Skip to content

Teleological Blog

"Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved." — Francis Crick

  • Evidence for Design
  • Atheism’s Trojan Horse
  • Darwinian Biases
  • teleologist’s theology
  • Toggle search form

The Stillborn Atheist

Posted on July 2, 2006 By teleologist 2 Comments on The Stillborn Atheist

This is not a post to critique the different forms of Atheism. I want to address specifically PZ Myers’s definition of Atheism.

As I was puzzling over how to answer such an odd question, I realized why I thought it was odd. The scientist and atheist positions are the same. It doesn’t matter which hat I’m wearing, the answers won’t change.

The emphasis is his. Most likely Myers is not even aware that he is resurrecting a form of logical positivism. Logical positivism was originally forwarded by men such as Moritz Schlick and A. J. Ayer to eliminate metaphysics. Logical positivism is the idea that anything outside of sense perception is not real and therefore meaningless. If an idea or thing can not be subjected to empirical testing and verification then it is meaningless. Does this sound familiar? Essentially logical positivism is making a truth claim through tautology.
PZ Myers on Godless Science

I do think that the processes of science are antithetical to the processes of religion — personal revelation and dogma are not accepted forms of evidence in the sciences … The whole philosophy of critical thinking and demanding reproducible evidence arms its proponents with a wicked sharp knife that is all too easily applied to religious beliefs

Myers does not seem to have studied his faith in Atheism because he would have realized that this sort of reasoning had been debunked long ago. This is why Myers’s synthesis of science and Atheism is dead on arrival. You see, the problem with logical positivism is that in order for its argument to be true, it can only apply to some metaphysical claims. Since metaphysics by definition is beyond empirical verification there is no way to determine scientifically which one is correct and which is false. On the other hand if the argument is used to apply to all metaphysical claims then logical positivism itself must also invalidate itself, because it cannot empirically verify that empirical verification is the only valid method of validating and idea or thing. In order to validate itself it must be able to empirically invalidate metaphysics, which it is not able to do.

The other argument against Myers’s atheistic positivism is that it contradicts reality. It is an inescapable fact that human existence involves qualities of intangibility. The aesthetics for the appreciation of beauty, love, hate, jealousy, envy, generosity, courage, fear, imagination and the list goes on. Even if the atheist were to insists that these are nothing more than random molecules in a sea of complex chemical reactions that produces these feelings, thoughts and emotions. The atheist cannot empirically prove this scientifically; therefore logical positivism is meaningless according to its own definition.

Science as some have said is a powerful tool, but in the face of reality it is insufficient to explain the whole of reality. In order to understand reality in its entire existential sense, we need another tool. The ancient philosophers understood this even better than Myers. Metaphysical thoughts and ideas are needed for the complete understanding of existential reality as we experience it. There needs to be unity in diversity. An atheist like Myers is anxious to whip out that scientific sword to strike religion but at the cost of losing reality. That is another story.

Related posts:

You're Not You and I'm Not Me
Adaptive evolution of non-coding DNA in Drosophila
VaTech Killer expresses admiration for Columbine Darwinists
Darwinism, Philosophy

Post navigation

Previous Post: PZ Myers Shows His Ignorance Again
Next Post: Ivy League Students Diss Dawkins

Comments (2) on “The Stillborn Atheist”

  1. Pingback: Teleological Blog » PZ Myers Shows His Ignorance Again
  2. Pingback: Teleological Blog » PZ Myers's Review of Darwin’s Deadly Legacy

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

  • Darwinism : Just Another Magic Show
  • Darwinian Evolution Means No Change Over Time
  • Review of The Reviews on Ham-Nye Debate
  • Ken Ham will debate Bill Nye. Why?
  • Darwin’s Other Doubt

Recent Comments

  • Darwinian Evolution Means No Change Over Time » Teleological Blog on Evidence for Design
  • teleologist on Review of The Reviews on Ham-Nye Debate
  • sosalty on Review of The Reviews on Ham-Nye Debate
  • The Anatomy of Darwinism (Part 2) » Teleological Blog on The Avalos’ Bash
  • teleologist on Review of The Reviews on Ham-Nye Debate

Archives

  • September 2016
  • February 2015
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • July 2013
  • January 2013
  • September 2012
  • May 2010
  • September 2009
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004

Categories

  • Atheism
  • Biology
  • blog specific issues
  • Creationism
  • Darwinism
  • Dstortions
  • Education
  • entertainment
  • Evolution
  • Holidays
  • Humor
  • Intelligent Design
  • Liberal-Humanism
  • OEC
  • Philosophy
  • Theology
  • Uncategorized
  • YEC

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2023 Teleological Blog.

Powered by PressBook WordPress theme