& # 8220 ; Higher Power & # 8221 ; Essay, Research Paper

Transcendentalism and A Belief In A & # 8220 ; Higher Power & # 8221 ;

We do non hold good grounds to believe in something nonnatural. Most

of the statements in favour of God, or a alleged & # 8220 ; higher power & # 8221 ; are based on

religion and emotion, and non a clear logical statement. In fact, these statements

are frequently in favour of throwing logic out the window. In many ways, this inquiry

is similar to person trying to turn out the being of an unseeable elephant.

It is far easier to turn out that the elephant does non be than it is to turn out

that it does.

Socrates & # 8217 ; rule of scrutiny provinces that we must carefully analyze

all things. The tools we worlds use to make this are logic and the scientific

method. In order to believe in something nonnatural, you can non analyze your

beliefs utilizing logic and scientific discipline. If you do, there is no manner to turn out the

being of a higher power.

The primary statement against the being of a Judeo-christian all-

knowing, almighty, righteous God is the statement from immorality. This statement

argues against the presence of a higher power utilizing facts of ordinary life. This

statement provinces that most would hold that some of the hurting and agony ( evil )

in this universe is unneeded. To be considered a necessary immorality, the happening

must be the lone manner to bring forth something good, which outweighs the immorality. Many

events, such as infant deceases, would non be classified in this class.

If such an omniscient divinity existed, it states, He would cognize that

this immorality was happening. If He was almighty, He would hold the power to halt

this immorality. If He was righteous, He would halt the immorality from happening

Therefore, the being of immoralities can non be compatible with the being of this

type of God.

The primary response to the statement from immorality is the entreaty to human

freedom. This statement states that God sees evil as necessary so that we worlds

may be free to take our ain way. The fatal defect in this statement is that

there are immoralities that exist non as a direct consequence of human pick. Natural immoralities

such as inundations, temblors, and twisters serve no intent harmonizing to this

definition, and are hence unneeded immoralities.

A theist might react to this with another weak rebuttal, saying that

every evil produces compassion and apprehension in others, and creates good in

that respect. This is an excessively positive, about delusional position of immorality. Almost

everyone will be able to come up with at least one illustration of person who has

suffered an immorality that has non straight or indirectly led to anything good.

The other statement for something transcendental is the statement from

religion. It is, nevertheless, besides a weak statement. It states that we will ne’er be

able to happen direct grounds of God & # 8217 ; s being through logic or natural scientific discipline,

so we must happen an surrogate method. This statement requires us to suspend

Socrates & # 8217 ; basic philosophical rule of scrutiny. The statement from religion

asks us to go forth this thought entirely, and merely believe that it works. This basic

deficiency of logic and logical thinking makes this a weak statement.

Another of the statements is the design statement. This states that the

existence is far excessively structured and complex to be derived from a large knock, or

another random sequence of events. A nonnatural & # 8220 ; watchmake

r” is the lone

account for the complexnesss of the existence, say advocates of this

statement.

The weak nexus in this statement is that for the many structured things

that exist, there are merely as many helter-skelter things. Not everything in the

universe serves a intent, or has an efficient design. Again, this is connected

back to the statement from immorality. Some immoralities are unneeded defects in the ticker & # 8217 ; s

design. Thomas Paley, a critic of the statement, asked why a higher being design

a blemished ticker with so many pointless characteristics. There is no good counter to that

statement.

Another statement is the First Cause statement. This statement states that

everything that exists had a separate cause of its coming into being. This

creates a causal concatenation, widening backward in clip, which can non be infinite. If

it is non infinite, so there must be a first cause, which must be God. This

seems like a sensible statement, but one of its premises is rickety. There is no

good ground to province that there can non be an infinite series of causes.

Scientists might reason for the Big Bang theory as a beginning to our existence,

but it besides could hold had a cause.

Another rickety premiss of the statement is the last 1. Why does the terminal

of the concatenation have to be the Judeo-christian God? It could besides be a

nonnatural force, without the many traits associated to a God. It is besides

unusually egoistic for one faith to believe it has the monopoly on God.

Why could the first cause non be Allah, Buddha, or the similar?

Two other minor statements try to link physical world to the

being of God. The first is the statement from miracles. This statement provinces

that many people have a legitimate belief that they have experienced miracles.

With so many unexplained phenomena in this universe, they argue, it is likely

that God must be doing these singular events.

The following statement is the statement from spiritual experience. Advocates

argue that many people claim to hold been & # 8220 ; touched & # 8221 ; by a higher power. Because

of this direct contact, we must believe in the being of a transcendental

being. Many people have really similar narratives of walking into a bright visible radiation in

near-death experiences.

With all of these happenings, protagonists argue, we must be able to see

the being of a God. The response to both of these statements is that there is

non one spot of concrete grounds to back up either claim. Every clip we have

tested alleged articles of spiritual miracle, such as the Shroud of Turin,

they have non lived up to their claim. We besides can non turn out through any

scientific method that anyone has of all time been touched by a nonnatural force.

These near-death experiences are likely a simple deficiency of blood to the encephalon.

The lone tools that we have to turn out or confute the being of a

nonnatural power are our senses, the scientific method, and logic. With all

of our technological progresss, we have ne’er been able to happen significant

grounds that this power exists or of all time did be. We besides have non found a

logical statement to turn out its being. Without this substantial cogent evidence, we

can non state that we have logical or sensible grounds to believe in something

nonnatural. We worlds have non found the unseeable elephant, but have

already created the circus for it.