But, allowing that we were to take the operations of one part of nature upon another, for the foundation of our judgement concerning the origin of the whole, (which never can be admitted,) yet why select so minute, so weak, so bounded a principle, as the reason and design of animals is found to be upon this planet? What peculiar privilege has this little agitation of the brain which we call thought, that we must thus make it the model of the whole universe? Our partiality in our own favour does indeed present it on all occasions; but sound philosophy ought carefully to guard against so natural an illusion. [Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, 1779, part 2]
Have to say that "What peculiar privilege" would be a great title for a blog...
Hat tip to John Atkins, my office mate.
Hume just RULZ.
What peculiar privilege has this little agitation of the brain which we call thought, that we must thus make it the model of the whole universe?
It's not a privilege. It's not even a choice ;)
What is Man that a creature of such limited intellect thinks Himself competent to establish what the Infinite may do?
With the utmost respect to Alan Kellogg [#3,above]
"infinite" is a mere adjective. Why reify it?