probably this thread is meant more for some philosophy forum but anyway i would appreciate your feedback:
I was talking with some ...friends most of them are atheists. One of their main arguement was that you cannot prove God's existence, while in Physics and Math all things are proved.
I told em that things are proved in physics and math based on fundamental principles (like conservation of energy or the principle that the laws of physics remain the same wrt time translations) and axioms which we accept as true with no further proof. If we remove those principles and axioms we cannot prove many things.
The only "extra feature" that the principles of physics (while axioms in math can be totally arbitrary) have is that they are in consistency with a wide range of observations, measurements and experiments. But this consistency is not the same as a proof of the principles, is it?
The point is, if you tell to atheists that you accept God's existence as an axiom they call you absurd. However the same atheists dont find science absurd though it is based on axioms and principles which we accept as true with no further proof. The only extra thing in physics is experimental consistency . Can experimental consistency be our one and only guide for what is true and what is not? i think not.
I was talking with some ...friends most of them are atheists. One of their main arguement was that you cannot prove God's existence, while in Physics and Math all things are proved.
I told em that things are proved in physics and math based on fundamental principles (like conservation of energy or the principle that the laws of physics remain the same wrt time translations) and axioms which we accept as true with no further proof. If we remove those principles and axioms we cannot prove many things.
The only "extra feature" that the principles of physics (while axioms in math can be totally arbitrary) have is that they are in consistency with a wide range of observations, measurements and experiments. But this consistency is not the same as a proof of the principles, is it?
The point is, if you tell to atheists that you accept God's existence as an axiom they call you absurd. However the same atheists dont find science absurd though it is based on axioms and principles which we accept as true with no further proof. The only extra thing in physics is experimental consistency . Can experimental consistency be our one and only guide for what is true and what is not? i think not.
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire