Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258490 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

ChristINSANITY is EVIL

Windsor, Canada

#217908 Mar 9, 2014
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. many things cannot be measured ..
.. there's evidence to suggest that the supernatural is not only possible, but that it has occurred again and again, subtly directing the course of human history since the dawn of civilization ..
Wouldnt everything that exist in Nature be Natural?
Supernatural is an Oxymoron kinda like xian science!

http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/blog/toxo-t...

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#217909 Mar 9, 2014
ChristINSANITY is EVIL wrote:
<quoted text>
Wouldnt everything that exist in Nature be Natural?
Supernatural is an Oxymoron kinda like xian science!
http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/blog/toxo-t...
.. all things are part of nature ..

.. we cannot know the true nature of self through pure intellect or religious dogmatism ..

.. for me, skepticism to both positions is an honest philosophical position. Abrahamic religions are morally and psychologically corrupt, pure reason and science fails to explain cause and effect ..

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217910 Mar 9, 2014
KiMare wrote:
Once again, a 'rational humanist' oxymoron. A Kleenex for you and toilet paper for me. Smirk.
Yep. You bored me to tears and then crapped yourself again.

You're not a quick study, are you?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217911 Mar 9, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
I am satisfied that we both stated and defended our position well. It is what it is. I have endeavored not to personally demean you, and hope I have succeeded. Again, I respect the substantial intellectual content of your remarks, and still consider us friends, at least in the www. sense. Peace in all things.
Agreed, amigo.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217912 Mar 9, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
I can't vouch for everything the DI does. But the evidence fully convinces me they have been maligned unfairly. I also think it is important to keep perspective on who is doing what. Scientists affiliated with them are operating in the field with integrity, as far as I am privy to information about them. I think of researchers like Scott Minnich, whom I perceive as a first rate scientist. Elements of DI behavior raise legitimate eyebrows, I'll concede. But the hard-line critics of them exaggerate it out of proportion. That's how I see it.
I'll accept that. I don't have a need to find fault with them that isn't there. I like Minnich as well. I even like Behe somewhat, but not Dembski. I didn't like his vise strategy bravado combined with his unwillingness to testify in what was a very low risk environment for him. I don't see any of them as bad men or inherently corrupt.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#217913 Mar 9, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep. You bored me to tears and then crapped yourself again.
You're not a quick study, are you?
Kimare is a barbarian.
http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg601/sca...

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#217914 Mar 9, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll accept that. I don't have a need to find fault with them that isn't there. I like Minnich as well. I even like Behe somewhat, but not Dembski. I didn't like his vise strategy bravado combined with his unwillingness to testify in what was a very low risk environment for him. I don't see any of them as bad men or inherently corrupt.
Buck has been successful in accomplishing much more with you than he has with me.(For that, I tip my hat to him.)

I see ID as a totally dishonest attempt to introduce religion into the public schools. Period. The "scientists" who support this movement are complicit.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217915 Mar 9, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You're thinking of navel.
Guess I shouldn't have give you that much credit.
No, I think those are oranges.
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#217916 Mar 9, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't the bible day to kill witches?
No it doesn't day dat.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217918 Mar 9, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
The DI has not, nor has anyone affiliated with it, sought to discredit the scientific method. ID scientists employ the method every day. The real complaint (I'm gifted for seeing through pretense) emanates from the fear that the scientific method could yield results not comfortable for the secular humanist/materialist/Darwinist orthodoxy.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
What does this phrase in the Discovery Institute's Wedge Document under governing goals mean to you?: "To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural, and political legacies"
Buck Crick wrote:
To me, it means to counter, or defeat, the assumption in science that everything important can be reduced to smaller and smaller pieces of material, and that all that exists is what can be measured.
I think it says both more and less than that.

It says that scientific materialism is not only wrong, but dangerous, and needs to be overturned. It has the same lethal aura as Luther's comments against science and reason. I consider such ideas themselves to be subversive and dangerous.

Also, materialism is a bit of a misnomer. It is not just matter/energy that is thought to comprise physical reality. It is also force, form, space and time. I prefer the terms naturalism - "a philosophical viewpoint according to which everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted" - and physicalism - "the doctrine that the real world consists simply of the physical world."

