Simple Liberty  



God is an Anarchist


Written by Darrell Anderson.

Nobody knows the roots of all human thinking or how humans came to possess abilities to think abstractly. There is no historical or scientific evidence or recording to validate a theory of origins. There is only conjecture. God, evolution, quantum mechanics, whatever — nobody knows. Therefore, all thinking processes fundamentally are based upon presumption, not fact.

A collection or system of beliefs is called an ideology, or better, a worldview. Every individual’s worldview exists completely and solely between the ears. Worldviews are system models — a collection of ideas, conjectures, theories, facts, illusions, and myths — where humans attempt to create an understanding about reality, the world, and universe. Fundamentally, all worldviews are mental or metaphysical mechanisms of survival.

The universe is bigger than any individual can know. Thus, all worldviews are incomplete — always. Additionally, humans tend to interpret reality as they would like rather than as reality is. As with all living creatures, humans tend to resist unwanted change. Humans also face challenges of social pressures when considering change.

Worldviews provide a sense of purpose and comfort. Therefore, many individuals treat their worldviews as closed systems. Individuals tend to ignore or misinterpret any new knowledge differing with their existing worldview. Although cautious individuals admit the possibility of error, many operate as though there is no error in their thinking or worldview. Many humans often experience what is called cognitive dissonance — a process where humans reject new information because of disagreements with their preferred worldview. Because worldviews are mechanisms for survival, few individuals are willing to openly explore contrary ideas and theories and adjust their worldview. Therefore, worldviews change slowly, if at all. Thus, many human problems are the result of ignorance and superstition. Such a process creates tension in human relationships.

There are only three broad categories for the beginnings of the universe. One idea is that the universe has existed forever. No beginning. Yet the concept of an eternally existing universe contradicts our current understanding of the law of cause and effect. Infinity is difficult concept to grasp and has never been known to exist in reality. Infinity is a mathematical concept only.

Because of this difficulty, some people then look for a “first cause.” They then introduce the concept of an eternally, self-existing being — God. Yet, this option is only one step removed from the previous idea. We still end up with something without a cause and that challenges our current understanding of cause and effect.

Other people reject both of these ideas and revert to some quantum mechanics hocus-pocus by postulating that nothing created something. But nothing is not just the absence of air — a vacuum. Nothing is the absence of all thought, consciousness, matter, and energy. The concept of nothing is as challenging to comprehend as infinity. Common sense tells us that nothing never can create something.

In the end, the only sensible conclusion is that there exists no theory of origins that does not throw sand into the gears of our understanding of cause and effect. In short, every theory is absurd.

That does not mean we cannot choose what we want to believe, only that we cannot yet prove anything about our origins. Intellectually we must admit our choice is based upon presumption and is absurd with respect to our current understanding of cause and effect.

Even the modern Hot Big-Bang theory raises questions. If we accept that the current universe started with a big explosion, we have to ask from where did the original clump of matter and energy derive? And within our understanding of cause and effect, what suddenly caused this clump of matter and energy to explode? What was the cause? We have no clue, no idea.

Questions about the origin of the universe are not the only unanswered theory. Scientists today understand much about our biological structure, but still have nothing but conjecture to offer about how life first assembled. There are creationist and naturalistic evolutionary theories, but no evidence exists yet that actually provides a clue to how life began. Because there is nothing but conjecture about the origins of life, there also is nothing but conjecture about how humans began to think abstractly.

The bottom line is that there is no evidence to validate our origins. We just do not know. There is only conjecture. There are only presumptions.


Terms of Use

Next: The One Principle

Table of Contents