Logic in an atheistic worldview

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

In what sense is the universe "irrational" and what "atheist philosophers" say that it is?


[/ QUOTE ]

Most, if not all, existentialist philosophers. It is irrational if there is no purpose or meaning to it, if it is just the accidental twitch in cosmic nothingness. Many responses stated an inanimate object can't be irrational and no amount of explaining would move them.

The real kicker is when one or two seem to agree but then say something like "Why does the universe have to have meaning?".

[imported_luckyme]

It's unfortunate the concept of "level-confusion" and emergent properties hasn't become better known yet. Attributes at one level of a complex system don't carry through to other levels. Thinking 'selfish-genes' result in 'selfish people' is a classic example.

Here, whether the universe is irrational or has purpose or meaning is irrelevant to whether lilacs or cod or people's lives have any of those qualities. Attributes reside at the level they are found. Entities at higher levels develop attributes not found at lower levels, so to look for them there is like wondering why flour doesn't swell up in the bag.

luckyme

[ QUOTE ]
Most, if not all, existentialist philosophers.

[/ QUOTE ]
OK, I was pretty sure you were talking about Sartre etc. Rest assured that what they have in mind when they say the "universe is irrational" is completely different from what I mean when I say it. It's perfectly possible for the universe to be both absurd (in the Sartre sense) and ruthlessly logical at the same time.

What I'm saying is that the universe is ruthlessly logical (laws of physics etc.). One of the results of this is that the universe has no interest whatsoever in our human desires. This, I believe, is what Sartre was getting at with his talk about absurdity (the lack of any relation between our desires and the universe's desires).

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about Sartre's POV. My knowledge of his writings/ideas is rather limited. Nevertheless, he was mostly talking about human desires and how they relate to the universe as a whole. I'm just talking about the universe as a whole. Human desires don't enter into it when it comes to the fundamental validity of the rules of logic as far as I'm concerned.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

This, I believe, is what Sartre was getting at with his talk about absurdity


[/ QUOTE ]

This is partly true. But the bigger picture is that existentialism is itself the logical outworking of a worldview that rejects God, which is all non-theistic worldviews. If man is the highest rational being then since he is obviously not omniscient and can make no sense of existence the universe is irrational. That includes human reason itself. And that is absurd.

[David Sklansky]

"But the bigger picture is that existentialism is itself the logical outworking of a worldview that rejects God, which is all non-theistic worldviews. If man is the highest rational being then"

Why does rejecting God imply that man is the highest rational being?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Why does rejecting God imply that man is the highest rational being?


[/ QUOTE ]

By definition God is the Absolute rational being. Even if there's a being higher than man but not Absolute, the problem of ultimate irrationality remains.