Quote:
Originally Posted by GobbHayte
What claims have i made about atheism? All i have said is that it has not been scientifically proven right, it is a point of view and not an absolute truth.
How is this wrong?
What did i say about Alex not being able to admit he was wrong? I've only ever tried to get him to admit that his way of seeing things could be wrong, that he has not been proven right. I never said that he was wrong, except that he was wrong to consider himself superior to others who have different beliefs.
This actually feels just like arguing with Christians.
----------------------------------------------------------
Christian argument
"It is the absolute truth that God exists"
"No it's not it's just one way of seeing things"
"yes it is, you're going to hell if you don't think like me"
-----------------------------------------------------------
Atheist argument
"It is the absolute truth that God doesn't exist"
"No it's not it's just one way of seeing things"
"yes it is, you're an illogical, creationist, anti-science flat-earther if you don't think like me"
------------------------------------------------------------
Atheism is a faith, just like religion, faith that there is no god and religion is wrong. It's not based on scientific fact any more than religion is.
|
Do you have some inability to understand the meaning of "religion", "atheism" and "faith"?
It was ironic because I have yet to meet an atheist who's position was not "I see no evidence for the existence of God, but if evidence were presented to me which shows it's existence then I will believe he exists". I have yet to meet a believer who when pushed on it won't define a situation where they would cease believe in a God.
Arguing that "atheism has not been
proven right", is completely missing the point of what atheism is. It's exactly the same as claiming that there's no scientific evidence for the existence of chocolate teapots not orbiting the sun, therefore anyone who states that there are probably not any chocolate teapots orbiting the sun is holding a position with no evidence. It only serves to show the person stating it doesn't understand the burden of proof.
Your strawman quote from an atheist is just as bad. Find me
one atheist who holds that position.
Atheism as faith is yet another piss-poor argument. Like baldness being a hair colour and nudeness being a type of clothing.
As for being not based on science, it is based on all the observational data on the universe the human race has ever amassed. Huge amounts of information, and not one single iota of it points to the existance of Gods and more than it points to the existance of unicorns or fairies. Religion is a position held solely through the ignorance of science. For the example from the largest religious sect in the UK. Christianity is based on a book which contains "truths" about the universe which were held by bronze age goat herders who worshipped a god of war who lived at the top of their nearest mountain. The science within it shows that we live on a flat earth which was created 6000 years ago, our moon emits light, pi is 3 and that Bats are a type of bird. To claim that religion and atheism are based on an equivalent understanding of science can only be explained by ignorance, stupidity or trolling. You can pick which one applies.