Originally posted by LemonJello
Nobody I know claims that "everything can be explained on the sole basis of the laws of physics and chemistry".
Quit being so daft and silly. Nobody I know claims that "everything can be explained on the sole basis of the laws of physics and chemistry". (And within such a view, what exactly would explain such laws to begin with?) For instance, I think it is almost unavoidable (and I am not really alone here within my atheist circles) that there exist at least so ...[text shortened]... rk first.
Beyond that, you still have not really addressed Conrau K's apt question.
I guess you don't know very many people! Isn't this idea the very foundation of evolution?
(And within such a view, what exactly would explain such laws to begin with?)
Funny you should ask. That very question was put forth herein quite some time ago by yours truly, to much ridicule. Ironic you would turn and use the same argument and think it legitimate.
For instance, I think it is almost unavoidable (and I am not really alone here within my atheist circles) that there exist at least some brute facts; but brute facts, by definition, have no explanation.
So can it be assumed that these "brute facts" are to be given credit for existence? If so, that's a neat and convenient avoidance package. By that, I, of course, mean 'weak.' If the theist is not allowed to point to God as the cause and it is certainly illogical to accept the something-from-nothing's crowd suggestion, your new 'it's all just so damn ineffable' explanation simply won't do, either.
Further, most atheists I know do not think normative commitments (e.g., encompassing the value systems and morals you bring up in this thread) are simply reducible to or justified or explained solely in reference to the types of descriptive deliverances that would come at the ushering of physics or chemistry.
Well, there can't be a baby if there is no bathwater, right? I'd submit that neither you nor the atheists you know are able to explain morals/value systems in light of the cause of existence.
You can't just jump in the middle of the game and make bold assertions on the current state of things--- paying no attention to the man behind the curtain. It's relatively simple to armchair quarterback on the historical elasticity of morality with so much hindsight available to us. But you stop far short of the real question, namely, how did we arrive here from nothing?
It would help if you took the time to do your homework first.
Unlike you (and I don't mean this pejoratively in the least), the overwhelming majority of self-proclaimed atheists are amateurs. They're the doppelganger of millions of Christians everywhere who are long on opinion and short on doctrine. I hold that the questions posed in the OP are relevant and intriguing. After all, if a professional such as yourself cannot offer a response to the specifics of their point, how can any garden-variety atheist hope to honestly stand?