Question.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-05-2012, 01:43 PM
 
RE: Question.....
One can wrangle with the definitions, but common understanding is that an atheist is someone who believes God does not exist. I realize they would say it's not that way but rather they simply have no faith in God, and I suppose there's a hair's difference in meaning, but I'm not convinced it's an important distinction.

The faith issue, in my opinion, when it comes to atheists is the faith they put in science, and not really science it self, but the scientific community. Science is the religion; The univerisity is the Church; the Ph.D. is the priest; Chaos is God, and the scientific method is the ritual. In that sense, atheism is probably more fundamentalistic than any religion on earth at this time, except for some of the more radical Muslim sects. They evangelize, demonstrate, hold rallies, form clubs, and have regular meetings on many college campuses. They even demand their civil rights under the freedom of religion clause of the First Amendment. And of course, they have internet forums and blogs.

When I examine the entire subject of atheism vs. theism, I can honestly attest to the old cliche that I don't have enough faith to be an atheist. I see design in nature; I see paranomral activity (or at least I used to); I can't escape the logic of a first cause that must be uncaused itself, and be conscious, and I see that my own consciousness is linked to something higher than what I see in the mirror. So, for me to be an atheist, I would have to jettison all that and adopt the atheistic religion described above. And I personally can't do that.

But then I have a different idea of God, and if all I had was the Christian notion or nothing, I'd choose nothing.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Egor's post
11-05-2012, 01:54 PM (This post was last modified: 11-05-2012 02:13 PM by TheBeardedDude.)
RE: Question.....
I don't have faith in science, I trust in it. I do not trust in the scientific community as a whole, but I trust in the the scientific method and peer review to cull erroneous claims from its ranks and promote those hypotheses with evidence and credible support. Universities are not an equivalent of a church by any stretch of the imagination, we don't get together and sing about gravity, instead we do research, study, and discuss papers (both the good and the bad). A PhD does not come with the trust of the scientific community, there are numerous people with PhD's and professorial status that are complete nutjobs. The scientific method is not a ritual, it is a process of examining the universe. A ritual is completely different. We do have scientific communities, we do hold meetings but I know of no "science rallies" nor do I know of any science cults. Scientists don't claim protection from the first amendment declaring protection because of the freedom of religion clause, if anything it would be freedom of speech. Scientists do not want nonscience taught in science classrooms and will use that clause to argue against ID/creationism, but they also argue against it based on its scientific merits, or lack thereof.

Science is not a religion and does not require faith. You don't have faith that an antibiotic will work, you trust the tests and research done prior to its production that it will perform the function is was designed to do. Scientists gather to discuss research but bash other people's work as much as they praise it, if not more. It is not based on current dogmas, but more often it is based on the validity of their science, ie making claims with little or no evidence and/or speculating.
"One can wrangle with the definitions..." -Egor


And then the above poster stretches the definitions of church, priest, religion, faith, and ritual.
I applaud your recent efforts to try and change your strategy from one of asserting that someone must be stupid not to believe, but the strategy of implying that atheists worship science is still markedly absurd. I believe that is what would be called a strawman fallacy, if you are asserting that atheists blindly follow the teachings of science. I know of no such atheist.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
11-05-2012, 02:17 PM
RE: Question.....
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  ... They even demand their civil rights under the freedom of religion clause of the First Amendment. ...
Consider Now... if I can juuuuust figure out now to get that tax exempt status, I can start destroying people's lives just like all those other "spiritual" folk.

Sorry, speaking before thinking - m'bad. Dodgy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
11-05-2012, 02:30 PM
RE: Question.....
No. Atheism is not a belief system. There is nothing you have to believe in atheism. It is simple: atheists do not believe in any kind of deity. There is nothing more to it. They do not say there is no god, unlike many religious people who claim there is a god. The answer is basically "no".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2012, 02:32 PM
RE: Question.....
To reiterate; I have found that people who have faith, seem unable to fathom not having it.

People who have an extreme nature think erroneously that everyone around them is just as extreme. This would be a projection of their own suspicious nature, causing them to believe in outlandish things like conspiracy theories, propaganda, and anyone else's ideas, rather than rationally observing surroundings as they are, with no preconceived notions or expectations.


They walk their own tight rope... and will eventually fall on their own sword.

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kim's post
11-05-2012, 02:38 PM
RE: Question.....
(11-05-2012 01:54 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Science is not a religion and does not require faith.

String theory, anybody? Tongue

I contend there is a clear and present danger of science becoming a religion. Lookit what happened with eugenics; now peeps think nothing of genetic screening and the greedy fucks are slipping shit by where if you don't have the right genes, you're some kind of sub human. This shit happens 'cause peeps get all closed-minded in their morality, like saying I don't have faith because that's some theist shit and I ain't one of those.

