---- Ted Davis <TDavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
=============
I'm presently reading a hard copy of an article about Dawkins in "The
Spectator," a highbrow magazine from the UK.
Isn't that redundant? :) Just kidding M. R.!
The issue for 9 December 06
has an interview by Rod Liddle.
Dawkins: "I don't think you can disprove God. But I don't think you can
disprove God as you can't disprove fairies and unicorns. It's a kind of
scientific purism that makes me say I can't be an absolute 100 per cent
atheist."
This is a standard athiest argument and it doesn't work. Fairies and unicorns, and leperachauns for that matter, can't be disproven any more than the Loch Ness monster or abominable snowmen. But their existance can be addressed scientifically. It can't be dis-proven because of the imposibility of proving a negative. But centuries of looking where they should be found and failing to find a shred of evidence is convincing evidence that they don't exist. I doubt if Dawkins has looked for God where he can be found. Instead he seems to be looking in the physical realm.
Brent
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 2 17:41:14 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 02 2007 - 17:41:14 EDT