The "less" refers to your inadvertent insertion of reductionism into the fold - the idea that things are understood from the lowest level up. There is much to be learned by studying components, but not everything. Some phenomena like life only first emerge at larger scales, and then fade away at even larger scales yet. There is no evidence of life when one looks at an atom or a galaxy.

Reductionism, like materialism, is one of the earlier ideas in the philosophy of science. Concepts like synergy and holism came later. Other often unstated assumptions of science include things such as determinism, non-teleology, and and the arrow of time/causality. All of these notions deserve to be challenged, and some may prove to be incomplete or even invalid.

But getting back to your original comment, "The DI has not, nor has anyone affiliated with it, sought to discredit the scientific method. ID scientists employ the method every day," I would say that while the scientists are forced to use the scientific method, the ideologues like Johnson, an attorney and law professor, seem hostile to it. Those words - Johnson's, I presume - indicate to me a desire to discredit the scientific method.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217919 Mar 9, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
Did you learn a lot about your naval? I have an "inny". That's about all I know about it. Oh, and it catches lint.
omphaloskepsis - contemplation of the navel

“Miles from Nowhere”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#217920 Mar 9, 2014
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. all things are part of nature ..
.. we cannot know the true nature of self through pure intellect or religious dogmatism ..
.. for me, skepticism to both positions is an honest philosophical position. Abrahamic religions are morally and psychologically corrupt, pure reason and science fails to explain cause and effect ..
Feel free to explore my nature all you want.

I have a new tat. It's written in braille. Close your eyes and see if you can find it and read it.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217921 Mar 9, 2014
scaritual wrote:

LOL. I know a guy named Murray who looks a lot like that.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217922 Mar 9, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll accept that. I don't have a need to find fault with them that isn't there. I like Minnich as well. I even like Behe somewhat, but not Dembski. I didn't like his vise strategy bravado combined with his unwillingness to testify in what was a very low risk environment for him. I don't see any of them as bad men or inherently corrupt.
I agree, too, Dembski and Stephen Meyer should have testified. Minnich and Behe stuck their necks out, and paid a price. Dembski and Meyer are pretty humorless. Behe has a sense of humor, seems like an amiable guy.

There's a somewhat interesting display of a debate hosted by Bill Buckley with Behe, Phillip Johnson, and David Berlinski on one side, Ken Miller, Barry Lynd, Michael Ruse, and a lady, possibly Barbara Forest. Video is not good. But it's interesting. More about creationism than ID. But a good-natured discussion.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217923 Mar 9, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>Now put those two thoughts together.

A judgment by you of all Christians based on an African cult that clearly and obviously violates Christian doctrine.

Once again, a 'rational humanist' oxymoron.

A Kleenex for you and toilet paper for me.

Smirk.
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't the bible day to kill witches?
Please give the New Testament verse.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217924 Mar 9, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
It depends.
LOL

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217925 Mar 9, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep. You bored me to tears and then crapped yourself again.
You're not a quick study, are you?
Yeah, that's what's happening according to a 'rational atheist' oxymoron.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217926 Mar 9, 2014
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
Kimare is a barbarian.
http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg601/sca...
A redeemed cynic who remains barbarian.

Smile.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#217927 Mar 9, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Feel free to explore my nature all you want.
I have a new tat. It's written in braille. Close your eyes and see if you can find it and read it.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#217928 Mar 9, 2014
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
do not blame god for the rape of the alter boys
blame the parents, who send them to be raped
I blame the perpetrators. The parents are victims of their own brainwashing.

Colm O'Gorman's autobiography was a shocking, but interesting, read.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 13 min kent 673,060
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 14 min Catcher1 104,606
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 36 min LAWEST100 184,616
Obama Pays Muslim Brotherhood Yearly Membership... 2 hr Chris Rather 2
Do women think men with blue eyes are more attr... (Dec '08) 2 hr Chris Rather 98
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 3 hr Rider on the Storm 4,049
News Michael Jackson's doctor: 'I told the truth' (Aug '09) 4 hr Holy Child Jehova... 395
Lido Theater, Dallas (Mar '12) 4 hr blkguylooking 471
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 hr Holy Child Jehova... 981,223
More from around the web