PureX
Veteran Member
But that is a totally biased, unfounded, and circularly reasoned presumption. Surely, you must see that. "What I see is probably all there is, because it's all I see."Not necessarily the case. Some of us no doubt just base it on the probability of this being so, given what we experience and see all around us.
Firstly, the "concept of God" is not God. All sorts of god-concepts exist, that is obvious to us all. But this does not prove that God exists apart from our conceptions. Nor does the improbability of our god-concepts prove that God (probably) does not exist.As in - where some see evidence, some of us just see reality. The concept of a god or not doesn't influence my behaviour one bit, and I suspect this is so for many without a religious belief.
Secondly, your god-concept doesn't influence your behavior because you have rendered the possibility of a positive effect impossible, by presuming that God is improbable (impossible). The god-concept is not the primary effective factor for most humans; faith is. The god-concept merely shapes the focus and practice of that faith.
Also, "reality" is a concept being created in our minds based on reason, experience, imagination (and desire). Everyone's reality is different, and none of them are complete or accurate. They are only our perceptions/conceptions of 'what is'.
Science has no bearing at all on the question of the nature or existence of God. It's completely incapable of even investigating the question. And yet nearly every atheist I encounter immediately runs to science to somehow justify their atheism. Why is that, when science has nothing at all to do with the question of God's nature or existence? Nothing at all.I doubt we are any more admirers of science than all others. It just happens to have proved itself as being the most useful tool humans have developed - so far.
Last edited: