To say that God is a filler concept is an unfalsifiable argument.

This argument is used in the debate Does God exist?.

This argument is an objection to God is a filler concept.

Keywords: God

Summary

When we say that "God is a filler argument", we're assuming that there will be a natural or scientific explanation for the as yet unexplained phenomenon. In other words, we're assuming in advance the results of research and experiments that have yet to be carried out. In fact, we can always claim, when faced with any phenomenon, that it will be "naturally explained in the future". Even if we saw "Made by God" written in letters of fire on rocks, we could say "Tomorrow we'll find a natural explanation for this phenomenon". So the argument is unfalsifiable. No experiment can contradict it; we're "always right" in arguing that "in the future, such and such a fact will be explained in a scientistic way."

Quotes

References

Justifications

Objections

Science has never claimed to be able to explain everything in the future.
We must accept the mystery
To claim that there is either a divine hypothesis or a known scientific explanation is to commit a false dilemma.

Parent debate