Posts in Physics
The next argument often used to point towards the existence of a supernatural creator is the Teleological Argument, also known as the argument from design. It goes something like this:
- Designs imply a designer
- The universe is a grand design
- The universe had a grand designer
Once again we will look at the validity of the first two statements, and then try to determine whether the third statement is actually valid given the best available evidence.
Now that we have defined some ground rules of our discussions and defined some terms that are commonly misused, it is time to start digging into some of the hard questions. In this first series, I am going to look at arguments for the existence of a supernatural creator and how to evaluate them given our previously agreed-upon rules of engagement.
Our first foray into this *very* heavy question will be into what I consider to be the best argument that believers have for the notion of gods: the Kalam Cosmological Argument, otherwise known as the argument from creation. At its most basic level, it states the following:
- Everything that begins to exist has a cause;
- The universe began to exist;
- The universe has a cause. (Wikipedia)
We need to evaluate both the initial claims and the conclusion of this classic argument. How does it hold up to scrutiny?
I am currently reading a somewhat painful apologetics work, Life After Death by Dinesh D’Souza. I am not quite halfway through and already the book is rife with bad science and flawed arguments. I may eventually write a review, but the book pretty much serves as its own refutation. I did want to touch on one point that gets some attention from D’Souza: the big bang and the origin of the universe.
It is not unusual to see the claim, “The universe began at the Big Bang.” There is a rather basic problem with this claim: the universe did not begin at the big bang.