The way I see it, faith is a necessary component of conscious awareness, to cover the eighty zillion assumptions ya gotta make before ya walk out the door.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
11-05-2012, 02:46 PM
RE: Question.....
(11-05-2012 02:38 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(11-05-2012 01:54 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Science is not a religion and does not require faith.

String theory, anybody? Tongue
Faith and desire ... are very different things. Thumbsup

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2012, 03:14 PM (This post was last modified: 12-05-2012 04:48 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Question.....
Wow. Such a process we have witnessed !
From an arrogant Christian, evolving, (heh heh) to an arrogant Veridican, and now to a (puppy looking) yet still arrogant "metaphysician".
Said poster forgot that Science originally was a branch of Metaphysics.
Said poster doesn't get that absence of belief, is not belief in absence.
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  The faith issue is the faith they put in science, and not really science it self, but the scientific community.
Said poster needs to get out more. Scientists fight like cats and dogs. They have NO "faith" in each other. In fact the nature of the beast, is to DISPROVE each other. Scientists have "UNFAITH"/"NONFAITH". That's their business. That's what they do all day. Science is a METHOD. Got a better one ?
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  Science is the religion; The univerisity is the Church; the Ph.D. is the priest; Chaos is God, and the scientific method is the ritual.
Said, the metaphysician, is still the same ole full of crap, Southern Preacher. Univerisity is where the veridican went to school. The rest of us went to, (or are still in), University.
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  They evangelize, demonstrate, hold rallies, form clubs, and have regular meetings on many college campuses. They even demand their civil rights under the freedom of religion clause of the First Amendment. And of course, they have internet forums and blogs.
All terrible evils. Just like that evil Veridican.
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  I see design in nature
Said sees complex patterns, and since said has never watched a super-computer simulation, uses, as the default/fallback position, "oh god did it", (god of the gaps) because said can't see how it happens, or that there are other options, just like a 1885 person would do, seeing a jet fly over. Yup, god did it. Ya shore. You betcha.
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  I can't escape the logic of a first cause that must be un-caused itself, and be conscious, and I see that my own consciousness is linked to something higher than what I see in the mirror.
Said doesn't get that First Cause just leads to Infinite Regression, or it's Special Pleading. Said also doesn't get that "consciousness" is a PROCESS, and that requires time, and that the "First Cause requiring time", for "existence", is self refuting. Said has NOT A SHRED of evidence for the "link". Said can cook up any ole thing, since there IS no method Said uses.
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  and if all I had was the Christian notion or nothing, I'd choose nothing.
In six months, Said will be an atheist.
For now, time to get back to the Paramecium lab.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
11-05-2012, 03:26 PM
RE: Question.....
Say what you will about Veridicanism my friends, at least it's an ethos. Wink

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2012, 04:19 PM (This post was last modified: 11-05-2012 05:39 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Question.....
(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  The faith issue, in my opinion, when it comes to atheists is the faith they put in science, and not really science it self, but the scientific community. Science is the religion; The univerisity is the Church; the Ph.D. is the priest; Chaos is God, and the scientific method is the ritual.

That's not atheism, that's accepting science and reason as your God. Girly ain't buying it. Reason, well reason's already demonstrated it's a piss poor replacement for God. And the scientific method is just currently the sharpest tool in the shed. Its main advantage, unlike most religions, is that it is amenable to reforging as necessary. But its only response to Hume's Problem of Induction is "You got a better idea?", which is a fair point but not particularly constructive. ... Doesn't mean I'm gonna leave the house without both the twins in tow. ... Man's gotta make a living. Wink

(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  When I examine the entire subject of atheism vs. theism, I can honestly attest to the old cliche that I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

I only use that label when I want to quickly and cleanly cut off further discourse with an idiot. But I admit that I've got no fucking clue and neither does anyone else. ... I've given up on even pretending that I do. We are all fucking clueless. ... Am I wrong to like and appreciate that? Blush

(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  I can't escape the logic of a first cause that must be uncaused itself, ...

Now that I can escape easily, primarily because logic has already identified its own inherent limitations and couldn't lock me in now even if it tried. Wink

(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  ... and be conscious, and I see that my own consciousness is linked to something higher than what I see in the mirror.

I don't think I'm connected to anything higher, but I do feel that I might be connected to something much, much bigger. Wink

(11-05-2012 01:43 PM)Egor Wrote:  But then I have a different idea of God, and if all I had was the Christian notion or nothing, I'd choose nothing.

That seems enough to me to call you Brother. Smile

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: