I notice that atheists love to tell theists that what they believe is non falsifiable.
BUT.
Atheism is non falsifiable as well, which makes that "theism is unscientific" argument irrelevant and self contradictory.
Why is atheism non falsifiable? Well, for the same reasons as theism. Can it be shown that there is no God? (absolutely scientifically)
I would say no...therefore atheism is non falsifiable.
We all have assumptions that affect our outlook and view on life/universe/morals etc.
We must take the best options and follow the evidence as Antony Flew says "Since the beginning of my philosophical life I have followed the policy of Plato's Socrates: We must follow the argument wherever it leads."
However, I would like to share with guys that (Biblical) theism is not quite non falsifiable (in an experiential miraculous way) because God said that those who seek Him with a sincere heart will find Him.
Seek God,
DB
(Note: I am rather busy at the moment and will try to get back to answering you guys when it is reasonable to do so. I am currently doing a full time apprenticeship and studying a paper from university...busy, busy. Good to talk with you guys though)
You contradict yourself :)
ReplyDelete"Why is atheism non falsifiable? Well, for the same reasons as theism. Can it be shown that there is no God?
I would say no...therefore atheism is non falsifiable."
"However, I would like to share with guys that (Biblical) theism is not quite non falsifiable because God said that those who seek Him with a sincere heart will find Him."
Your second statement says that atheism is falsifiable. According to you if my beliefs are wrong all I need to do is seek God with a sincere heart thus falsifying my belief.
You are looking at it all the wrong way around.
Falsifiable doesn't mean that you can prove it's true and it doesn't mean that you can always prove it false either. It means that if it were false you could in principle demonstrate that.
I think you are looking at it all the wrong way around.
Oops, I suppose I contradicted myself...:) I'll fix it. (Thanks cuz for pointing that out)
ReplyDeleteThe seeking God bit I suppose isn't "scientific" but rather experiencial and sometimes scientific (physical miracles). I originally was talking about "science" in an absolute sense in using it to find truth.
"It means that if it were false you could in principle demonstrate that."
You cannot scientifically falsify "there is no God" therefore atheism is unscientific.
"I think you are looking at it all the wrong way around."
This statement however, I disagree with. I think people just don't like falling at their own arguments.
DB
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"You cannot scientifically falsify "there is no God" therefore atheism is unscientific."
ReplyDeleteSo you're saying that there is no evidence for God's existence?
(Oops, posted it under the wrong account.)
No,
ReplyDeleteI am saying that there is evidence to point toward God even though He is unseen. Just as you probably have evidence to point against God even though His non existence is unseen.
cheers,
DB
If there can be evidence for God's existence then that makes atheism falsifiable.
ReplyDeleteFalsifiable "Logically capable of being proven false"
If you really believe atheism is not falsifiable don't you think that all this effort trying to "logically" convince us that design requires a designed is wasted?
designer not designed sorry.
ReplyDeleteI just thought I add this for your benefit. Maybe you're getting falsifiability and verifiability mixed up. atheism* is falsifiable but it is not verifiable. There's no way to prove that there is in fact no God that makes atheism non-verifiable.
*Your version "There is no God" ie. strong atheism.
Who said atheism was scientific?
ReplyDelete'God' could easily falsify 'Atheism' anytime he wanted. The idea that Atheism isn't falsifiable is nonsense.
ReplyDeleteGod could at anytime give every single person the evidence they require to believe in him, if he wanted to.
Dear Da Bomb,
ReplyDeletePlease prepare a piece of sheet and write at least 1000 times:
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
I am quite serious.
When something has an effect on something else it is said to affect it. Not to effect it.
Thanks,
G.E.
G.E.
ReplyDeleteI was looking up the differences between the terms :) They are slight! But thanks anyway LOL.
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'""I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'""I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'""I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
"I should not write 'effect' when I mean 'affect'"
.... LOL
EPM,
ReplyDelete"Who said atheism was scientific?"
AAHHH so science has nothing to do with belief or no belief in God in an absolute way "testing with the five senses".
Then tell Dawkins (the atheist hero) that.
BathTub said,
"God could at anytime give every single person the evidence they require to believe in him, if he wanted to."
BathTub, He has given us enough evidence, or No Doubt and I would not believe :)
cantareus,
ReplyDeleteVerifiable means: "capable of verification; that can be proved to be true or accurate".
http://www.yourdictionary.com/verifiable
Falsifiable means: "Philos. designating or of a statement, theory, etc. that is so formulated as to permit empirical testing and, therefore, can be shown to be false"
http://www.yourdictionary.com/falsifiable
I can believe in God beyond a reasonable doubt by the effects (noun, did you see that G.E.! LOL) of Him around us.
But to scientifically show that He, Himself is real or not is not possible as we know it...He is Spirit.
