« The Good Theist | Main | Faith vs. Apologetics »

02/19/2013

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a0133f0b2fdc2970b017c36f822e7970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Self-Refuting "God of the Gaps" Critique:

Comments

ID isn't even a 'gaps' argument. It looks at what science tells us NOW about life and infer design based on what we DO know.

Casey Luskin that's a great point. May Christ give wisdom to all those atheists to understand your greatness. Knowledge with out wisdom is dangerous in these times. So many scientists without wisdom. Sad for them.

Luskin's basic fallacy there is the assumption that we fill the gap with something.

We don't.

Frequently the gap is an invented one reflecting either the dishonesty or the wilful ignorance (are they different?) of the person claiming it, but where the gap genuinely exists it is left as a gap pending more data on which to base a decision.

Should Luskin at any point ever come up with a validated piece of scientific data which can only be interpreted as proving that his particular god did it and that no natural explanation is possible, then he will have succeeded in using science to prove his god and can justify sitting it in the gap. Until he has done so, his notion remains not even a theory; not even a hypothesis, but merely a guess with no supporting evidence.

This is the basic scientific method. There is no shame in having questions without answers. The dishonesty is in inventing answers and then pretending you have answered the question. Smug confirmatory bias might be deeply satisfying for those not especially bothered about truth, but it is about as far from science as you can get.

You can test this for yourself by substituting the words 'peanut butter sandwich' for 'God' in Luskin's pretend answers and noting that it makes exactly the same 'sense' and conforms to precisely the same 'logic'. He will still have multiplied entities needlessly and will have made the explanation infinitely more complex because now he has to explain the god - where it came from, how it works, how it did whatever he is claiming it did, etc. He also has to explain why he disregarded all other possible supernatural explanations, how he identified and examined supernatural entities in the first place and how a supernatural entity which, by definition, can't interact with the natural world... er.... interacted with it but remained supernatural and undetectable. Hence his 'simple' or simplistic answer is actually far less satisfactory and infinitely more complex, so infinitely less likely to be correct, than the assumption that the gap can be investigated and eventually filled by science without making any assumptions, or incorporating any preconceived superstitions, no matter how smugly self-satisfied those assumptions might make us fee, or, as is more likely the case, how smugly self-satisfied the 'answer' might make the audience feel.

The fallacy he is using is our old friend, the Strawman, of course. One is tempted to ask how he knew he needed to, but the likelihood of getting an honest answer to that question probably approaches zero.


Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Categories


Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.
1 Peter 3:15

Editor’s Top Picks for Learning Apologetics


I urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. Jude 3


You are a king, then!” said Pilate. Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me. John 18:37

CONNECT WITH GREG ON:


Facebook / Twitter / Personal Blog

The Poached Egg Founder / Editor Greg West

For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 2 Corinthians 10:3-5

The Poached Egg Worldwide


For we did not follow cleverly contrived myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; instead, we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 2 Peter 1:16

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...