Yes, statistical analysis is useful, but is most fruitfully applied in fairly simple systems. Weather is practically unpredictable beyond about a week, and even forecasting a few days ahead is a shaky business.
The point at issue is whether or not it is possible that God interacts. I don't understand why you would dogmatically say that if there is something outside our universe, it has had no effect. Shakespeare was "outside" of "Othello", but he had an effect. You seem to be begging the question.
The notion of "memes" is amusing, particularly the attempt to give an evolutionary account of their development, but I am not sure that it is a useful scientific concept. I am, however, sure that they are not self- supporting entities, but require a host, such as a human brain, to subsist. I am also quite sure that they are not alive according to any of the characteristics by which we distinguish life. Rather, they are a metaphor, more or less useful. So similarly, the language by which we refer to God is always inadequate, provisional,and by analogy. Philosophically, God is everything he is in a one act of Being. There is no change or deficiency. But in referring to the relationship between God and his creation, we resort to anthropomorphism. Who could fathom God? |
