A VERY INTERESTING CONVERSATION


An Atheist Professor of Philosophy was speaking to his Class on the Problem Science has
with
GOD, the ALMIGHTY.  He asked one of his New Christian Students to stand and . . .

   

Professor :
  You are a Christian, aren’t you, son ?
Student    :
  Yes, sir.
Professor :
   So, you Believe in GOD ?
Student    :
  Absolutely, sir.
Professor :
   Is GOD Good ?
Student    :
   Sure.
Professor :
   Is GOD ALL – POWERFUL ?
Student    :
   Yes.
Professor :
   My Brother died of Cancer even though he Prayed to  GOD to Heal him.
                    Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill.
                    But GOD didn’t. How is this GOD good then? Hmm?

(Student was silent )

Professor :   You can’t answer, can you ?  Let’s start again, Young Fella.
                  Is GOD Good?
Student    :
  Yes.
Professor :
  Is Satan good ?
Student    :
  No.
Professor :
  Where does Satan come from ?
Student    :
  From . . . GOD . . .
Professor :
  That’s right.  Tell me son, is there evil in this World?
Student    :
  Yes.
Professor :
   Evil is everywhere, isn’t it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?
Student    :
  Yes.
Professor :
  So who created evil ?

(Student did not answer)

Professor :   Is there Sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness?
                   All these terrible things exist in the World, don’t they?
Student    :
 Yes, sir.
Professor :
  So, who Created them ?

(Student had no answer)

Professor :  Science says you have 5 Senses you use to Identify and Observe the World around you.
                  Tell me, son . . . Have you ever Seen GOD?
Student    :
 No, sir.
Professor   :
 Tell us if you have ever Heard your GOD?
Student    :
 No , sir.
Professor :
  Have you ever Felt your GOD, Tasted your GOD, Smelt your GOD?
               Have you ever had any Sensory Perception of
GOD for that matter?
Student    :
  No, sir. I’m afraid I haven’t.
Professor :
  Yet you still Believe in HIM?
Student    :
 Yes.
Professor :
  According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol,
                  Science says your GOD doesn’t exist.  What do you say to that, son?
Student    :
 Nothing.  I only have my Faith.
Professor :
 Yes,Faith.  And that is the Problem Science has.

Student    :   Professor, is there such a thing as Heat?
Professor :
  Yes.
Student    :
  And is there such a thing as Cold?
Professor :
  Yes.
Student   :
  No, sir. There isn’t.

(The Lecture Theatre became very quiet with this turn of events )

Student    :   Sir, you can have Lots of Heat, even More Heat, Superheat, Mega Heat, White Heat,
                   a Little Heat or No Heat.
                   But we don’t have anything called Cold.
                   We can hit 458 Degrees below Zero which is No Heat, but we can’t go any further after that.
                   There is no such thing as Cold.
                   Cold is only a Word we use to describe the Absence of Heat.
                   We cannot Measure Cold.
                   Heat is Energy.
                   Cold is Not the Opposite of Heat, sir, just the Absence of it.

(There was Pin-Drop Silence in the Lecture Theatre )

Student    :  What about Darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as Darkness?
Professor :
 Yes. What is Night if there isn’t Darkness?
Student    :
 You’re wrong again, sir.
                   Darkness is the Absence of Something
                   You can have Low Light,   Normal Light, Bright Light, Flashing Light . . .
                   But if you have No Light constantly, you have nothing and its called Darkness, isn’t it?
                   In reality, Darkness isn’t.
                   If it is, were you would be able to make Darkness Darker, wouldn’t you?
Professor :
  So what is the point you are making, Young Man ?
Student   :
  Sir, my point is your Philosophical Premise is flawed.
Professor :
  Flawed ? Can you explain how?
Student    :
  Sir, you are working on the Premise of Duality.
                   You argue there is Life and then there is Death, a Good GOD and a Bad GOD.
                   You are viewing the Concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure.
                   Sir, Science can’t even explain a Thought.
                          It uses Electricity and Magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.
                   To view Death as the Opposite of Life is to be ignorant of the fact that
                   Death cannot exist as a Substantive Thing.  

                   Death is Not the Opposite of Life: just the Absence of it.
                   Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your Students that they evolved from a Monkey?
Professor :
  If you are referring to the Natural Evolutionary Process, yes, of course, I do.
Student    :
  Have you ever observed Evolution with your own eyes, sir?

(The Professor shook his head with a Smile, beginning to realize where the Argument was going )

Student    :   Since no one has ever observed the Process of Evolution at work and
                   Cannot even prove that this Process is an On-Going Endeavor,
                   Are you not teaching your Opinion, sir?
                   Are you not a Scientist but a Preacher?

