I mentioned YouTuber Joe Schmid recent conversion (or reversion) to Catholicism, and the epic seven-hour video he made on the cumulative case for God. (One of only three videos explaining his conversion, which total twenty-five hours.)
I'm working my way through it bit by bit, but I was particularly struck by this section, in which he asks why the universe, if it's "just there", isn't a lot more boring. I've often wondered this myself.
Whenever I've found myself pondering this, I've imagined the universe as an endless block of steel extending in every directions
Here are some of Schmid's suggestions of how the universe might have been (I've modified things I don't understand):
No concrete objects exist.
Only one particle exists.
One particle moves in a straight line forever (or a circle, etc.)
One particle periodically enters into an excited state.
Exactly two particles exist and orbit their common centre.
And he then says: "I could do this forever". Indeed.
Atheists put so much weight on evolution that it doesn't seem to occur to them that even for evolution to occur, the universe had to be a dynamic, rule-governed, complex reality.
To which the atheist might reply: "Well, it just is."
Which reminds me of Fr. Frederick Copleston's reply to Bertrand Russell, in a radio debate on the existence of God, when Russell was sticking to the "arms folded and sitting back" position: "If one refuses to even sit down at the chessboard and make a move, one cannot be checkmated."
No comments:
Post a Comment