Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 22:16:25 +0200, Paul Schlyter
wrote:

Why should knowability influence opinion? I think it is likely that
the true nature of reality, the underlying "why" of universal laws
are
unknowable.

So what is your opinion about this unknownable "why"? Why are the
universal laws as they are, according to your opinion?

I don't think it's a meaningful question. They are what they are.


The answer in that case is perfectly knowable. I can count the
grains
and know for certain.

I would like to see you count several billion of grains of sand.

It matters not that it would be tedious, or difficult, or take years.
The point is that the sand is countable. Whether there are an even or
odd number is knowable.

I've certainly never met anybody who had no opinion on the question
of
gods.

True, you haven't met me...

I do not believe you have no opinion on the matter. You do not appear
to be stupid. Indeed, you come across as rather silly pretending to
have no opinion.

To have no opinion about the existence of God is no stranger than to
have no opinion about why the laws of nature are like they are.

The laws of nature exist. They are describable. Even assuming that the
question of "why" is meaningful, not being able to answer that simply
reflects a lack of knowledge. We know beyond reasonable doubt that God
(that is, the Abrahamic monster) doesn't exist, because it is
logically incoherent and we can see how it was invented out of earlier
gods. It is as silly to suggest it is real as to suggest Harry Potter
is real. We can't say with certainty that no other gods exist, but we
can observe that there is zero evidence for them, and that there is no
question about the Universe that requires a god or is better answered
by positing one. So the only intellectually honest position is to
assume none, in the same way we assume that Russell's Teapot doesn't
exist.


Actually Elon Musk missed our here. He should have put a teapot on the
Tesla he launched.