Atheists check out this Article found on yhooo news

[P_Joseph]

By Dinesh D'Souza

Rancho Sante Fe, Calif. - Religion has faced formidable foes in its history. But atheism hasn't generally been one of them

[cwcrenshaw]

While I tend to try to stick to more scientific discussions than philosophical ones, there are a few issues with this article that I would like to bring up.

1) Of course our 5 senses aren't enough to experience every phenomena in the world...this is why we have scientific instrumentation that sees infrared light, can detect blackholes, etc. Most of what we know about science today would be not known to us were it not for scientific instrumentation. This extends the range of this purely scientific lense that humans are bound to.

2) While it is entirely possible (although improbable) that there is an existence outside of which science can measure, I would wonder what would this matter to humans? Humans operate in a scientific way...that is to say that everything we do in this world is measurable and bound by science. If something were to exist outside the realm of what we are capable of experiencing, it would have no bearing on our existence. This brings up another point which is that of the soul and afterlife. This is where I have to take issue again by saying that I disagree with the statement (in reference to the soul) "absense of evidence is not evidence of absense". I claim that is exactly what it is. Nothing can be said to exist (and again, have any bearing on us) if it does not make a perceivable difference in the realm in which we live. Lack of evidence is precisely evidence that something does not exist.

3) Science and faith operate in a fundamentally different way. This article does nothing more than expand on that. Science is based on empiricle evidence from which hypothesis and then theories are formed, tested, and reviewed. The ironic part of saying that there exists something outside the realm of science is that you can't prove it

[Grungekid]

1) Of course our 5 senses aren't enough to experience every phenomena in the world...this is why we have scientific instrumentation that sees infrared light, can detect blackholes, etc. Most of what we know about science today would be not known to us were it not for scientific instrumentation. This extends the range of this purely scientific lense that humans are bound to.

Of course using this reasoning, there is probably more to reallity than what is currently visible through our 'instrumentation'.

2) While it is entirely possible (although improbable) that there is an existence outside of which science can measure, I would wonder what would this matter to humans? Humans operate in a scientific way...that is to say that everything we do in this world is measurable and bound by science. If something were to exist outside the realm of what we are capable of experiencing, it would have no bearing on our existence. This brings up another point which is that of the soul and afterlife. This is where I have to take issue again by saying that I disagree with the statement (in reference to the soul) "absense of evidence is not evidence of absense". I claim that is exactly what it is. Nothing can be said to exist (and again, have any bearing on us) if it does not make a perceivable difference in the realm in which we live. Lack of evidence is precisely evidence that something does not exist.

Where are you getting this from? If there is something beyond science, it is entirely still possible that it influences our reallity, or that we may have to face it once we leave this one.

3) Science and faith operate in a fundamentally different way. This article does nothing more than expand on that. Science is based on empiricle evidence from which hypothesis and then theories are formed, tested, and reviewed. The ironic part of saying that there exists something outside the realm of science is that you can't prove it

Also note one of the core philosophies of modern science is that nothing ever moves beyond the realm of theory. Nothing is proven without a doubt. Though we can't prove that something may exist outside of science, we can't prove it doesn't, and thus the matter is a catch-22, which can only truly be solved with faith. Belief helps move us in a direction, and it stimulates action, in instances like this where matters are unclear. That is vital for human progression.

[Fraught]

While I tend to try to stick to more scientific discussions than philosophical ones, there are a few issues with this article that I would like to bring up.

1) Of course our 5 senses aren't enough to experience every phenomena in the world...this is why we have scientific instrumentation that sees infrared light, can detect blackholes, etc. Most of what we know about science today would be not known to us were it not for scientific instrumentation. This extends the range of this purely scientific lense that humans are bound to.

