Re: [asa] David S Wilson

From: Bill Hamilton <>
Date: Sun May 06 2007 - 21:30:55 EDT

Randy wrote

Atheism: In his presentations, Wilson said nothing to indicate his
views on the existence of God so in our informal discussion I asked
David "What, if anything, do you feel your studies tell us about the
existence of a transcendent God?" After a few exchanges where he
wanted a definition of what I meant by "God", he stated that given
his assumption of naturalism he felt all aspects of human behavior
could be satisfactorily explained. Therefore he had no need of God. I
took the approach of questioning why the existence of God was
mutually exclusive to any scientific explanation, using the typical
arguments of laws of physics not being mutually exclusive to God's
involvement. He then asserted that a God that didn't make a
difference wasn't worth believing in.

It seems he's limiting his discourse to science: That a God not scientifically detectable is not worth believing in. But there's much more to life than science. Surely he doesn't believe that there is nothing in his relationship with his wife, if he's married, that's not scientifically explicable. By and large scientists work on "toy" problems -- carefully circumscribed so that the methods of analysis and measurement we can devise can be applied. That puts human-human relationships and human-creator relationships outside the domain of science. Perhaps Wilson can live believing that there are scientific explanations for all of our emotions and mores, and that feelings of compassion and love have mechanical explanations. But to my mind that cheapens these aspects of our humanness and raises the question: Why bother with trying to figure out life, or indeed why bother with life itself?
Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
248.652.4148 (home) 248.821.8156 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun May 6 21:31:20 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun May 06 2007 - 21:31:20 EDT