally wrong.

B. Child abuse is for fun and not absolutely morally wrong.

Caught on the horns of a false dilemma, if you don't accept absolute moral laws you approve of child rape right? Wrong, fuck you Sye, you sneaky, snide little cunt. Moral laws cannot be conflated with the physical laws of maths and science as the universe unfortunately allows child abuse as fucking awful as that is, as much as it sickens me to type. If only there was some all powerful sky man who could alter the laws of the universe to stop such atrocities from occurring.... but wait, isn't that what you're proposing and attempting to prove?

Question 5: The Laws of Science, Maths, logic and morality are immaterial?

The major problem here is one of conflation, maths and science consist material laws the other two immaterial, abstract ans subjective, of course that option is unavailable to us. Dirty tricks are in full flow now, if you wish to see this through you're forced to flow on the tracks Sye and crew lay down.

Question 6: The Laws Of Maths, Science, Logic and Morality are....

A. Universal

B. individual

Again conflation, maths, science and in this case logic are universal morality is not. If we cease to be our moral laws go with us while the laws of the others remain. Here's a question for Sye, if moral laws are universal how can God break them time and time again? The old testament contains frequent examples of God advocating rape and murder of children.

Question 7: Laws of Maths, Science, Logic and Morality are unchanging?

Maths and logic may remain unchanging, laws of science and our understanding of them certainly does change at high energies particles behave differently and counter intuitively to common laws of pyschics. As for the laws of morality they are constantly in flux. is slavery still acceptable? The bible endorses it, going as far as to contain advice for slaves to follow if they wish to attain salvation and rules for slave masters (if you smash their teeth out you've got to let them go as compensation tut!). Still acceptable Sye? What about genocide? Stoning? ethnic cleansing?

Of course to complete the test you must answer yes, leading you to this:

"To reach this page you had to acknowledge that immaterial, universal, unchanging laws of logic, mathematics, science, and absolute morality exist. Universal, immaterial, unchanging laws are necessary for rational thinking to be possible. Universal, immaterial, unchanging laws cannot be accounted for if the universe was random or only material in nature.
The Bible teaches us that there are 2 types of people in this world, those who profess the truth of God's existence and those who suppress the truth of God's existence. The options of 'seeking' God, or not believing in God are unavailable. The Bible never attempts to prove the existence of God as it declares that the existence of God is so obvious that we are without excuse for not believing in Him" So you must believe in god if you got that far right? Just like a passenger on a hijacked jumbo jet must agree with the political stance of their abducters.

Prepositional bullshit of course, ever wonder if you've been taken for a ride? Nah, God exists and as for child molestation, it's absolutely wrong but he ain't stepping in to stop it, he gave us free will after all.