FINAL THIRD PAPER ON MEANING OF LIFE (Question 7)
According to Baier, why he thought that theistic responses are problematic, first, he believes that the biblical explanations of our universe often simply false and not true. Second, he thinks that the explanations of the universe are incomprehensive or absurd. Third, he also believes that Christianity lowers evaluation of earth’s existence, which he thinks is the main problem of the belief in the meaninglessness of Life which however, rests on the use of unjustifiable high standard of judgement.
Also he believes that, theism is morally unacceptable, and so God is basically using us to fulfill his purpose of creation. Thereby, reducing us to mere means and also fails to rest each person in
…show more content…
Therefore, truth and falsity can be determined with a high degree of probability. He added that science also supplies for many more purposes capable of realization.
Therefore, according to Kurt Baier, the Christian worldview and the scientific approach agree on criteria but differ on evaluation of human life. However, our lives have meaning without a higher being. In other words, we can abandon Christianity and adapt a scientific worldview. Because, Kurt Baier believes that biblical explanations of the universe are false. And also the explanations of the whole universe are incomprehensible.
Therefore, he believes that the Christianity's thoughts and idea of life rests on an "unjustifiably high standard of judgement." Since Science tells us "how," not "why." Baier, also believes that religion gives meaning by linking the universe. Whereas teleological explanation provides answers to "Why?" as well as which shows reasoning for doing something based on background that provides explanation, example "I exist" and causal explanations, provides answers to "How?" and so