Science and atheism inconsistent?

[atanu]

I agree with everything except that in bold, because you don't use other beliefs in the scientific method..,,.

That is what Dr. Marcelo says.

 

[charlie sc]

That is what Dr. Marcelo says.

Indeed. If his argument had any merit, I'd agree to it. Currently, it makes no sense.

 

[ChristineM]

Not ‘mentality’. I said ‘mentally’ meaning ‘knowing through mental-sensual apparatus’.

Two points. First. What are you looking for as God? What is your definition of God?

Second. I hold that non cognition is not evidence or proof of non existence. Everyone stops seeing/knowing self and world in deep sleep. But is the self non existent?

And i am dyslexic and did not spot my error, i think because the wording "your mentally" does not make much sense in the context so in my blindness to words i substituted mentally for mentality.

What is anyones definition of god, everyone has a different definition. How i define god is how i was raised in the CofE, i.e the god of the bible. And i am not looking for anything in the line of gods.

Most of the time those in deep sleep wake up.

Proof by exhaustion works for me. In ten thousand years or so there has never shown him/her/it self, has never been seen, there has been absolutely no varifyed event attributed to a god and literally billions of people claiming gods existence has ever been able to provide any evidence in reality. It would only take one, just one falsifiable god event to dispel this proof. I eagerly await.

On the contrary, there is so much hard evidence to indicate gods dont exist it is difficult for me to comprehend how do many poeople ignore it.

 

[atanu]

Indeed. If his argument had any merit, I'd agree to it. Currently, it makes no sense.

Well. It makes sense to me in the sense that atheism is a belief, which scientific method does not support.

 

[atanu]

.
Most of the time those in deep sleep wake up.

Yes. We know that we can exist without being aware of self and world.

Proof by exhaustion works for me.

Do you think that your proof exhausts the fact (as pointed through the example of deep sleep above) that there can be evidences beyond waking state mind-senses?

I am only talking of possibility.

 

[charlie sc]

Well. It makes sense to me in the sense that atheism is a belief, which scientific method does not support.

Do you believe theism is compatible with science?

 

[ChristineM]

Yes. We know that we can exist without being aware of self and world.



Do you think that your proof exhausts the fact (as pointed through the example of deep sleep above) that there can be evidences beyond waking state mind-senses?

I am only talking of possibility.

Deep sleep is a a straw man, it has been studied, imagery of brain activity taken and measured. Has a god ever had an mri scan?

 

[Polymath257]

Yes. We know that we can exist without being aware of self and world.



Do you think that your proof exhausts the fact (as pointed through the example of deep sleep above) that there can be evidences beyond waking state mind-senses?

I am only talking of possibility.

Sleeping state mind senses? Not very reliable, I'm afraid.

 

[atanu]

Sleeping state mind senses? Not very reliable, I'm afraid.

Is it sarcasm?

I said that while mind-senses go to sleep, the self exists. One cannot say that if mind-senses do not perceive a thing that thing is non existent.

 

[ecco]

He perfectly states my beliefs.

Would you care to specify exactly what parts of his article perfectly state your beliefs?

 

[ecco]

The imagery is good. But I am being a reporter of view of a scientist. It seems that you have not even examined the OP.

I examined the OP. Here is part of what your scientist said...

"I think atheism is inconsistent with the scientific method. What I mean by that is, what is atheism? It's a statement, a categorical statement that expresses belief in nonbelief. 'I don't believe even though I have no evidence for or against, simply I don't believe.' Period.​

The problem is that he makes a statement that has no basis in fact. All atheists do not have the same reason for their viewpoint. What he stated is certainly not my viewpoint.

It's very hypocritical for Gleiser to argue that atheism is "inconsistent with the scientific method" when that comment is based on no research at all.


Perhaps before being "a reporter of view of a scientist" you should ascertain if the view of the scientist is a reasonable one.

 

[ecco]

If that is true then why is the statement ‘Science and atheism inconsistent’, wrong?

I am asking to understand.

See post # 731 above.

 

[ecco]

It correct to neither believe nor disbelieve in things un-evidenced.

Lacking confirming and disconfirming evidence I will say “I have evidence neither for nor against the existence of X’.

Why do you continue to say there is no evidence against the existence of God/gods?

 

[ecco]

You acknowledge that ‘atheism is a belief’. So I say that a belief is not compatible with science.

be·lief
/bəˈlēf/
noun

1. 1.
   an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
   "his belief in the value of hard work"
2. 2.
   trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
   "a belief in democratic politics"

I have a deep belief that Einstein's General Theory of Relativity has been proven many times by many different methods.

You need to understand the definitions of words so that you do not misuse them.