This is actually not a refutation of the argument. In your analogy the "puddle" is us and the "hole" is the universe, and just because we happen to exist in a universe where we can exist does not imply the universe was created for us. This argument presupposes though that there are many...
The problem with your analogy here is you are talking of a closed mechanical system like a machine.However the universe is a open dynamic system that has constant novelty, i.e., it changes every moment and yet that remains in dynamic equilibrium, therefore it requires a constant supervising...
But I don't agree that 'God' is beyond the intellect, because if 'God' was beyond the grasp of the intellect, how would we be to have the concept of God in the first place? It is similar to Kant's 'Noumena' he said the Noumena was unknowable. But if it unknowable then how does he have the...
I am aware of this philosophy, the Jains and Buddhists do not require a God in their worldview. However, they face the same problem the materialist does, how do they explain that the universe remains coherent then? For example in the Jain worldview there are infinite spiritual monads, infinite...
Just to add to this discussion here is a repost from my thread 'Anti-materialism'
This theory is based on a naive observation at the time of Darwin that single cells were just amorphous blobs that over a long time joined with other blobs, and then the blobs join with others. What Darwin did...
No it doesn't. I never made that argument. If I have, please cite me where I said "Everything needs to be explained" You are basically strawmaning a more sophisticated argument presented in the OP.
Why would it be magic to say that something just exists? In that case if you hold say an alternative position that 50 or so elementary particles just happen to exist, then that would be magic too. In that case if I say anything that just exists is the same as saying it is "magic"
There is a...
Sure we do, and yeah this is not the place to do it, and nor was my thread "Anti-materialism" the place to do it either. The place to do it was my thread "Can Hindu's be atheists" which you bowed you out of. In any case I know what you are arguing here is not Hinduism, but more sunyata/emptiness...
I agree we are short shorted and I agree we have limited mind with limited intelligence. However, with this limited mind with limited intelligence we can still make inferences based on observation. Now, based on my observation I can clearly see coherent and functional things do not exist without...
Sure, I agree that the universe is fluid and dynamic and that the current stable universe will always not always remain stable, but we have a perfect answer for this in Hinduism and that is everything goes around in cycles, of which we have mentioned 6 stages pre-exists, manifest being, exists...
The problem with the atheists/materialist approach is they are applying old obsolete 18th century reductionist thinking to the universe and to living things, this is the approach of taking things apart like a machine, and then putting it back together part by part. This way of thinking was...
This is a repost from a thread of mine in the Hindu DIR thread. It has taken me a long time to accept that God exists, as I am an ex-atheist and still have strong atheistic tendencies. I have looked at all the main arguments for why God exists cosmological, design and ontological, but it is this...
Bravo Sayak, welcome to the anti-Materialism Hindu camp. Although you only haveone foot in there, but it's good to see that you are reconsidering materialism. However, this is not not a "Hindu argument" really. And I am afraid they are not very good arguments,
I clumped these all together...
The problem I am having with your representation is with the word "perfected" If it was already perfect at the Islamic stage of science, then what was it at the Western modern stage, more than perfect? I think you it would serve you better to use the word "contributed" They contributed for sure...
Just a few corrections to your history. I am not undermining the scientific achievements of the Arabs, which were significant, but many of the first you claim here were not first. India had universities and hospitals in 600BCE, and Persia too had hospitals in the Sassanian empire. Mathematics...