Why choose atheism?

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

You imply disparagy where none exists. Again, you are placing the scientific method and faith in a higher being on the same plane and they don't belong there. You assume that anyone who uses the scientific method to examine the universe (or something that exists within it) *must* not be able to believe in a higher being and vice versa. Further, you elevate that "hypothetical" scientist to a higher intellectual level than the "hypothetical" person of faith (as if to be a person of faith is to be stupid and to be a person of science is to be smart).

Let's put it another way:

Take two scientists;

One is a secular humanist who believes that the universe was created with a big bang (with no apparent causal agent) and that life began on Earth spontaneously (with no apparent causal agent) and such life then began and continues to evolve as an adaptation to the environment.

The other is a person of faith and just for the sake of argument, let's make him or her (gender isn't relative for this argument) a Christian. This scientist believes that the universe was created with a big bang and that G-d is the causal agent and that life began on Earth as a direct result of G-d creating life and that such life was created complete and as we see it today with no evolutionary process in response to the environment.

(As an aside, there are Christians who do believe that there is an evolutionary process at work. Some (a minority opinion among Christians) believe this process includes humans as well as all other life forms and that the Almighty instituted and guides this process. Other Christians believe that all other life forms are subject to this process except humans and that the Adam and Eve created as the first two humans are developmentally identical to human beings today. Most "mainstream" Christians however, do not believe in an evolutionary process at all and believe the Almighty created all life "In the Beginning" exactly as it exists today. Don't ask me to explain dinosaurs...opinions vary widely among Christians.).

Let's assume that both these scientists are honest researchers and will do their level best not to let their personal belief systems affect how they conduct research and how they interpret the results.

Both scientists work on the same project but not together. They both conduct completely separate research projects but on the same subject, using the same measuring equipment and attempting to support or deny the following:

"Is there a creative force behind the universe/life/existence?"

There are several outcomes here.

1. Both scientists conclude that the universe and everything in it was created by a random and unexplainable process
2. Both scientists conclude that the universe was created by some sort of intelligent force that exists outside of the "natural" laws that govern the universe
3. Each scientist comes up with results that support their own personal belief systems
4. Neither scientist can arrive at a conclusion and determine that more study is required (while admitting the possibility that no scientific process will ever be good enough to make such a determination)

The third possibility is most likely since even the most honest of researchers still introduce biases (observer bias for example) into their studies.

The first possibility is the next most likely and here's why. We like to think of the scientific community as being completely apolitical and abiased. That is, scientists don't lie about or fudge their research results at all ever. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just watch how the mainstream scientific community treats a researcher who publicly announces that there conclusions support intelligent design. They will not only be ridiculed by the mainstream community but likely, will not see much funding for additional research sailing their way. In short, they will significantly damage if not destroy their reputation in the scientific community. I'd like to believe that a Christian scientist wouldn't cave into peer pressure but after all, I have to admit that Christians are humans and sometimes do not live up to their convictions.

Items 2 and 4 are unlikely to happen but they sometimes do.

That is, sometimes a scientist will even go out and deliberately attempt to disprove the existence of intelligent design but their honesty takes over (my opinion) and they realize that the mainstream theories involving creation and evolution are not as well supported as generally believed and in fact, there is greater evidence for intelligent design.

Item 4 almost never happens and may in fact never happen. It is a possibility though and maybe the most honest one. After all, no one was there to see the big bang happen and no one ever gets to directly observe the exact moment when an evolutionary event occurs (or directly observes that it never occurs) so how do you know?

I hate to say this shambles and please don't take offense, but you aren't presenting a very rational argument. You continue to insist that in general, people are either scientific or faith-based and that those two conditions are mutually exclusive. This is not true and I can prove it. I'm posting a link to a list of Christian scientists. Here it is:

http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm

While this won't prove (at least to your satisfaction) that G-d created the universe, our planet, and all life on Earth, it will establish that your supposition that a scientist cannot be a Christian is untrue. Your only defense at this point would be to say that the people on this list are not "true" scientists and that any conclusions they come up with in their studies are highly suspect and should not be trusted.

While I believe I've previously established why it's much easier career-wise to at least publicly state that you are a secular scientist than a Christian scientist, you have the right to come to your own conclusions.

You mentioned (more or less) that this conversation is useless from your perspective since we believers already have our minds made up and your arguments are not likely to change our points of view.

I disagree that the argument is useless. I believe that an exchange of ideas between people with different perspectives is highly useful. We believers are not as closed minded (well...not all of us) as you might imagine and in fact, I'd suggest that secular people are just as capable of being closed minded and resistant to change as you think we are. After all, my arguments are just as unlikely to change your point of view and get you to re-examine your assumptions about life, the universe, and everything.

