Is God a Man-Made Invention?

	Ada Calhoun
	Ben Greenman
	Dinesh D'Souza
	Jeff Hoard
	Mo Rocca
	Young Turks

News Blogger Feed

Feeds By Category

Dinesh D'Souza

Reports

Bestselling author DINESH D’SOUZA’s latest book is What’s So Great About Christianity. read more

Is God a Man-Made Invention?

$Dinesh D\$

Posted Dec 2nd 2007 11:22PM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Science, Christianity, Controversy, Atheism

On Friday, November 30, I debated philosopher Daniel Dennett at Tufts University on the topic, "Is God a Man-Made Invention?" This was my third debate against a leading atheist, following my debate with Michael Shermer at Oregon State University and my debate with Christopher Hitchens at the Ethical Culture Society in New York. The auditorium at Tufts filled up so quickly prior to the Dennett debate that the organizers had to have a second overflow room where viewers could watch the fireworks on a big-screen TV. (You can watch the full debate here.)

Dennett surprised me a little by showing up with a power-point presentation. I hadn't agreed to this in advance, but I didn't object. I thought to myself, "I'm not sure what advantage slides are going to give him in a format like this one." Dennett spoke first for 25 minutes, and sure enough, he made full use of those slides. He had quotations from me up there, and he challenged me to defend them. I was impressed by Dennett's preparation, and also by his avulcular "grandpa" style, an effect enhanced by his white Santa beard. Atheism is a grim philosophy, but Dennett more than anyone else makes it seem harmless and even charming.

Normally I would use my opening statement entirely to make the case for God's existence. But I didn't want Dennett's allegations to go unrebutted for too long. So I devoted the first five minutes to puncturing some factual and historical holes in Dennett's argument. Then I proceeded to make my case. Of course I conceded that religion is a man-made invention, but I argued that modern science has over the past century produced remarkable discoveries that affirm and support the argument for God's existence. In doing so I recognized that I was challenging Dennett not only on his home campus, Tufts university, but also on his home turf, which is a philosophical atheism rooted in science.

We each had two five-minute rebuttals which produced lively exchanges about the Big Bang and about whether the universe is fine-tuned for life. Then there was a lengthy question-and-answer session. Given that the audience was mostly made up of Tufts students sympathetic to Dennett's atheism, a majority of the questions was directed at me. Most memorable for me was the philosophically-minded savant who pooh-poohed the possibility of God's existence on the basis of what he called the Principle of Parsimony. He argued that either propositions are true by definition, or they are true by empirical verification. If a proposition cannot satisfy either criteria, then it is meaningless. Since God does not exist by definition, the young man insisted, and since we cannot verify His presence empirically, clearly God has been refuted by the Principle of Parsimony.

I asked our undergraduate savant to apply his twofold test to the Principle of Parsimony itself. Is it true by definition? No. Well, can it be verified empirically? Again, no. Therefore by the student's own criteria the Principle of Parismony is worthless and can be cast aside. The student had no comeback to this and neither did Dennett.

So who won the debate? That's for you to decide. You can watch the whole thing here, and then you can cast your vote on the resolution and on who came out on top.

Watch the videos of the debate after the jump.Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [652]
Share this
- Add this post to...
- Netscape
- Digg
- Del.icio.us

Reader Comments ( Page 43 of 44)

Previous 15 Comments | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

631. bump

fabio at 2:51PM on Dec 6th 2007

632. Genesis suggests the reverse: Man is a God-Made Invention.

Michael at 9:09PM on Dec 6th 2007

633. Those of us who are christains know the reality of a relationship with God Almighty. that is why the world celebrates Christmas and easter. God the sons birth and His resurrection from the death of His. body. however no one can know god by study in a university or any school.. it takes a personal revelation of Himself to a person.you have to want to know God. the reason He destroyed the world with a flood was that man had no rules for integrity, honesty, or goodness. consequently every man did that which was good in his own eyes---and it was only evil continuosly. He destroyed the land dwellers for that and started over. every country has a legend of the flood. God rules anyway and doesn't need mans belief to live and rule

jo ann wright at 8:53AM on Dec 7th 2007

634. If not a man-made delusion then by what or whose?

S. Dean at 1:30PM on Dec 7th 2007

635. the reason He destroyed the world with a flood was that man had no rules for integrity, honesty, or goodness. consequently every man did that which was good in his own eyes---and it was only evil continuosly. - jo ann

Well I'm glad he set things right. The peace and harmony and prospersity that humanity has enjoyed since the flood is something to be proud of.

fabio at 3:05PM on Dec 7th 2007

636. I'm not sure if I believe in God. One thing I do know though, is that the Bible is a FABULOUS fairy tale.

Karin at 5:20PM on Dec 7th 2007

637. Has D'Souza so quickly forgotten his shellacking at the hands of Christopher Hitchens? The idea that we are more than an advanced mammalian species ascended from primates is simply an attempt to cheat death, and utilizing a concept of god and religion is an abhorrent means by which greedy sheister cults advance their wealth (at the expense of the credulous).
THIS is heaven. In fact, checking the little pole shows that there are a great many non-believers. I was please by the numbers of those who refuse to capitulate to glaze eyed indoctrinators, and to see life for what it is. Let's hope we can prevent one of these cults (religions for you believers) from destroying our planet.

