Thought on the Strange Self-Negating Quality of Modern Atheism

One of the most fascinating things about modern atheism, at least when taken in its more robust format of atheistic-naturalism, is how much different elements that that worldview routinely appeals to in order to intellectually shore itself up often negate and contradict themselves, and a case in point is the combination of the multiverse and blind-watcher evolution, for the former is something atheists routinely appeal to in order to deny the intuitive inference to cosmological design based on the fine-tuning of the universe while the latter is appealed to in order to deny the intuitive inference to biological design based on what we see in nature, and yet note that if an atheistic multiverse exists, then not only is it the case that there exist countless universes that look like ours and yet in which evolution may look like it happened, but it never did, and organisms simply popped into existence as they were, etc. (not to mention countless worlds like ours but where organisms were intelligently designed), but, on the other hand, it is also the case that if the atheistic multiverse is denied, then the odds of blind-watchmaker evolution actually accounting for everything we see in the natural world are so slim, and the evidence for this claim so paltry, that it is eminently rational to disbelieve in such an evolutionary process; and so the atheistic-naturalist is stuck between a very ironic rock and a humorous hard-place, for if he denies the atheistic multiverse, he has just made naturalistic evolution eminently rationally to deny (all his loud protestations to the contrary notwithstanding) while also allowing for the cosmological design inference to have serious anti-naturalistic force, and yet if the atheistic-naturalist accepts the multiverse, then he has not only also just made naturalistic evolution eminently rationally to deny as well, but he has also made it quite rational to believe that this world was intelligently designed, and so either way, the atheistic-naturalist’s position has a major breach in it, and it is such a large breach that it raises the question of whether atheistic-naturalism is even a rational position to begin with.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s