Nevertheless, it's good for all of us to have our beliefs challenged by outsiders. If we are honest and re-examine our positions based on the statements of others, we should discover that either our beliefs are flawed and need further examination or we will see that our beliefs are solid and can easily stand up to challenge. The important thing is to talk and to keep the dialog open. If you didn't think this thread was worthwhile, why did you post?

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Wow... I must either have *no* understanding of science, or I must *really* not believe in God. Awesome, Shambles! I never knew that! I knew something was missing in my life, but my life is now complete. Thanks for setting me straight on that!

...but perhaps you should read Trip's post, above mine. Not sure how you think I "don't get it" just because I believe in God and believe that He made all the processes around us.

 

I agree with Trip here.

I am pagan, but im also a scientist. Whilst my beliefs are somewhat radically different to more 'mainstream' religions, the effect is the same.

I believe in a single divine entity (not god since that implies masculinity in my mind), that encompases everything in the universe. This entity has always existed, indeed, it IS our universe (and you, and the chair, etc). I believe the universe was created through the big bang (although I have some issues with that as a general rule, but those same issues extend to the deific aspects of creation theory too).

I believe that all life evolved from simple orgranisms into what we have today (I studied genetics, evolutionary change and natural selection are just facts for me, ive seen the mechanisms). But that doesnt mean that the divine entity hasnt steered the direction of evolution of the creatures of the planet.

I also believe that all the gods of every pantheon exist (im an eclectic pagan, I dont tie myself to a single pantheon of gods). Some are the same entity with different names, some are entirely different entities. But I believe that each of these gods (and I include the christian god, etc) are manifest through our own beliefs. That is, they dont exist if we dont believe in them. I believe that every person that believes in a single 'god', or prays to that 'god' increases its power and influence. However, I also believe that each of these gods are simply personifications of an aspect of the ultimate divine entity

Think of the ultimate divine entity as a Diamond, and each of the individual gods forming a facet on that diamond. Ultimately they are the same 'object', just different sides of it.

Complicated? maybe, but it feels right. And you can see that I am able to be both religious, and scientific at the same time. Too many people make the mistake of assuming its one or the other. It isnt, and it never has been.

To take another look at it, God created the universe. God may be omnipotent, but do you really think he would want to spend his time making sure things fell to the ground when dropped? of course not. He created the universe and applied a set of rules to everything within it. Its like he wrote a program and started it running. Science is merely the study of those rules. In some sense, by studying the rules he put in place for the universe, we can get 'closer' to him.

 

First of all, before anyone reacts to Fergal's post, the title of this thread is "Why choose atheism" and I would define "atheism" as the belief that there are no supernatural agents involved in the creation and maintenance of the universe. Within that context, Fergal's statement about being a pagan and what that means are just as valid as those of a Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, etc.

Ironically, when Jews recite the Shema prayer, "Hear O Israel, the L-rd our G-d, the L-rd is One", the word translated as One in English is the word "Echad" in Hebrew. The word Echad can be interpreted as "one" in the sense that a cluster of grapes is "one", that is, "one cluster of grapes". Of course, that single cluster can be made of of dozens of individual grapes. Judaism would not interpret "Echad" as meaning "a cluster of gods" but rather "a cluster of the different attributes (mercy, justice, etc...) of G-d.

 

And it's all divisive.

J.

 

Rosicrucionism anyone?

Gives you a chance to show your cross.



J.

 

If you put any number of scientists in a room and get them to think about the nature of the universe, there is only one conclusion they can come to - and it doesn't involve a creator.

The idea that there are two sorts of scientist, the faithful and the faithless is a fallacy. If you are a scientist, your investigations will lead you to the conclusion that there is no reason to believe in a God. It's as simple as that.

The reason I put science above faith is because science helps me to gain an understanding of reality, whilst religion helps others to avoid it.

And the only reason I get involved in this argument is because I know that we have to stand up against people who would push us back to the middle-ages if they had half a chance. The sad thing is that now some Christians (in particular) can see that their faith is failing to appeal to a more educated population, they are turning to faux-scientific arguments to try and convince us that what none of the rest of us believe in is actually worthwhile. And they'll ignore a hundred years of science to put their point across. In the meantime, some believers in other Faiths have turned to the gun and the bomb. But none of it will work. Faith has had it's day.

Luckily, here in the UK the churches are mostly empty on a Sunday...

 

I don't agree, there are plenty of religous scientists. Why don't you perhaps look in to Dr Zakir Naik or Harun Yahya?

