Saturday, November 04, 2006

God, The Proof of


The question of whether God exists has rolled around in everyone's mind.

Everyone agrees (some tautologically) that God can only be known through Faith. Faith is the belief in something not seen (i.e., proven by using the five senses). Therefore, the existence of God depends upon Faith in God.

Why do people, who are arguably free agents, believe in God? After all, if God can't be proven, then a belief in God is irrational. But, the question exists, from a scientific perspective, whether an irrational, unprovable God can exist?

My proof is that if anything irrational and unprovable can be shown to exist in a beneficial way, (and if embraced by society, all the more significant), then God exists. I believe that God exists because the benefit of something irrational and unprovable exists.* In other words, if people can actually have better, more productive, more meaningful lives because of the societal need for something irrational and unprovable exists, then the door is open for God to exist. If, then, there is any benefit to anyone from God existing, then God exists.

Since about 800 b.c.e., humans have been using "irrational numbers"
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_number). These numbers do not exist. But they are necessary for you to be able to read the text that is in front of you. If they did not exist, the computer you are looking at would not exist. Therefore, for the existence you are currently experiencing to formally exist, irrational numbers are absolutely necessary. Yet, by definition, they do not exist.

Ergo, because some people need God to solve a problem, God exists. If you still don't buy it, try living your life without the benefit of irrational numbers. If irrational numbers are necessary, yet science can logically prove they do not exist, then science has missed something or it is a lie. (Ironically, if it is a lie, then this prood of God fails.)


Not a counter argument: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmNjfpoRZpE&eurl=

*I am not saying what that benefit is. In democracy, one man's pornograhy is another man's art.

No comments: