Argument from Bad Morals

One of the most common objections to arguments for the existence of God is what I like to call the Argument from Bad Morals. It seems to be fairly common among New Atheists and tends to surface whenever the Argument from Morality comes up. It goes something like this:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
2. Objective moral values do exist.
3. Therefore, God exists.

Few will object to the first premise since it's the condition for the whole argument. All sorts of objections crop up with the second premise, though. The typical counter-argument goes as follows (there are two variations on Premise two, but the argument is essentially the same):

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
2a. Theists (read: "Christians") do immoral things.

2b. God does immoral things.

3. Therefore objective moral do not exist and it follows that God cannot exist. 

One can immediately see that the third premise does not follow the second, it's a non sequitur. It also fails to price that objective moral values exist.

Theist immorality is really a non-issue as far as the Moral Argument goes because it doesn't prove anything, except maybe that Christians and Jews are mistaken about a few things. So it fails to disprove God but it can't because it has no bearing on the existence of Jesus, his divine nature, death, and resurrection.

It seems that they are really trying to say "God did something I don't like so he's not real." That's absurd. I can't do that to God anymore than I can do it to my boss. 

Next time you hear this, try phrasing their argument like this and see what happens. It will hopefully give them some food for thought. If not, then you can at least be sure you know what's really going on.

God Delusion or Part One

I have not read Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion yet, but I think I ought to. I meet so many New Atheists on the Internet who are so poorly informed that I am beginning to suspect that they get all their information from this book and this book alone. I am not really motivated to pick it up, though, because even though I have not read it I have read about it and it seems to be fantastically bad book. In fact, I think I can refute his central premise here and now.

Let us start with Dawkins’s main argument. He says:

“1. One of the greatest challenges to the human intellect has been to explain how the complex, improbable appearance of design in the universe arises.

2. The natural temptation is to attribute the appearance of design to actual design itself.

3. The temptation is a false one because the designer hypothesis immediately raises the larger problem of who designed the designer.

4. The most ingenious and powerful explanation is Darwinian evolution by natural selection.

5. We don't have an equivalent explanation for physics.

6. We should not give up the hope of a better explanation arising in physics, something as powerful as Darwinism is for biology.

Therefore, God almost certainly does not exist.”

Dawkins started on solid ground. The first line is actually pretty accurate and I do not have any problems with it. Line two is basically true, I am tempted to attribute design to the entire universe and I am sure that everyone else at least considers it at least once in their lives. Line three is where he falls apart.

Dawkins seems to be misstating the Unmoved Mover Argument, which states that everything that is in motion has been put in motion by something else. At first glance Dawkins seems to refute this by asking who designed the designer, or in other words, who put the first thing in motion. In other words, Dawkins argues that believing in God is sort of like believing in infinite regress, which is an infinite series of causes. That is not the case and it is not what the Argument from the Unmoved Mover says.

Aquinas formulated the Unmoved Mover Argument from Aristotle and adapted it to explain the Christian God. He was very careful to avoid infinite regress and actually used that as a reason NOT to believe in atheism. He also did not use the word motion to describe cause, like putting the planets in orbit around the Sun. Aquinas means change when he says motion, like moving from one state, like liquid, to another state, solid, for example, or forward through time. He also says that nothing can be changed (or moved) except by something that has already been changed. A good example of this would be how a hockey puck cannot move unless a hockey stick hits it and the stick cannot hit the puck unless something swings it and so on and so forth.

This sounds like infinite regress at first, but something else is happening here. Aquinas described motion as change, or moving from potentiality and actuality. Everything has potential to varying degrees. The hockey puck has potential to be hit and to hit something, like Jimmy Howard’s blocker pad. The stick has the potential to hit something, like the hockey puck, and to be swung by something like Justin Abdelkader. Justin Abdelkader has the potential to swing the stick, pick up the stick, throw the stick, or even play without the stick (that is not a very good idea). He has more potentiality than the stick and puck and can move that potentiality to more actuality than either. This chain eventually leads to something that is pure actuality, that is it has the ability to do everything and is doing everything at once.

A being like this is the Unmoved Mover. It is a being that is so transcendent that it is everywhere at once and doing everything at once. It is nothing but being, in the most literal sense of the word. There is no need to ask “who moved the Mover?” because the Mover is self-actualizing. It is the pinnacle of being. Dawkins’s question seems foolish once the Argument from the Unmoved Mover is properly explained.

The really fascinating thing part of all this God called himself the Unmoved Mover in the Old Testament when Moses asked God what his name was. God said his name is “I am.” There are no qualifiers and no distinguishing potentialities, just pure being. That is amazing. God told Moses that he is the Unmoved Mover centuries before Aristotle first conceived about it and several millennia before Thomas Aquinas expanded it. God is. That’s all.

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens Official Teaser Trailer #1 (2...

I'm trying really hard to exercise self-control, but OMG STAR WARS!!!







That is all.

The Sweetest Curse

I have one question: can we please stop calling things on the internet "porn?"  I see it everywhere, food porn, earth porn, and even tech porn.  I'm getting sick of it because porn isn't something good. It's bad.

Pornography originally defined any sort of art depicting prostitutes or prostitution (thank you, Webster's).  That's people who sell sex.  They're not too high on anyone's hero list (unless you're an internet feminist). 

Porn caters to base lusts. It's degrading and disordered. To quote everyone's favorite Republican VP hopeful and loudmouth, "you can put lipstick on a pig..."

The Day the World Went Away

One year has passed since my grandfather died. Life has been very different since then. I've started a new job in a different city on the other end of the state. I'm a little closer to some family members I used to consider estranged and a little further from side that I thought were inseparable. I'm busier than I ever thought I would be and far more blessed than I ever expected.

I miss him, even after the passed time and multiple life changes. I didn't know him as well as some of my family did, but I do remember always looking up to him. He knew everything and never seemed to doubt himself, like so many other men from his generation.

He was also very religious. He was sort of a backbone at his parish. I remember going to mass with him after I came back to the church. He was reverent and joyous. I got in line for communion and he was right next to the priest, handing out the Eucharist and our seemed like that was right where he belonged. That's the biggest take away right there. Say what you want about the old man, he loved the Eucharist. That was his big deal.

I want to be a better Catholic in honor of his memory. I want to keep that party of the legacy alive. James Wyss, pray for us. Don't spend too much time in Purgatory. See you in Heaven.

All the Heavy Lifting ( How St. Benedict Helped Me Become a Better Layman)

I struggle with spirituality. I don't do great works of charity, there isn't any time for that because of the three (almost four) kids. I can't play music or sing, so I'm not involved with church music. I'm not an extraordinary minister because I struggle to make it to church regularly. I can't be a deacon because I'm too young and I don't have time for training. I don't donate a lot because i just started a new job and we bought a new house and diapers are expensive. I don't lead Bible studies since I work nights and weekends I don't have many friends. I am not great orator or demagogue. What's a guy to do?

In fact, mothing in my life qualifies me as what most people would describe as profound Christian. I used to worry a lot about that and I used to really worry that all my reasons were just excuses. I fought a huge internal battle of insecurity, worry, and doubt until I discovered something so profound that it changed the way I looked at life and convinced me that I really am Catholic, monasticism in a little monastery called Christ in the Desert.

Christ in the Desert is a Benedictine monastery in New Mexico. I don't remember exactly how I found out about it other than at the time I was investigating Catholic spirituality as part of the RCIA program and I was really interested in the American Southwest. Since the monks there observe the Benedictine life I naturally did some research to find out what it was all about. St. Benedict established a rule for monks to live by. Wikipedia (a good source for cursory information- don't let anyone fool you) sums up the rule as this, Pax and ora et labora, which means "peace," and "pray and work." This naturally hit me like a lightning bolt from the clear blue sky I happened to be sitting under while I smoked a cigar and contemplated this. 

All the work I had been doing suddenly made sense. I wasn't going to be the next Padre Pio or Fulton Sheen and I didn't have to be. I just had to keep doing what I was doing. I still struggle with doubts and I am by no means an overly peaceful person and no one can ever part enough, but that's okay. As the greatest saints struggled with their great work I will struggle with mine, raising a family and doing right by them. 

Pax and ora et labora.

Water, Water Everywhere and Not a Drop to Drink

Last week was the week from hell. We had painters in the house, multiple doctor appointments, and work was stressful. I was pretty relieved that Sunday had finally come and I could finish putting my house back together, relax a bit, and enjoy some time with the family before starting in on next week. I finally got everyone to bed and settled down to watch the new Supernatural episode. I ignored the odd musty smell in the basement because I hadn't emptied the dehumidifier in a couple days, put the clothes on the dryer, started the dishwasher, and then happily went to sleep expecting a quiet morning ofwentfee and re-attaching cabinet doors. My house had other ideas, though.

I woke up this morning to splashing sounds and little footsteps running through the kitchen. My sleepy mind assumed that it was one of my kids trying to get an early morning glass of water from the refrigerator and spilled some. I ignored it and rolled over. The splashing persisted. I roused myself from my bed and went into the kitchen to see what was going on. There was water everywhere. It was in front of the dishwasher and I started to freak out a bit because my coffee-starved brain assumed the dishwasher self-destructed while I was sleeping. So I went went downstairs to get the mop bucket and there was more water. This stuff was yellow and smelled terrible and since it under the pipes near the upstairs toilet I assumed the worse.

My panic levels were rising because all the kids were awake and they wanted breakfast NOW and any minute my wife was going to wake up and I would have to have to figure out a way to explain to her that the dishwasher AND toilet quit in a spectacularly messy way. I started to furiously mop up all this water and I got the kitchen more or less dry. I headed downstairs to do the same, mercifully there is a drain less than three feet from the basement puddle and everything liquid is in the unfinished utility room. I started feeling better about this when all of a sudden my head started getstingwet. I look up and water is coming from the ceiling. I wasn't really surprised at this point but I wad a little disgusted since I still assumed this is from the toilet. I threw a bit of Pine Sol knock off on the floor to sanitize the mess and set to cleaning up the big pantry cabinet next to the puddle and dry off the pipes. Things finally looked pretty dry so I headed upstairs to look for a plumber.

Thumping and screaming interrupted that endevor.  My four-year-old son who we will call Mr. J sliped on the damp kitchen floor and fell down. I went to calm him down and send him back into the dry side of the basement when I noticed that there was ANOTHER puddle on the floor. Dammit. So I got Mr. J changed and grabbed the mop again. I came back upstairs and my wife was standing in the kitchen. She asked what happened and then grabbed some paper towel to clean up behind the refrigerator. I started mopping again and she told me that she found the leak. It was the water line to refrigerator's ice maker and door water dispenser.

I calmed down a bit and even managed to shut off the water to the refrigerator while still leaving water in the bathrooms (and more importantly the kitchen - coffee maker) running. We solved the problem and I eventually got to the cabinets. I managed to get a laugh out of it all in the end and learned once again that the wife is usually right. Good one, house. I'll get you next time.