[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

Originally posted by Yorick: Law does need a giver. If a law is deemed "natural" by a humanist, then nature is deemed to be the lawmaker. The earth or the universe itself. The value in seeing a designer, is that the beauty has a reason. A purpose. It can be related to. Put simply with belief I can appreciate everything about a leaf the nonbeliever does - and then some. Rather than just the physical there is the spiritual appreciation.

What makes you so certain that your way of viewing is the only way to see and appreciate deeper, into the spiritual realm? To suppose so strikes me as approaching a sort of spiritual arrogance. Even an Atheist may perceive deeply into the nature of meaning. Who are you to say that you value a leaf more? Or life more? Or the universe more? Or all of existence? Presumptuous indeed.

The Law requires a Maker argument is based on a logical fallacy, btw. It confuses different meanings of the word "Law." Man-made "law" is Prescriptive -- it is a command ordering either to do an act refrain from an act. "Law" in this sense does require a lawgiver. A command implies a commander.

The laws of Nature, on the other hand, are merely Descriptive -- they are descriptive models which humans have formulated from observation which describe how nature and the universe does in fact behave, not orders or commands for it to behave a certain way.









[This message has been edited by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown (edited 09-04-2001).]