As Lewis says: “Looking for God–or Heaven–by exploring space is like reading or seeing all Shakespeare’s plays in the hope that you will find Shakespeare as one of the characters…”
(Note: though God did become one of the characters, as Jesus :) but that was not the principle Lewis was pointing out)
Take the best conclusion with the evidence we have. There is no middle ground with God.
You are either for Him or against Him.
There may be strong atheists and weak atheists but they both believe the same thing.
cheers,
DB
Just saw this,
ReplyDelete"If you really believe atheism is not falsifiable don't you think that all this effort trying to "logically" convince us that design requires a designed is wasted?"
No, this is one of the many evidences that point toward the conclusion...God.
Thanks DB,
ReplyDelete:-)
DB,
ReplyDeleteYou are either for Him or against Him.
Sorry to having to point this out, but you cannot be "against" something that you do not believe to exist.
You can either believe it to exist or not. But be opposed to (against), well, nope. You can be against promoting a belief in something. But that is not necessary to be an atheist.
To truly be "against God" you would have to believe it to exist.
Do you see the problem?
G.E.
Da Bomb,
ReplyDeleteI'm saying that atheism is not a scientific position. A person might arrive at an atheistic viewpoint by way of scientific investigation...or not. It is a lack of theism (which is definately not scientific, but that does not de facto make atheism a scientific position (in my opinion).
As I've told you (a number of times) before, Dawkins does not speak for or on behalf of anyone but Dawkins. He is a scientist, so it's no wonder that science is a prominant factor in his worldview.
I do think you are confusing yourself with this whole thing. You can't say that atheism in non-falsifiable and then present evidence that you think falsifies atheism!
Cheers,
Wow, this is a great blog you have here - but why are the atheists so angry?
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how much the non-believers will hide behind science to defend their beliefs, but when they get called on it they retrat behind their empty philosophies.
I don't have the faith to be an atheists!
Keep up the good work brother.
Born a second time,
ReplyDeleteI am not angry. DB has basically just said all atheists are strong atheists or gnostic atheists. This is a straw man. The term atheist/theist deals with belief. While Gnostic/Agnostic deals with knowledge. I am a weak atheist or agnostic atheist. I don't believe there is a god but I do not claim to know that there isn't a god. I actually believe it is impossible to know or not know the existence of a god.
Beliefs are just ideas you hold. Knowledge is what can be studied and falsified. I make no claim to the knowledge of a god or gods.
Dear born a second time,
ReplyDeleteWho is %*^%$^&&$#%#@^W^#$@%%%$!!! angry!
G.E.
lol classic 'Oh no look at the angry atheist! Why won't they let me misrepresent them in peace!'
ReplyDeleteDa Bomb the complete absence of evidence that we have for a personal intervening God might be enough for some, but it's clearly not enough to all. My point was the this all powerful God could easily provide each individual person with the exact amount of evidence they each needed to believe in the correct religion.
BathTub,
ReplyDelete"My point was the this all powerful God could easily provide each individual person with the exact amount of evidence they each needed to believe in the correct religion".
If you keep looking sincerely, you will find Him...if you want to find Him. It's amazing how far some of us go to ignore something if we don't want it to be true.
Is your blog safe? It has a adult content warning on it?
DB
G.E.
ReplyDelete"Sorry to having to point this out, but you cannot be "against" something that you do not believe to exist."
Yes it may be true of other meaningless things (like tossing a coin), but with God it is different.
Imagine God as a general who is telling you to go to battle and you say you don't know if He is real?
Do you think the general will have gone away? Are you ACTING for or against the generals wishes?
cheers,
DB
Beamstalk,
ReplyDelete"Beliefs are just ideas you hold. Knowledge is what can be studied and falsified. I make no claim to the knowledge of a god or gods."
I make no claim to the non-existance of a Designer who cares about you. Beliefs are not just what you say but what you DO.
Walk the talk man.
DB
Yeah you keep ignoring my point that God could simply present each person with the appropriate amount of evidence they need to be convinced. Besides if you are not aware I grew up in the church for 20ish years I did plenty of searching.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a blog currently, only a livejournal which shouldn't have any warnings on it. Are you getting me confused with someone else?
EPM,
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to argue against different atheists with different views. so I try and take the most common thread.
DB
Da Bomb,
ReplyDeleteThis assumes that I can hear such general and I just pretend it does not exist. You know quite well that your God has to be taken out of faith. If a general existed, and I were deaf and blind. And the general asks me something and I do not obey, other soldiers cannot claim that I am "against" the general. All you could claim is that I can't hear and can't see the general.
So, I might be acting ignoring the general, but not against the general.
G.E.
I guess that puts your God into the meaningless list for an atheist.
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how far some of us go to ignore something if we don't want it to be true.
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing indeed. I would say that most creationists go lengths ignoring the reasons provided by atheists because they do not want to accept the possibility of not believing. The possibility that your belief is not evident whatsoever. I know. I was there once.
G.E.
Hey G.E.
