Reality of Truth

Roger Penrose writes (Shadows of the Mind , p. 418):

“Godel’s argument does not argue in favor of there being inaccessible mathematical truths. What it does argue for, on the other hand, is that human insight lies beyond computable procedures [algorithms]. Moreover, it argues powerfully for the very existence of the Platonic mathematical world. Mathematical truth is not determined arbitrarily by the rules of some manmade formal system, but has an absolute nature, and lies beyond any such system of specifiable rules.”

In the next paragraph he writes: “We simply do not know the nature of matter and the laws that govern it to an extent that we shall need in order to understand what kind of organization it is, in the physical world, which gives rise to conscious beings. Moreover, the more deeply we examine the nature of matter, the more elusive, mysterious, and mathematical, matter itself appears to be.”

Penrose has also said: "I would say the universe has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (Penrose, R. 1992. “A Brief History of Time” (movie). Burbank, CA, Paramount Pictures, Inc.)

So anyway, when a physicist/mathematician like Penrose says stuff like that; and then a Darwinian preacher like Dawkins proclaims stuff like, “The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose”; I’d say the Darwinian/atheist is just blowing wind…that he’s presumptuous, arrogant, ignorant.

Replies:

non-algorithmic mathematical materialism, by Todd, 06/22/04 Re:Science & atheism, by Fred H., 06/22/04

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.