Friday, March 30, 2012

Cosmological and Design Argument



In your blog, I would like you to reflect more generally on what, if anything, you think philosophy might contribute to the understanding of religion. Think about i) whether you think these arguments might change someone's relgious convictions, and ii) whether there is anything about religious experience that is left out of these arguments (for example, some people might say that faith is important for religious conviction, yet of course faith has no role in philosophical argument).



It is essential for religious followers to dig deep into the depths of the philosophical understanding of God. Not all religions are the same; however, through studies, it has been proven that we all may be praying to the same God in many different forms. As a philosopher, God – the creator of the world and universe is the reason why we exist but exists without a cause. I would defiantly point out to a follower or leader of religious beliefs to look at God as the beginning of all we know. We are certain there is a God, but for what purpose? By looking into the philosophy of religion, we are able to see that since God is an uncaused cause, it has to be the beginning of what we know and nothing before it like the reflection of the sun on several glasses. We see the reflection on different glasses, but the source is the sun and we can look at God the same way. This connection between philosophy and religion is the hidden truth that could change many religions. As a Hindu, I worship many forms of God whom I have recently realized that many are forms of single forms. For example the Gods I worship are the reincarnated version of another God and so forth. Why stop there though? What if philosophy had the answer to the main question – Which is the real God? By understanding the universe is created by an architect and understand that the beginning would be an uncaused cause, we can infer that there is one God. For Hinduism, that Supreme Being is named Brahman. Philosophy also points out that an “apparent design”, which is the design of the world as we see it. It is not by accident that our world comes together in such simple harmony. Of course it’s not perfect, but it isn’t by mistake. Science predates the “big bang” theory. What if that theory was a part of God’s creation?
As we look into the scientists who claim the origins of the world and the archeologists who sought evolution as the answer to our questions, we find that these people were theists. Strangely enough, Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution does make a lot of sense with all of the archeological finds that have been discovered over the years. A theist, however, would say that is inaccurate and claim that humans were made by God. Darwin does mention that God supervised the events or probable chance of our homo evolution and allowed the chances to take place. A religious follower would then ask, why does it seem so well thought out, our species, and designed to work in such a way where we became the dominant species of the world?
In all philosophy explains that when it comes to religion and science, religion asks us questions of ‘why’ and science asks of ‘how’ without interfering with each other. I would agree with the harmonizers who see the relationship between science and religion as a contingent. Without religion there is no science and without science there is no religion because science exploits religion and vice versa.

1 comment:

  1. it was interesting to read your own perspective on this subject! You present the harmonizer's view very succinctly

    ReplyDelete