We must accept the mystery
[ rename ][ 
]
[ rename ][ ]
This argument is used in the debate Does God exist?.
This argument is a justification of God is but the name of our ignorance.
This argument is an objection to To say that God is a filler concept is an unfalsifiable argument..
Summary[ edit ]
Quotes[ edit ]
“I prefer to accept mystery for what it is: the part of the unknown or unknowable that envelops all knowledge, all existence, the part of the inexplicable that any explanation presupposes or encounters. This is true from an ontological point of view: it's what I referred to earlier as the mystery of being. Why is there something rather than nothing? We don't know. We'll never know. But this is also true from a physical or scientific point of view. Why are the laws of nature what they are? We don't know either. It's likely that we'll never know (since we could only explain them by other laws). Calling this mystery "God" is a cheap way of reassuring ourselves without solving it. Why God rather than nothing? Why these laws rather than others? Silence, in the face of the silence of the universe, seems to me more appropriate, more faithful to the evidence and the mystery.”