Michael Labbe at 6:04PM on Dec 7th 2007

638. Is God a man-made invention? I want to say "yes - duh" but am somewhat shocked that we continue to ask this question in 2007.

Shawn Bushway at 7:39PM on Dec 7th 2007

639. i'd say that if you believe in God you could go to heaven or you could go to hell..if you don't believe in God you could go to hell or you could go to heaven..any body out there know for sure??being a decent person could be the deciding factor irregardless of what you think..i'm only giving my opinion because i'm not God..

raymond at 9:31PM on Dec 7th 2007

640. Actually, atheism is a philosophical view that either rejects theism or affirms the nonexistence of gods. But I don't expect the believers in a sky-god to accord me the same courtesy they demand for themselves: to respect the differences.

anyacat at 11:33AM on Dec 8th 2007

641. Well its not wrong for someone to need a higher power to believe in to make there life have purpose, and give them something to work toward in the after life.
I believe its wrong to push it upon others that don't need that belief to live a moral life, and happy life.
Compainionship with nature and other humans brings happyness into some peoples life. Just as God or Gods give other people something to live for.
Just think for a moment if would have sat back and prayed during WWII, and didn't pursue an Atomic Weapon. Would God have smitted them down. Most likely Russia would have been ruling the world now.
Mans belief in himself has conquered the world, or we would all have the same religion.

Thesourc at 1:21PM on Dec 8th 2007

642. If one really thinks about it; isn't agnosticism the oldest spiritual structure? After all--are we born believing in a god, -or anything for that matter?
If we are not born of religion, then wouldn't it be invented. If one was born to draw a belief, without any interferance from others. What religion would he be?

Thesourc at 2:28PM on Dec 8th 2007

643. Is Souza a talented orator? So are many preachers and politicians. So was Hitler.

Millions of people throughout history have cheered rhetoric which in their ignorance sounds good but is specious, even dangerous.

That they are susceptible to doing so is not an argument in favor of religion, or of ascertaining the "truth" by resort to popular vote, or of encouraging more such mob think.

There is nothing to debate here.

There is no evidence of the "existence of God". Gotta define "God" -- what you are purportedly talking about -- first. But the "God" word is meaningless because any concept that can be defined any way one likes from time to time ipso facto doesn't exist. Call whatever you don't know whatever you like. Call everything "God", call some kind of hypothetical creationary forces "God", call the scientific principles "God", etc.

Just don't pray to it, or assign it imaginary attributes. Nothing Goddish lends a shred of evidence or support to any of the world's religions, their bibles, their tenets, their rituals, their ideas, their value, their goods, their bads, their notions of proper behavior, their promises of punishment or reward, their heavens, hells or purgatories, or any of their mythologies, all of which stuff, periodically useful or not, was completely made up over time by primitive ignorants.

liz

Elizabeth J. Kates at 3:37PM on Dec 8th 2007

644. This is an Appeal to Ignorance. Nobody's proven the existence of a god, but nobody's disproven the existence of a god, either. So the argument really went nowhere.

To brian (i had a friend who dies yesterday of cancer. i am damn glad there was no atheist around to tell the family bill's life was one cosmological accident and his life had no meaning past here. yes whatever you want to call atheism it is GRIM.): Only the truly coldhearted would ever say that, atheist, Christian, or otherwise. You have a narrow definition of what an atheist is and for that I pity you. Death is something felt by humans, and is outside of religion. Yes, you may lean on your faith to get through the hard times, but your faith only offers you hope, while others around you are physically THERE to support you and comfort you. That's what death does; it brings the people together.

Anyways, I think that because we don't understand the universe, and we used to fear the elements of nature, we created deities to explain why certain things happen. I think the infinite universe is infinitely more awestriking and terrifying than the existence of a God.

Justine Y. at 1:21AM on Dec 9th 2007

645. hahahaha..Thats one super smart volcano that could pick and choose only the first born male child, both man and animal ..39. Richelle..
It sure restored my faith :)

Will at 6:58PM on Dec 9th 2007

Previous 15 Comments | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Add your comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.

To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.