In 2003 I met a Molecular Biologist by profession and lecturer at Oxford University who converted to Islam in his 50s after coming across some detailed verses from the Holy Qur'aan describing the process of the sperm entering the egg and the various phases the feotus goes through during pregnancy. These details have remained a mystery until scientists only recently made the discoveries through their experimentations / research. But the fact that this was revealed in the Qur'aan over 1,400 years ago was enough motivation for this individual to investigate the Qur'aan and the possibility of a Creator; resulting in him attaining a conviction about the existence of God and practising Islam. Fascinating man, a religious practising Muslim scientist.

I personally think that it's unwise to live life thinking EVERYTHING must be theoretical and the more we try to improve the theories the closer to the truth we might get. There are absolute truths in this world -- to view something as important as an existence of a Creator through the scientific method is doing injustice to the issue; the existence of a Creator is factual, it is proven by the fact that we exist in the surroundings that we exist in, there is no requirement of scientific experimentation as it is obviously clear our human limitations can not go beyond the distinct limitations that we have been created with.

 

Since I previously posted a link to a resource listing various Christian scientists and organization of Christian scientists and since ay5000 talks about meeting a scientist who is a Muslim, I have absolutely no idea how you can come to that conclusion. We are saying that scientists of faith exists and we have proof and you are simply ignoring our statements and continuing on as with your quote above.

I'm going to try this again. Science and faith are not mutually exclusive. I know I used to believe that way, but it's a very simplistic view of those two arenas. You have the right to your belief system and you have the right to express your opinion. As far as I can tell from what you're saying though, I can't see on what you are basing your opinion except the standard secular humanistic party line.

As far as people of faith pushing everyone back to the middle ages and ignoring a modern understanding in the various scientific disciplines, I know Christians who are doctors, nurses, software engineers, school teachers, and authors. These are educated people who don't deny that the Earth revolves around the sun and that the universe is vast. We aren't all critters who are swinging from the trees looking for breakfast and who go to sleep in caves every night.

As far as those who use guns and bombs to advance their agenda...they aren't serving the same god I am. Yes, you can find people of faith (or at least those folks who *say* they are) who make mistakes, are cruel, mean, greedy, and lots of other bad things. After all, we're all human and humans fail G-d. That doesn't invalidate G-d nor does it invalidate the laws and principles He has put forth for we, His creations, to follow. It just means that even people of faith can be jerks, sometimes.

I'm not going to try to convince you in the existence of a higher power. That's not for me to do. I would like you to be a tad less insulting in your depiction of people of faith, though. You seem to be going out of your way to paint us as ignorant (fairly stupid in fact) and power hungry. I'm sure you could find examples of people like that out there...however most of us are doing our best to get closer to our Creator and thus get closer to the divine in all people.

By the way...you don't have to be a person of faith to see justice out of the barrel of a gun.

 

Within reason, I would never claim that everything in life is theoretical. I would, however, suggest that often our 'knowledge' of some things is theoretical because our observations of them are imperfect.

As for absolute truth - I'm not convinced. Everything we experience we experience through the veil of our biology and whatever chemical and electrical activity goes on in our brains. I don't think we can even trust for certain that what we think we know for sure is really there - not that it matters, because we are not going to be able to change it. From this perspective, maybe everything is theoretical after all. Maybe we will never get to the final truth.

But when it comes to there being clear evidence of there being a Creator - don't make me laugh! The creator is as likely as the toothfairy, and that's all. But I do agree that this is not a question for scientists or science - it's probably one for people who have a few idle moments to spare and like a bit of a rant now and again...

 

I agree with Trip on this one.

 

Ah - I see...

This is one of those situations where the name is being confused for the thing. Anyone can give themself the name 'scientist'. But not everyone with that name will actually be one. Christian Scientists are not scientists. They're Christians with a lack of faith...

Scientists who think we were whistled up out of dust and (half the time) ribs, are simply closing their eyes to the horror and beauty of the empty universe we inhabit. Or deliberately looking the other way. Which is fine and dandy, but not really science...

 

I think I already answered this one in post 101:

Unfortunately, every depiction you create about people of faith and particularly scientists of faith is built on assumption. While you seem to revere the scientific method and drawing conclusions from observation and fact, you don't seem to employ those methods in constructing your arguments. I'm not trying to be insulting and apologize in advance if this sounds offensive, but I wasn't kidding previously when I said that you don't present a very rational argument. In many ways, you are expressing a faith in your beliefs...perhaps more than I.

 

(sigh...) OK then, if you insist....

Your only claim that that the people on this list are 'true' scientists is that they (and you) have described themselves as such.

Maybe we should have some sort of 'scientist test' to check out who are the true scientists? I'd like to suggest the ducking stool, which was brilliantly successful at detecting witches...