(The Class was in Uproar )

Student    :  Is there anyone in the Class who has ever seen the Professor’s Brain?

(The Class broke out into Laughter )

Student    :  Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s Brain, Felt it, touched or Smelt it? . . .
                  No one appears to have done so.  

                  So, according to the Established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol,
                 Science says that You have No Brain, sir.
                  With all due respect, sir, how do we then Trust your Lectures, sir?

(The Room was Silent. The Professor stared at the Student, his face unfathomable)

Professor :   I guess you’ll have to take them on Faith, son.
Student    :
 That is it sir . . .  Exactly !
                  The Link between Man & GOD is FAITH.
                  That is all that Keeps Things Alive and Moving.


That student was Albert Einstein. 

Evangelist Traci Burney, RN

Advertisements

4 Responses

  1. Love this, Jim. I’m going to send some folks to it. Carole

  2. Thanks Carole! Hope to see you soon btw!

    Jim

  3. “Student : Sir, you can have Lots of Heat, even More Heat, Superheat, Mega Heat, White Heat, a Little Heat or No Heat. But we don’t have anything called Cold. We can hit 458 Degrees below Zero which is No Heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as Cold. Cold is only a Word we use to describe the Absence of Heat. We cannot Measure Cold. Heat is Energy. Cold is Not the Opposite of Heat, sir, just the Absence of it.

    Cold is a relative concept: it’s converse is Hot, not Heat.

    But even within the student’s own logical structure, the student is wrong by thier own argument. The student claims that -458°F is equal to No Heat, then makes a later claim that Cold is the Absence of Heat. The absence of something is typically understood as meaning there is nothing of that something. The Absence of Heat is therefore No Heat, which means that Cold, as defined by the student, does exist.

    Student : What about Darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as Darkness?…Darkness is the Absence of Something… [sic] You can have Low Light, Normal Light, Bright Light, Flashing Light . . . [sic] But if you have No Light constantly, you have nothing and its called Darkness, isn’t it? In reality, Darkness isn’t. If it is, were you would be able to make Darkness Darker, wouldn’t you?

    As with the Heat-Cold example, Darkness (Dark), in everday usage, is a relative concept, the converse being Lightness (Light). And the same mistake is also being made: says Darkness can’t exist then provides a definition to back up the claim that allows Darkness to exist.

    It is also not neccessary to make Darkness Darker for Darkness to exist, based on the definition of Darkness the student provides. Darkness is the condition of “No Light constantly”; there is no need for a darker darkness.

    Student : Sir, you are working on the Premise of Duality. You argue there is Life and then there is Death, a Good GOD and a Bad GOD. You are viewing the Concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure.

    That’s a non sequitur: starts off by claiming the Professor is making a logical fallacy called a Premise of Duality, but then goes on to talk about finiteness and measurability. And anyway, just because something may be not-finite (e.g., God) does not mean it can not also exist within a duality.

    Student : Sir, Science can’t even explain a Thought.

    Yes, and no. I can’t say of the top of my head what science is able and not yet able to explain on thought, but I’m fairly sure there are some things that can, at the very least, be basically explained.

    Student : It uses Electricity and Magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.

    Electricity is a vernacular term, not a scientific one. Even so, science has a pretty darn good understading of what is generally called electricity. And science understands magnetism.

    The student rambles on about evolution. Usual Creationist claptrap. Easily refuted, and not neccessary to go into here.

    Then the student presents his coup de grâce: how can we know the professor even has a brain?

    [ka-thunk] -Head hits desk in stupifaction-

    Scientifically speaking, we can test the hypothesis “The professor has a brain” quite easily. We have access to PET scaning and CT. If that is not evidence enough we can cut a hole in the professors skull and see the brain. The claim is testable and falsifiable.

    That the professor says that we need to take it on faith that he has a brain is not a statement any such professor would (presumably) make. It is the argument of a theist trying to justify faith by putting the words into the mouth of a ‘scientific type’.

    But even so, we can be reasonably certain that the professor possesses a brain. No sentient being has ever been observed that has not had a brain, at least those that have been examined. We can make an inference based upon our experience of the natural universe.

    Though inferences can be incorrect, they are still useful, if used properly. Even skeptics (unless they’re ultra-hard core) use inferences in everyday life (and even then, I’d posit that the ultra-hard core ones do, too). After all, we don’t walk out into the middle of traffic because there is an absence of evidence to conclude that this time no harm will come of us. It is entirely reasonable to infer that if one does so one may very well be involved in a collision with a vehicle, causing great harm – even death – to oneself.”

    http://holocenehominoid.blogspot.com/2009/07/atheist-professor-of-philosophy-speaks.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: