AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
SIR: In response to Peter Arnold's letter (July-August 2008) in defence of atheism:
Arnold cites "the grossest of congenital anomalies" occurring among children as evidence for atheism. This is a real howler. If there is no God and no teleology in nature; if all is merely the product of blind chance or Darwinian survival, then there is no such thing as what nature should ideally be like. That is, if nature is not meant to conform to some intelligible design or preordained plan, then it makes as much sense to say that there are gross congenital anomalies in children (nature) as it does to say that the local rubbish tip is grossly disordered. Because rubbish tips are not meant to be ordered, because there is no design to how a rubbish tip should look, to speak of a bottle being in the wrong place, or a soiled mattress being the wrong side up is absurd. But the same goes for the ...