Homework from Miss Madden:
Year 10 full course Philosophy question:
“There is no evidence that God exists”. Do you agree? Give reasons to support your answer and show that you have thought about different points of view. ( Minimum word count – 100)
Leave a comment below!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I do not agree. Where ever we look there is evidence that God exists. As a Sikh, I believe that there is only one God. As a person who has aspirations to pursue a career in science it is difficult for me to believe something without evidence. I do believe God exists and therefore I have evidence.
ReplyDeleteHow is it, that planet Earth is the perfect distance away from the sun that it is possible for life to exist? Is that a coincidence or is it a hand of God? The things about our universe that can’t be explained by today’s science is God’s hand.
There are many theories as to how we came to be. Muslims believe that Allah is the creator of all. They also believe that it is wrong to represent him in anyway other than in words as we simply do not know what/ who he is as he has never revealed himself to humans. Not having any representation of Allah can also mean that people may find it difficult to believe he exists. On the other hand, the representation of God can limit him in time and space.
We can believe in the scientific theories (for example, ‘The Big Bang Theory’) about how the world came to be but we do not know what caused these explanations and that is where God comes in. To me, God doesn’t need to be represented and therefore I take me as existing as God existing too.
Darpan
Errin Kiernan & Corina Sehmar’s response;
ReplyDeleteI disagree with this statement and i believe that there is evidence because there are stories passed down through the ages about Jesus and God, the bible is a prime example of stories passed down. Well it could be stories or it could be true facts, some believe that it is he exact word from God but some others believe that it is passed through people who then wrote it. For us this is the only real evidence of God but even then it's not certain evidence. We're not certain who specifically wrote the bible, so it could've just been stories misinterpreted as true facts.
I think that god doesn’t exist, because there has been no real proof, I don’t think people can just make up that someone created our world and someone had these views, although I do believe in ghosts because I think some supernatural does exist and there has been much more proof of ghosts then god, and I don’t think the world should be run by Science alone.
Amy Buckle
Tayler and Ella.
Were not sure if god exists or not because there is no proof that he exists, but there’s also no proof that he doesn’t exist.
If god was real, then why is there bad and evil in the world why does he not prevent it from happening?
Also if god was real, who found out there was a god?
On the other hand we sometimes believe he’s real as the bible says he is real and some people believe its the word of god.
Also, people claim that miracles have happened to them and we have had a experience that could he be related to god.
No body is sure though so we don’t understand how someone can believe in him for sure.
Many people look to the natural world and see lots of evidence for the teleological argument of supposed ‘intelligent design’, when they perceive evidence of order, purpose and direction in the universe, or see complex living organisms that they believe couldn’t have possibly derived from ‘chance’. The eye is a common example used as ‘evidence’, as to those who aren’t familiar with the processes of Darwinian selection, it is perceived to be irreducibly complex, surmised wonderfully in William Paley’s watchmaker analogy. Because after all, what is the use of half an eye? However, simply by turning to nature and taking a closer look, it is easy to see how this is wrong. For example, there are some species of worm that can only distinguish between light and dark, dogs that can only see in black at white and so on. The heightened sense of sight, however slight would still pose an evolutionary advantage and the gradual development of the eye is applicable through evolution. Evolution isn’t chance, yes it’s only a theory, but so is the theory of gravity… when I look out the window, there are never any priests floating past.
ReplyDeleteIf any example of such irreducible complexity that could not be explained by Darwinian evolution were found, the entire theory would fall apart, as stated by Charles Darwin himself in his book, On The Origin Of Species.
Yet still, religious apologists seek out gaps in present-day knowledge or understanding and cling to them, always assuming that god, by default, must fill them. No, we don’t know what happened before the big bang, but why be so quick to fill the gap with religion? Of course, we can’t disprove god’s existence, but the burden of proof rests in the believers, not the non-believers. Otherwise that same logic could be applied to anything of which existence is conceivable but can neither be proved or disproved, such as the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Bertrand Russell’s parable of the celestial teapot. Gaps shrink as science progresses; it’s ignorance that drives science on, in order to diminish our ignorance. Simply filling the gaps in our understanding with god is dangerous and could halt the course of progress.