The trouble with using rational argument here is that you can't argue with nonsense. And the idea of a creator is just that. Nonsense.

 

Gee...witch hunting. What a fun thing to do for a weekend activity.

Sorry about the sarcasm but I've honestly got to ask if you *really* believe that's what goes on in churches? And you say that people of faith are out of touch (yes, of course the history of "the church" is stained with blood, sadly...but again, that's a reflection of the evil that can encompass even men and women of faith and has nothing to do with the Author of that faith...secular society can hardly claim a pristine past by comparision).

You have the right to your beliefs and there are many who share them. Interestingly, most secular people, while they don't agree with the idea of a Creator, at least don't feel insulted or hostile about it all. You seem to have a real ax to grind and I'm not the source of it. You say that I am not rational in this transaction, but in reviewing my submissions, I can't see where I'm being overly emotional or irrational.

I'm going to end my conversation with you in this thread. While I think that an exchange between people of different viewpoints can be productive, this one has lost its appeal. I don't want to argue just for argument's sake nor do I wish to be part of what appears to be a very emotionally charged subject for you.

As a moderator, I have a responsibility to rise above the content of any given thread when it threatens to degrade into an unhealthy conflict. Our conversation has reached that point. I wish you well, shambles.

 

I can also do superiority. And I wish you well too.

 

How can you say that, as you are neither a scientist nor a man of faith? You're coming into this argument twice-blind.

Just because *your* observations cause you to believe there is no creator, you cannot say that EVERYONE must come to the same conclusion. There is no proof for or against God. It's faith, man. If you don't have it, I can't give it to you, nor should I attempt to do so. But by the same token, I have that faith, and I *am* a college-educated scientist, so please don't assume that everyone should believe (and yes, it is a belief, not a proven fact) similarly to you.

 

Twice-blind is good. I'm sure there's a bible quote about that...

It's a miracle! I would never have believed that it is possible that BosonMichael and myself might agree on something. Hallelulah!

But don't panic - we still have an argument on our hands. I'm not saying that everyone should come to the same conclusion. But I am saying that everyone who takes a scientific approach to the question must come to that same conclusion - there is no evidence to think anything other than that there is no creator. This doesn't mean the question remains open. It means the question is meaningless.

For me, the interesting question is why someone who in all other respects is able to take a rational and scientific approach to things falls at the last hurdle. Are you afraid of standing on your own feet? Taking full responsibility? Facing the void?

The reason I am emotional about this is because you religious types frighten the bejeesus out of me. I can't help that - it's the instinctive reaction of a man who sees the religious right drawing an apocalypse down on us that no-one is going to escape from. Not even the 'saved'. There. It's out there.

 

No, no Bible quote about that, as far as I know...

Applying the scientific method to "Who made us" or "What will happen when I die" is meaningless because we have no way of knowing the answer. But the questions themselves aren't meaningless.

That said, one can actually apply a logical, scientific process in deciding whether the universe is "intelligently designed" by a Creator. In my studies of chemical and physical interactions at the smallest levels, in my opinion, there's too much order and design there for everything to have happened "by chance". I scientifically weigh the chance that everything could have happened randomly versus the chance that everything was designed to be the way it is... and I come up with the logical opinion that I believe there is a Creator. So my belief that there is a Creator DID come from a logical, scientific, calculated decision.

I personally believe that the Creator is the God of the Bible due to faith, not by logic or deduction... I didn't apply the scientific method to determine who I believe is my Creator. I had to rely on faith. I'm not afraid of "standing on my own feet". I do. I simply choose to worship who I believe is my Creator. I do take full responsibility for my actions. I am wholly accountable to God for what I do... or for what I don't do that I should do. And I have no trouble "facing the void". If I'm wrong, then when I die, I simply cease to exist. But if I'm right, then when I die, I will go to be with my Creator. I don't choose to believe because I'm scared of not existing when I die. In fact, if that's true, then I won't care, will I? I choose to believe simply because I believe that we have a Creator worthy of worship and praise. It's just a choice, and I'm happy to live the way I do. I don't feel that I'm compromising, or that I'm giving anything up. I'm genuinely happy, and I'm quite content in my faith and the relationship I have with Jesus Christ.

I don't know what sort of 'apocalypse' that religious people are drawing down on top of you. Could you explain what you mean? If anything, the tide has turned. Anti-religious people (not non-religious people, but anti-religious people) are making it increasingly difficult to do anything religious. You aren't forced to worship if you don't want to... but we aren't sometimes allowed to worship when we want to.

The only 'apocalypse' that anyone will draw down on anyone won't come from me. If there's any judgement to be done... it'll come from God, not from me. It's not my place to do so.