Fri 8 Dec 2006
Multiple Universes?
Posted by Darren under Apologetics , Atheism , Christians , Epistemology , Faith , God , Naturalism , Philosophy , Skeptics
Was browsing Amazon today (as I am wont to do a little too often as my growing Amazon Wishlist will attest) and came across this quote re the "multiple universes" objection:
As far as the endless universes argument, I'll lay the flaw on the line: THE MANY UNIVERSES THEORY EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, THUS IT EXPLAINS NOTHING. I could say with equal validity that, in a multiverse consisting of an infinite number of realities, there would inevitably arise a world where fossil evidence appears to support evolution, when in fact it never occurred. The evidence looks that way by sheer coincidence. (Free Thinker's review of Dawkins' The God Delusion on Amazon)
The objection of "endless universes" seems to come up occasionally when I'm discussing God with people. It is sometimes used in its scientific sense an argument against the Anthropic Principle, however there are more than a few problems with using multiple universes as an argument against the Anthropic Principle.
I haven't yet read Dawkins' The God Delusion, but from what I've heard about it, it wouldn't present much new information. Here are some resources I've come across lately regarding Dawkins' book:
- Skeptical Christian: The God Delusion – The Skeptical Christian's review of the book.
- London Review of Books: Lunging, Flailing, Mispunching – Terry Eagleton's literary review.
- The Complete Review: The God Delusion – Links to many published reviews of Dawkins' book (both positive and negative) with several quotes listed on the page.
As always, if you're going to read The God Delusion, I might suggest that for balance you also read McLaren's Finding Faith.
BTW, sorry for the lack of posting. The last two weeks were spent scrambling to try to get all of my papers handed in for school so I didn't have a lot of time to post.
One Response to “Multiple Universes?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
December 8th, 2006 at 7:03 pm
Been reading about cosmology lately myself. This subject can be a challenge to one's faith, depending on who you listen to. I recently saw an article by a scientist (himself a cosmologist, I guess) about why "(Almost) All Cosmologists are Atheists." Just this title bothered me at first, until I realized that the primary activity of that occupation BY DEFINITION is to sit around and try to figure out how the universe could have begun without a creator, so of course they're mostly all atheists! Then I read part of a book by YEC icon Dr. Henry Morris in which he lays out all of the various theories of cosmology, and it became clear to me that they all of these ideas are just educated guessing, pure speculation backed up by theoretical math. Reminds me of what David Berlinski said about physicists in a recent interview he conducted with himself:
"Give a child to the Jesuits, they say, and ten years later the man will cringe when he spots the Cross. But look, ten years or so spent studying physics is a pretty effective form of brainwashing as well. You emerge into the daylight blinking weakly and talking about an endless number of universes stacked on top of one another like an old-fashioned Maine pancake breakfast. Or you start babbling inanely about how meaningless the universe is. But if you ask me just who is the more credulous, the more suggestible, the dopier, the more perfectly prepared to convey absurdity to an almost inconceivable pitch of personal enthusiasm – a well-trained Jesuit or a Ph.D. in quantum physics, I’ll go with the physicist every time. There is nothing these people won’t believe. No wonder used-car salesmen love them."
Yep! Goes right along with what Dr. Morris was saying: string theory, the whole universe shrunk down to the size of a grapefruit, suspension of the laws of physics, multiple universes, Bubbleland, etc. Thus I now realize I don't have to believe these guys just because they have PhD's in math or physics. It's not like they can test their theories by creating a universe in the lab (yea, I know, they can make predictions based on the theories and then see if observations match the predictions, but then the theory of epicycles more-or-less predicted the motion of the planets, though it was wrong).
OTOH, contemplation of the vastness of the universe challenges my faith, too. Why would God be so interested in this teeny tiny speck of dust called earth? I know, maybe size doesn't matter, but it does give me pause. Makes me wonder if maybe God didn't make other worlds and other civilizations on other planets and just hasn't told us about them. If I can get past the vastness of the universe challenging my faith to even believe that he exists, then I stand in awe of his mind-boggling immensity and infinitude. "Oh Lord my God, when I in awesome wonder, consider all the worlds thy hands have made…"