ReplyDeleteBut what if all the fellow soldiers are telling you what a general is telling you to do yet you choose not to believe in Him :) Because you don't believe in Him does not mean there will not be consequences.
Belief is not just belief but action. Walk the talk.
It especially is interesting when what you believe..."so far no god" is also (by action) taken in faith as well. We both cannot "see" absolutely scientifically the origin of the universe but we both live our lives from different beliefs about the origin of our universe.
"I know. I was there once."
There are others who have an opposite story. Lewis says "Now that I am a Christian I do not have moods in which the whole thing looks very improbable: but when I was an atheist I had moods in which Christianity looked terribly probable."
J.R.R. Tolkien (who was catholic) apparently influenced his conversion.
cheers,
DB
Sorry BathTub,
ReplyDeleteI meant BeamStalk. :)
Apologies.
DB
DB,
ReplyDeleteWell, then here the metaphor breaks down. A general is plausible. Something that is reasonable to believe.
I do not think belief is necessarily action. As of Lewis, man, what can I tell you:
Now that I am an atheist I do not have moods in which the whole thing looks very improbable: but when I was a Christian I had moods in which Christianity looked terribly improbable.
I cannot even imagine what Lewis is saying as making any sense. Christians believe in a being that nobody can see. Nobody can have a conversation with, nobody can anything. You have to just believe it ... Nope, not making sense. That there is rather nothing such as God, that makes sense.
It is exactly like the emperor's new clothes. The equivalent by Lewis would be:
Now that I am a Cloth Seer I do not have moods in which the whole thing looks very improbable: but when I was an aclothist I had moods in which Cloth Seeing looked terribly probable.
G.E.
Da Bomb,
ReplyDeleteI have a problem. Suppose God appeared to me and told me:
Disobey this command!
What should I do? Should I obey or not? :-)
G.E.
I use "dirty words" ever now then, so I put the warning on there for people who are easily offended. The "dirty words" are rarely in my critiques though.
ReplyDeleteI also never said beliefs don't shape the person. I said they are just ideas. An idea can shape a person. Ideas very much shape a person.
ReplyDeleteLook at proposition 8 in California. People are keeping other people from marrying their loved ones and sharing the same benefits as everyone else, because of ideas. When I was a christian, I thought this type of thing was wrong. As a christian I thought, how can we judge someone else, it is not our place. We can only show others our love.
When something has an effect on something else it is said to affect it. Not to effect it.
ReplyDeleteI cannot help myself... GE is effecting change in DB's vocabulary.
--
Stan
Born A Second Time,
ReplyDelete"It's amazing how much the non-believers will hide behind science to defend their beliefs, but when they get called on it they retreat behind their empty philosophies."
My friend, I could not have said it better myself. May I add that they deny resources when you don't agree with them or claim that they are unreliable. They also use parts of a definition that agrees with their argument while ignoring the others. And of course my personal favorite, they begin to insult your culture or person when you claim their side is out and out wrong. When you call them on their prejudice, they actually appear to get offended.
A great example of this is Da Bomb's recent entry on the fine tuning of universe. Check it out, it's an enjoyable read and expose into the psyche of the atheist.
BTW, Daniel, I agree with "Born a second time". Keep it up, you're doing well.
Shalom Aleichem, My Brother
Sorry No Doubt,
ReplyDeleteYou got a bunch of guys who are used to front and direct arguing, and who have little if any patience with nonsense. We do that among ourselves. Once you get used to it you stop taking offense.
Also, see the other side of the story. You love attacking people who do not agree with you. When you get the same in return you act all surprised. What do you expect?
---
Oh, yes Born a Second Time, take a look at the "fine tuning" thread. It is lots of fun.
G.E.
G.E.
ReplyDelete"I do not think belief is necessarily action."
In this context I am talking about atheism vs Christian theism.
How is belief in this context not necessarily action?
You either believe/live/act/do/ in the present tense about God and His Word to us or you believe/act/live/do as if He is not real thus stating your own faith.
cheers,
DB
Hey Dan,
ReplyDeleteThanks again for your blog. The past two entries have inspired me to create another blog.
Perceptions From Beyond Time and Space
in addition to
Discussions From Beyond Time and Space.
I referenced your "Fine Tuning of the Universe" blogs as example in my first entry. Please look at it and tell me if you wish me to remove it.
Unfortunately, I don't have your email or I would have contacted you that way. Here is the link. Please check it out quickly so I can remove the reference if you so desire.
http://time-space-perceptions.blogspot.com/2009/07/atheism-act-of-faith.html
Thanks Again.
Meet you at the southern gate.
Keith
Keith,
ReplyDeleteIt is alright that you post the link. I agree with what you wrote...Christianity is based on faith WITH evidence not blind faith.
Baruch ata Keith!
V'Baruach Ha Shem!
See you at the gate :)
Dan
No Doubt,
ReplyDeleteCan you give an example of someone insulting your culture?
Thanks.