In response to Midge, leaving aside:
A) the creationist issues
B) the complex issue of prayer
There seem 4 questions and two assertions.
Q 1) Does a proposed entity cause effects on the observable universe?
How would we know?
We ascribe causation, which is a complex issue, rather badly.
We often see things we can't explain at present - but assume we will
understand one day.
We create "laws" of science to explain events, but how valid are
these when one is speaking of the behaviour of living creatures, and
humans in particular? The "laws" of psychology, sociology and
anthropology are interesting, but do they really stand up to
scientific scrutiny? John McEnroe comes to mind.
Q 2) Is there some other explanation for the observed effects?
How will we know until we can explain everything.
Q 3) If there is no interaction between the observed universe and the
proposed entity(s) why care?
(Some) human beings seem to have an irresistable knowledge to get at
the truth, climb up mountains only to climb down again etc etc. Is
it really so different to the kind of science that is trying to
explore the beginnings of the universe?
Q 4) Finally if there are observable events that cannot be explained
yet, does this justify a continuing belief in God(s).
That seems to me to be a philosophical question rather than a
scientific one, but if it could be shown that societies that lack
some kind of religious type of belief decay more quickly and more
devastatingly than those that sustain religious belief I think some
would find that an answer.
Comment on Assertion 1) Occam's razor (William of Occam) is wrong
often enough not to be useful in situations where all possibilities
can be considered (but IS useful when under time or other
pressure). Multiple causes often do contribute to events, and the
consideration of only the proximate cause is something that we in
medicine should be particularly aware of - eg. Significant event analysis
Comment on Assertion 2) The rule of simplicity could be said to
suggest that it all looks prettier and seems easier if we ascribe
difficult science to the simple concept of a God.
Julian
|