Quis nodit ipsos noditores?
Some might say
nate. Some might say
God.
Richard Dawkins would say that it's impossible for the noders to have been noded, and we must all have self-noded at some far point in the past, and that nate doesn't exist, because he said so.
The average
fundamentalist would say that we were all
noded in a single instant on the day
E2 went on-line.
The serious question here is: is it fair to argue that God cannot exist by means of an argument of
infinite regress?
No. For one, God could have evolved. For two, s/he need never have been created - this is still an infinite regress, but it lacks the escalation of 'meta-God'. For three, why not believe in an infinite regress? For four, if God needs to have a beginning, why not posit a
Big Bang like event for him/her?
Dr Dawkins has problems.
Of course, none of this proves or demonstrates the existence of God, only of the fallaciousness of Dawkins' arguments.
Damn, this was meant to be a joke node, and it got all serious.
ZamZ: Well said. I for one believe it's my duty to improve the world, and not to sit around pretending God (should s/he exist) is going to save my sorry behind. To couch it in noder-terms, you should vote on nodes, not on personalities. :-)