Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol 449 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  C0ntr013r

  thiest: "you cant prove god dosent exist therefore he does! I see what i want to and therefore you cant me convince otherwise! Also people who dont believe exactly as i do suck!"
  athiests: " but we are simply being logical. We just want some reason and evidence" (repeat pointlessly ad infinitum)
  i would like to believe my summary will save some time and effort but history suggests it wont..

  This is actually a discussion of Gnostic vs Agnostic now thou

  EDIT: I am also trying to show that Atheism is not science.

  And it is actually the reverse:

  atheist: you cant prove that god exist therefore he does not!
  
• 

  C0ntr013r

  I think the thread has been derailed enough too, so lets forget about the multiverse for now.

  The points on which I disagree with you are:

  Lack of evidence automatically discards a hypothesis in science.

  I don't think that is how science works.

  I re-iterate: Atheism is scientific.

  Science is Atheistic, Aelveistic etc...
  

  I disagree with this because Atheism deals with belief, or the lack of it to be precise. Hence not science.

  Absence of evidence is good enough to discount ALL of the above for any practical and scientific purpose.

  I disagree with this because it is a logical fallacy

  You can disregard the derailment.
• 

  freemindfade

  But who created god?

  ...mind blown

  you know we could also be living in a matrix like reality. Totally plausible. But until there is enough proof I am not going to be living my life as if that were true otherwise I might be committed and thrown in the boobyhatch.

  So until then I am a matrix atheist/agnostic. And will devote my time to more productive things than going to meetings every week and being a bigot and reading science fiction (bible) books about it. It's entertainment and interesting to think about. Just like god. But it's merely a thought. And not a great one at that this God fellow.
• 

  cappytan

  The problem isn't a lack of evidence full stop.

  The problem is a lack of evidence where there should be evidence.

  Do you agree that there is a difference between those two statements?
• 

  C0ntr013r

  The problem isn't a lack of evidence full stop.
  The problem is a lack of evidence where there should be evidence.
  Do you agree that there is a difference between those two statements?

  Who is this addressed to?
• 

  _Morpheus

  Sigh..... I wish i were a prophet. Im just a person who has seen this play out a dozens and dozens of times. Its a good exercise, maybe a cordnis struck somewhere for some, but mostly its as i described.
• 

  Saintbertholdt

  _Morpheus,

  Its a good exercise, maybe a cord is struck somewhere for some, but mostly its as i described.
  To me the question I consider more often these days is the following: How is atheism influencing Christianity in the 21st century?
  

  C0ntr013r

  I want to restart this issue with you and ask you a question. This question requires a basic explanation before it is asked and is actually a recap of my original argument:

  In human history there are many stories about fairies. Some are stories, some are legends, some are related to the practice of magic. These stories, myths and legends go back centuries. So in history there have been many people that have believed in fairies and even today in esoteric culture some people still do. Fairies purportedly have little wings and they seem to love flowers. So postulating that fairies may in fact pollinate plants is plausible. But it is also an extraordinary claim. For that claim to be true one would expect some very compelling evidence, but it is lacking. So the question is this:
  

  1.On what basis can science dismiss fairies, or is stating that fairies don't exist unscientific?

  
  

  cappytan

  The problem isn't a lack of evidence full stop. The problem is a lack of evidence where there should be evidence.

  Here's my mantra: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
• 

  Oubliette

  Carl Sagan had this to say about that:

  • The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying... it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity. - As quoted in "Scientists & Their Gods" in U.S. News & World Report Vol. 111 (1991)

  -
  

  • An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed. - Conversations with Carl Sagan (2006)
    
• 

  freemindfade

  Exactly Oubliette.

  There was a time people would have thought natural forces were god, or gods, ancient myths etc. So when they make scientific discoveries about natural laws that replace superstitions and myth, does that mean they discovered "God"?

  Or does it just mean they have replaced ignorance with knowledge.
• 

  _Morpheus

  @obb - Which is where the label "athiest" gets dicey. The perception is that an athiest is someone who flatly denies god does or could exsit at all with 100% certainty. In fact, most self identified athiests that i have come across, myself included, fall into a catagory of "not currently believing in god but willing to accept evidance of him should some presented".

  What we do not accept as evidence, however, is "feeling" God exists, looking at random objects and not being able to explain how they got there and attributing them a supernatural sky daddy, finding 20$ in the street and feeling "blessed" etc etc.... This is not evidance.

  Nice motto, saintB;)