1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Science and atheism inconsistent?

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by atanu, Mar 30, 2019.

  1. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    32,713
    Ratings:
    +19,185
    Religion:
    Atheist
    No, that is not the case. The definitions of words change over time. It may not match your preferred usage, but there is no official definition of the word.
     
  2. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    13,397
    Ratings:
    +5,204
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    Easy, just take responsibility for it. Once you realize that everything you think is real and true is just an internal conceptual matrix that you use to make sense of your experience of being, you can let go of the presumption that it is or must be truth, itself. It is, in fact, an elaborate opinion that you are constantly having to alter to accommodate new experiences. There is no "truth" in it, there is only functional and dysfunctional opinion (just like in science).

    The question regarding "God" then becomes, does the idea of "God" work for you, or doesn't it? And the answer will depend on what you need and expect your idea of "God" to do for you, and if you can develop an idealization for yourself that can respond positively to those needs and expectations.
    There is belief as faith, and belief as pretense. I find belief as pretense to be somewhat dishonest, and arrogant, so I tend to avoid that form of belief. Mostly because my life has taught me that dishonesty invites disaster. Belief as faith, however, I find to be both humble and helpful. It provides possibilities that can't be accessed otherwise, without the dishonesty and arrogance that invites difficulty.
    How 'deeply' can one reject a whole realm of possibility? ;)
     
  3. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    32,713
    Ratings:
    +19,185
    Religion:
    Atheist
    No, for most atheists it is only a lack of belief.. There is a difference.

    And gnostic in that usage reflects how sure the person is in their belief, that is all. Once again, the definitions and usages of words change over time. Look up the meaning of "homely" a few hundred years ago.
     
  4. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    13,457
    Ratings:
    +6,219
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    That is not the issue. Simply facts determines that Methodological Naturalism cannot falsify any hypothesis that proposes the existence nor non-existence of God(s).
     
  5. Willamena

    Willamena Just me
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    39,353
    Ratings:
    +6,458
    Religion:
    Mystics
    Put that way, it's more like a misuse of the English language.

    Right, the strong atheist is sure in his belief. It has nothing to do with "knowing."
     
  6. charlie sc

    charlie sc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,097
    Ratings:
    +360
    Religion:
    Atheism
    Lol I'll take responsibility for something, if it is even applicable, when it makes sense to do so.

    This looks like nonsense. You're jumping from one idea to another when, it seems, you cannot answer my question.

    You did not address what I said. I find this form of deflection incredibly intellectually dishonest.
     
  7. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    20,296
    Ratings:
    +14,850
    Religion:
    None
    So where is this evidence for the existence of god. I am pretty sure if it existed it would be right up there with the wonders of the world.

    As it stands we still have several evidences that show specific aspects of gods cannot exist.

    For example no omnipotent god is possible given that matter exists
    A caring god is such a weird concept given all the suffering that exists (unnecessarily if such a god was a reality)
    What creator god would possibly create a prize creation to worship him/her/it and creat an insect or a virus to kill that prize creation
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,820
    Ratings:
    +4,862
    Religion:
    atheist
    What are you talking about? When all else fails, set up a strawman and then burn it down.

    Where do you get that atheists have a conceptual requirement of "objective evidence"?

    Where have you seen me refuse to acknowledge subjective evidence as valid (true) evidence?

    Nevertheless, instead of making sweeping statements, why not try to dispute and counter the actual arguments I made.
     
  9. charlie sc

    charlie sc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,097
    Ratings:
    +360
    Religion:
    Atheism
    You said a few things here. Indeed, I agree with some of it :)
     
  10. THE HOOD APOLOGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2019
    Messages:
    127
    Ratings:
    +39
    Religion:
    Christian
    I read the book by Krauss, and what he does in this book is call "something" nothing. Period. The nothing that he's saying that the universe started from is actually SOMETHING, he just redefines what nothing means, which is hilarious to say the least.

    "He is starting with the existence of quantum fields that behave in a certain manner and suggesting that matter arises out of arrangements of these fields. But he is still presuming the fields and the laws that govern their existence, which is a far cry from nothing. Nothing" would mean not only the absence of particulate matter but the absence of the fields as well. Nothing means nothing. Period."[1]

    David Albert, professor of philosophy at Columbia and director of the M.A. Program in the Philosophical Foundations of Physics , in his critique of Krauss's book, stated:

    "The fact that some arrangements of fields happen to correspond to the existence of particles and some don’t is not a whit more mysterious than the fact that some of the possible arrangements of my fingers happen to correspond to the existence of a fist and some don’t. And the fact that particles can pop in and out of existence, over time, as those fields rearrange themselves, is not a whit more mysterious than the fact that fists can pop in and out of existence, over time, as my fingers rearrange themselves. And none of these poppings — if you look at them aright — amount to anything even remotely in the neighborhood of a creation from nothing." [2]

    1. Unam Sanctum Catholicam
    2. David Albert, ‘A Universe From Nothing,’ by Lawrence M. Krauss [accessed 9 Oct. 2012]
     
  11. THE HOOD APOLOGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2019
    Messages:
    127
    Ratings:
    +39
    Religion:
    Christian
    I think the definition of proof and evidence is being misunderstood.
    There's plenty of evidence for the existence of God(Yahweh of the Bible), whether that evidence constitutes as proof is in the mind of the evaluator. For example, Evolutionist and Creationist look at the same evidence concerning life on this planet. Yet the creationist sees the evidence as proof that God exists, and the evolutionist sees the evidence as random chance acting upon matter without the need for a creator. Same evidence, different conclusions.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,820
    Ratings:
    +4,862
    Religion:
    atheist
    That is not logic, that is apologetics. You define your god as having no beginning just so you can state he is without cause. It's a cute run-around but it is completely bogus.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,820
    Ratings:
    +4,862
    Religion:
    atheist
    In your humble opinion.
     
  14. charlie sc

    charlie sc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,097
    Ratings:
    +360
    Religion:
    Atheism
    I thought this too in some sense. There are some studies on self-deception that I looked at about a year ago.
    I find it very interesting that someone can hold two contradictory beliefs but believe the sub-optimal one over the optimal. This may not be a conscious act though.
    I need to contemplate and research it a bit more, but I hypothesise that theists, who know religion is based off faith, self-deceive if they also think it's based off evidence. I can point you to some papers on self-deception if you want, but it'll only be interesting if it's something you fancy and want to go in-depth :p
     
  15. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,820
    Ratings:
    +4,862
    Religion:
    atheist
    What evidence? Do you mean the stories in the Bibles that were written by anonymous people to tell morality tales and further an agenda? That evidence?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    20,296
    Ratings:
    +14,850
    Religion:
    None
    I think the meaning of evidence is being deliberately misrepresented

    Evidence : the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

    Given that definition and the fact there is no fact and no information for a gods existence then i would say there is no evidence for a gods existence

    However if you take evidence to mean mythical tails from a bronze age book written by essential anonymous authors with no provenance that you think are real, then you have a point


    Same evidence confirmed by observation and the scientific method
    Or same evidence confirmed by god magic and faith

    Evolution is shown to be a naturally occuring process by several different scientific fields

    I'll take reality every time.
     
  17. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,820
    Ratings:
    +4,862
    Religion:
    atheist
    That would refer to me as well.
     
  18. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,820
    Ratings:
    +4,862
    Religion:
    atheist
    I don't think you understand atheists. You certainly don't understand me.

    I suggest you read my post #106 if you are interested in understanding (my) atheism.
     
  19. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,820
    Ratings:
    +4,862
    Religion:
    atheist
    What do you mean by "closed view"?
     
  20. Willamena

    Willamena Just me
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    39,353
    Ratings:
    +6,458
    Religion:
    Mystics
    But his point was that that is "proof" rather than evidence. And he's right. Evidence is simply facts or information that point at a conclusion.
     
Loading...