This post will deal with the second and third "tests" from the Atheist Test pamphlet.
TEST TWO
A. Do you know of any building that didn't have a builder?
___ YES ___ NO
B. Do you know of any painting that didn't have a painter?
___ YES ___ NO
C. Do you know of any car that didn't have a maker?
___ YES ___ NO
If you answered "YES" for any of the above, give details:
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
As I've already mentioned in my previous post, The Atheist Test: Test One, the author resorts to underhanded persuasion methods at times. However, in the test quoted above, I cannot blame him too much for making the following argument:
Complex things demand a designer or maker.
This argument is compelling, I admit.
But consider again Natural Selection and the formation of the heavenly bodies. Complex things could possibly come about without an intelligent mind.
Humans are unique among all life. The human mind can invent. Other animals may build and use tools. But to invent something is uniquely human.
Does that mean we are made in God's image?
If God made us or set evolution into motion, then yes, I suppose so.
But evolution doesn't seem to require an intelligent mind. Rather, the intelligent mind seems to have evolved through Natural Selection.
Perhaps we humans think that everything complex requires a creator because we are creators ourselves. We impose personification upon everything around us. Cartoons have talking birds, rabbits, or insects with human personalities. People gaze up at the moon and see a shadow of a human face. People throughout history have worshiped the Sun, the planets, and the stars as though they had human personalities.
And God seems quite human, too. He gets angry. He loves. He expresses regret. He gets jealous. And people often depict God as a man sitting on a throne with long white hair and a long white beard. Even when God is depicted as being an invisible spirit, he seems human.
Is that because God made us like him, or because we imagined him like us?
The ultimate problem with Test Two is that the author totally dismissed the possibility that natural phenomena can happen automatically. Again, the author leads the reader to assume the notion of Evolution theory and Big Bang theory is utterly foolish. But the evidence around us says that these two theories at least deserve some consideration.
TEST THREE
A. From the atom to the universe, is there order?
___ YES ___ NO
B. Did it happen by accident?
___ YES ___ NO
C. Or, must there have been an intelligent mind?
___ YES ___ NO
D. What are the chances of 50 oranges falling by chance
into ten rows of five oranges? ______________________
If you answered "YES" for any of the above, give details:
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
Here are some more sleazy persuasion tactics. I keep saying this because psychology research has found that when a person is coaxed to answer "yes" to the first question in a series, that person is more inclined to answer "yes" to every other question that follows.
For example, lets say a sales person calls and asks you the following:
Do you have any children in your home?
(assume you're a parent and answer "yes")
Do you care about the mental development of your children?
(yes, of course)
Do you believe that reading to your children is very important?
(of course, you dumb ass! why are you asking me this?)
I'm so glad you asked, because I have here these wonderful books designed to accelerate your child's reading abilities. Perfect for ages blah, blah, blah . . . Wouldn't you want your child to have books like these in his or her library-- books that will help your child become an excellent reader in the years to come?
(why, it would be dumb to answer no. so, yes.)
So, will you order one of these books today to enrich you're child's future?
(aw, damn. alright, I'll order some. I'd feel stupid saying no to books I just admitted were good for my children.)
My son pulled this trick on my when he was only in kindergarten! The conversation when like this:
Son: Daddy, don't you care about my artwork?
Me: Why of course son? Why would you ask a thing like that?
Son: Well, do you like the pictures I draw?
Me: Yes son. You draw very well.
Son: Well, if you care about my artwork, why don't you buy me some more markers. Please . . .
Keep in mind that my son had lost the last five packs of markers that I bought him. So all of a sudden, I felt duped at the way he played on my parental tenderness. But this is what persuasive people sometimes do.
Yeah, he eventually got the markers. And my son lost that set, too.
Grrrrr . . .
Anyway, I digress.
Many people are swayed by this line of questioning. Sales people use it often. Pay attention to the next few times someone makes a sales pitch at you. Listen to the questions they ask and see if they are phrased in such a way that they solicit a "yes" answer. This happens in sales literature, too.
These tests use this same tactic. The questions aren't designed to draw out common sense thinking. These questions draw only on proven tactics of influence in order to manipulate how you think.
That's why I keep using the word sleazy.
And that's why I feel driven to compose my commentary on this pamphlet.
So then, I do agree that from the atom to the universe there is order.
Um, but I don't think we can say that about quantum physics; Stuff smaller than the atom. That's a whole new world which has physicists baffled. Total chaos going on down there in quantum land!
Did it all happen by accident? Maybe. But not over night. Who knows how long things were brewing before the Big Bang might have happened. This universe may simply be a set up for the next bang that might come along.
I like the way question "C" is phrased: Or, must there have been . . .
The author is being manipulative again.
Or he found a really good sales copywriter to help him with the wording of his pamphlet.
Fifty oranges in rows of ten
Now, the author challenges you to believe that someone could drop 50 oranges and they fall to the floor in perfect rows of ten.
Of course you won't see that happen. That's why he asked.
But, the author implies that astronomers and evolutionists claim that the universe and life began in this way. Existence just fell in place in the same way that 50 oranges would fall into perfect rows of ten after being dropped.
You do know that biologists recently developed sperm cells from stem cells, right?
Did you know that all the building blocks for life can be found floating in outer space, between all the stars?
Humans could possibly be Mother Nature's chemistry experiment. (And there I go; I'm even projecting human qualities upon chemistry by calling it Mother Nature.)
Chemistry and biology may only need enough time and the right conditions to do amazing things.
I can't say the same for dropping 50 oranges into perfect rows of ten.
Or maybe one can. Any chaos theory experts out there?
Posts
