Friday, March 2, 2012
The Five Proofs
After reading the
five proofs I would have to agree with Aquinas because he provides many facts
into his claim. On the other hand I disagree with how Dawkins believe evolution
and belief in god is incompatible because his reasons are not strong enough. He
has no proof in how everything was created. Honestly if it was based on natural
selection there is always the question of how everything started. There had to
be a creator to everything, with the reasons Dawkins provide I don’t believe it
is strong enough to say there us no god. If Aquinas was still alive he will
definitely disagree with what Dawkins is saying. I feel like he will explain
more about the design of that god has come up with because I feel like Dawkins
don’t understand about the design of the world. I feel like everything in the
world happens for a reason, could be a certain balance. Natural disasters and
miracles happen for a reason, we will never have a strong enough argument to
support it. But I believe that will be something Aquinas will explain more
about if he was alive.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely agree with you because I know when I was reading both the articles I felt as if Aquinas was able to provide more information and facts to support his claim unlike Dawkins. Dawkins was not able to really support as to how the world came to be which I believe made it hard for me to believe in his claim like you. I think your right when you say that you feel like Dawkins does not understand enough about the design of the world. I feel like if he fully understand the design of the world as you put it, then he would have had a better argument or claim.
ReplyDelete