This post is inspired by Bertrand Russell [British writer, social critic, historian, philosopher, logician, mathematician, Nobel laureate and political activist who lived between the years of 1872 and 1970]’s essay titled “Is there a God?” (1952), obtained in The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Volume 11: Last Philosophical Testament, 1943-68, ed. John G. Slater and Peter Köllner (London: Routledge, 1997), pp. 543-48.
We as a specie have always battled with the age old philosophical question; Why Are We Here?; that which leads some into conservatism and others into the arena of free-thought, some into the beauties of bliss in theism and others into perceived atrocities and burning infernos of hell as many religion sellers tend to portray the inevitable outcome of unbelief. Be that as it may, the questions still remain and Russell probably gave us some more insights to wrestle and ponder upon. You’ve probably thought of or chanced upon yourself or others asking questions similar to the ones below:
1. Aren’t we supposed to tolerate religion regardless of the ills because of its therapeutic
2.You are an atheist, skeptic, scientist or whatever, can you use science
to disprove God? No, you can’t. Therefore there is a God because I feel his presence
each and everyday. You want evidence for God? Well, you are the evidence for his existence? How do you think you came into being?
3. If there are over 70% of human demographics who believe, is there truly no reason to
believe? Do we not live in a democracy? That’s rather arrogant of you; thus to suggest
they’ve all got it wrong and you are right. There is a God and you are a lost sheep.
the fool saith in his heart… It’s not me oooo, its the word oooo.
4. If there is a God, he/she/it probably resides outside of space and time. Science is restricted to the confines of space and time, therefore there is a God.
Well, here is what Russell’s famous teapot argument has to say about all those line of arguments that aim to make the thought of theism more plausible:
Russell’s famous teapot Argument
Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.
Thus, God is probably the “teapot” in a nutshell.
Achaab Daniel ABALANSA