2) While it is entirely possible (although improbable) that there is an existence outside of which science can measure, I would wonder what would this matter to humans? Humans operate in a scientific way...that is to say that everything we do in this world is measurable and bound by science. If something were to exist outside the realm of what we are capable of experiencing, it would have no bearing on our existence. This brings up another point which is that of the soul and afterlife. This is where I have to take issue again by saying that I disagree with the statement (in reference to the soul) "absense of evidence is not evidence of absense". I claim that is exactly what it is. Nothing can be said to exist (and again, have any bearing on us) if it does not make a perceivable difference in the realm in which we live. Lack of evidence is precisely evidence that something does not exist.

3) Science and faith operate in a fundamentally different way. This article does nothing more than expand on that. Science is based on empiricle evidence from which hypothesis and then theories are formed, tested, and reviewed. The ironic part of saying that there exists something outside the realm of science is that you can't prove it

and yet until right this minute you have had no evidence that i exist - yet here i am WOW

[Observer of dreams]

comparing our experience of reality to reality itself is impossible

Science requires 2 fundamental things in order to have a test, regardless of whether or not the test is successful, a constant and a variable.

We humans say to one another, "Science says god existing is improbable."

We humans also say to one another, "Faith says god existing is probable."

The problem is that they are both devices of man.

Attempting to discover the totality of oneself is equally as impossible as attempting to discover the totality of the universe.

[cwcrenshaw]

Of course using this reasoning, there is probably more to reallity than what is currently visible through our 'instrumentation'.

I agree that is possible, for instance...dark matter in the universe...we know it exists but we dont have a good way to accurately measure it. We know it exists through its measurable effect on gravitational fields. If something is not measurable directly then it must have a measurable affect on other objects...if not, you can not claim that it "exists".

Where are you getting this from? If there is something beyond science, it is entirely still possible that it influences our reallity, or that we may have to face it once we leave this one.

That was point I was making though..if it did have an influence on our reality, there would by definition have to be a way to scientifically measure it. As for facing it after death, there is no (scientific) evidence for that so there's nothing for me to debate.

Also note one of the core philosophies of modern science is that nothing ever moves beyond the realm of theory. Nothing is proven without a doubt. Though we can't prove that something may exist outside of science, we can't prove it doesn't, and thus the matter is a catch-22, which can only truly be solved with faith. Belief helps move us in a direction, and it stimulates action, in instances like this where matters are unclear. That is vital for human progression.

"Theory" though is a term used only when an idea has mountains of evidence to back it up and has been scientifically tested over and over again. I think you mistake the word "theory" for "hypothesis". For example, gravity is a theory but i'm sure you would say that gravity exists without any doubt. Again I stress evidence...anything can be claimed without evidence, this does not make it so. Faith is the exact opposite; faith is the belief in something without the necessity of evidence...this means ANYTHING can be claimed through faith. Faith solves nothing my friend.

Edited October 18, 2007 by cwcrenshaw

[cwcrenshaw]

and yet until right this minute you have had no evidence that i exist - yet here i am WOW

How many times is this flawed argument going to be used?

[cwcrenshaw]

edit

Edited October 18, 2007 by cwcrenshaw

[Copper Scroll]

I agree with Kant's argument completely.

I have actually raised these points to atheists before--from various angles, using their terminology here or more religious/theological terminology there--and have never received any satisfactory counterargument.

Another way to spin it is that most people do believe that there is a truly objective reality. The problem is that we only perceive our subjective realities, but the organization and overlap between our subjective realities suggests strongly to us that a truly objective reality (that is whole and singular) exists. Now, empiricists hold that the only reality worth considering is one that can be perceived--one that can be known. But no one among us can perceive or know objective reality directly. That would require ominscience--knowledge of everything there is in reality to know. No one among us has it, so what makes objective reality worth considering? In order for it to be worth considering, someone must be percieving it--someone omniscient....

[Copper Scroll]

2) While it is entirely possible (although improbable) that there is an existence outside of which science can measure, I would wonder what would this matter to humans?

Well, because all reality is one and everything in reality affects everything else in reality, then those things that are unknowable to us do impact us on some level--perhaps on unknowable level (i.e. the soul?).