The fact that we can't explain God doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

From Wikidebates
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Parent debateThis argument is used in the debate Does God exist?.
Argument againstThis argument is an objection to God is an inexplicable explanation.
Keywords: Teleological argument, God[ edit ].

SummarySummary

QuotationsQuotes

“Under the guise of common sense, this objection is in fact inoperative and contrary to the scientific spirit itself. It's one of two things: either we have good reason to suppose an intentional cause for the fine-tuning of the universe, and so we must assume that it probably exists, or we don't have good reason to suppose it, and so we must leave it at that. But if we are in the first case, and we have good reason to suppose such a cause, the fact that we don't know "how it's made", "what it looks like", "where it might come from", etc., cannot constitute an argument to refute its existence, or even the possibility of it. Whether in everyday life or in scientific practice, we never reject an explanation on the grounds that we don't know how to "explain the explanation".”

Frédéric Guillaud, God exists, p.327-328, Éditions du Cerf, Paris, 2013.

ReferencesReferences

Arguments forJustifications

Arguments againstObjections

Parent debateParent debate