It is often stated that there is no evidence for God. That’s an easy conclusion to draw if we limit our understanding of the world to the way it seems to operate in day-to-day life. This includes the level of science and technology that we encounter on a regular basis today – things like smart phones with GPS and instant worldwide communication, modern medicine with vaccines and transplants, and AI that has made computers conversational and seemingly creative. In all these things, most people see no clear evidence for God’s existence and in fact, see evidence for the success of modern science and technology.
Given such observations, our minds usually generalize and conclude that they represent the fundamental nature of reality. In other words, what we see is all there is.1 We construct a story that explains what we see and then believe that the story represents all reality. It is then easy to reinforce this with selective learning, confirmation bias, and so on.
Continue reading
One of the nagging mysteries of modern physics is something called the “Fine-tuned Universe” question. It has to do with the fact that our universe has properties that are exactly what’s needed for life to exist. However, our best understanding of these properties seems to indicate that it’s much more likely for the universe to be simpler, so much simpler that life could not exist, so that it’s incredibly unlikely to have just the right properties. The reason for this has to do with the nature of physical laws and how they depend on a small number of constants that seem to have random values. There seems to be no reason for the constants to have the values that they do have, so out of all possible values, why these very particular ones?
Sometimes we become so used to the way things work that we don’t even realize when there are options. Yet simple thought experiments can reveal possibilities that we would never see if we just rearrange normal daily experiences. In this essay, we’ll consider such a thought experiment to see what we can learn about relationships and the way all living beings interact, and consider what it might look like to turn a fundamental aspect of life upside down. 
In the continuing comparison of natural and supernatural views of reality, we’ve considered some fairly philosophical perspectives. However, for these things to be real, we would expect clear manifestations, some evidence in the natural world. It may or may not be strictly testable, but there should be some ramification. In this essay, we’ll consider an example of what we might expect, drawn from a movie.
For the past few years, I’ve been pondering religion “versus” science issues and have worked out an initial attempt of what seems reasonable to me. This post summarizes the ideas as a starting point for more detailed exploration, both with study and discussion with others. The basic idea is that it is a finely balanced choice, more finely balanced than most like to admit. The goal here is to be able to articulate why to make a particular choice, rather than just say “It’s how i was raised”, or “I like this”, or “I don’t like that”, etc. It’s an attempt at a rational perspective. 
