/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2359136

i`ve heard about that book it is honored by many people with all different interpretations on the subject so i guess it`s a neutral, impartial book. that leaves room for uncertaintys.

>>2321222

Someone can decide to rely on (belief in); culture, tradition, other people`s accounts, it`s own feeling, it`s own experience, extreme-scepticism, sceince, etc etc...
All of these aspects are reasonable things to rely on depending on your (philosophical) view on life.

People can see one or a combination of these aspects as fundemental and therefor must belief in a god or not, in order to fallow his/her own logic.

And this precisely why atheism is a belief rather than a lack of belief.
It is not the question of God existing or not which they lack belief in, it is the reasons for God existing or not which they believe in.

Note that being religious is just as reasonable as atheism.

>>2321222

Someone can decide to rely on (belief in); culture, tradition, other people`s accounts, it`s own feeling, it`s own experience, extreme-scepticism, sceince, etc etc...
All of these aspects are reasonable things to rely on depending on your (philosophical) view on life.

People can see one or a combination of these aspects as fundemental and therefor must belief in a god or not, in order to fallow his/her own logic.

And this precisely why atheism is a belief rather than a lack of belief.
It is not the question of God existing or not which they lack belief in, it is the reasons for God existing or not which they believe in.

Note that being religious is just as reasonable as atheism.

>>2255195

>is because the conception of atheism you're promoting is easier to argue against

your right, but that doesn`t stop me form doing it to be honest

>>2241726

Hey hey let`s have a little respect here.
Can`t you see he/she is a pagan.
Pagans are among the most special people i`ve met.

Just treat them with respect and try to understand thier metaphorical statements.

>>2221676
A dictionary will tell how the word soul is commonly used and what people exacly mean when referring to it.
We see the word has many meanings.
The idea of a soul is deeply rooted in society becaus it is a fundemantal part of christianity, judaism and islam.

I like this defenition most:

soul (s??l)
1. the spirit or immaterial part of man

So whenever i use the word soul on /sci/ i mean:
>soul = immaterial part of a human/ other being.

Not claiming a soul exactly as discribed in the bible though.

2/3
For expamle it is not "christianity" that holded back sceintific progression in the middle ages, it`s the people who were holding back sceintific progression at that time who holded back sceintific progression, becouse of thier INDIVIDUAL interpretation of christianity.
Just like an atheist can have social-darwinism and determinism as his fulfilling of atheism.

It`s pretty coward from Dawkins and other atheists to keep picking on orthodox religious, these people often lead a romantic life and are easy targets for the well prepared atheist "intellectuals".
I consider picking easy targets over equal opponents coward.
Why keep bashing those poor people who have respectable moral values.
I would rather like to see them arguing with religious people who are critical-thinking themselves, like those religious sceintists who work at CERN or "theist" philosophers/nihilists.

>>1613172
>the universe being fractal and a butterfly fluttering it's wings can cause a hurricane on the other side of the world?

I know a person with exactly that worldview and he is referring to the butterfly effect and fractals all the time...

To be honest it reminds me of myself a few years ago, when i believed in determinism (now christian).

I my point of view, determinists have an awfull lot to learn, (Not because they lack common sense/are stupid. But because thier personal character causes them to think deeply more often than others.).

A fractal is just an algorithm that encodes/transforms a set of numbers.
how about adding 1 to a number, this can also be done for eternity, and it can be made visual. So basicly adding 1 is equally special and mysterious as the fractal algorithm.

I believe a particular event is more then just a reaction of opposite actions. So it doesn`t meen as much to me as it does for a determinist.

>>1506824

>Individuals who were indoctrinated into believing in that religion.

wiki: indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.
We already live in a society of free speech. as i mentioned befor no one is forced to fallow christian way of thinking. At least not by religion.

I personally think most people fallow a religion because they are inspired by other people(teatcher,family member etc..), "oh what an inspiring person i know he has thought a lot and is smarter and wiser than me, and he still believes. So who am i think i know better and become atheist." (i see nothing wrong with trusting other peoples ideas, who are honest and this is way different from indoctrination).

Moot please try out an artificial intelligence board.
It will be awsome.

>>1359464

>>implying believing in determinism == atheism
>>and believing particles do alter for unknown reason form wave form to a particle form (strong evidence for this) == being religious

Besides that;
Believing appears to be part of human`s destiny. So why swim against the tie, and fallow a verry unlikely logic.

>>1114002

Good to see there are still some normal thinking people here.

Who have let thier self-image of; "i am a smart person, so i must be an atheist" thoughts behind long time ago.

What if a myth can be usefully applied in practice. you don`t know how and why, but there seems to be something usefull (and maybe true) about the myth.

Believing appairs to be the destiny of a human, so why swim against the tie and fallow a verry unlikely logic.

- free will
- why there is good/bad
- gives people peace
sceince can not say anything about the subjects abouve.
Only a theorie which explains all these things abouve can replace the idea of a god.

ps. anyone who still thinks determinism is a reasonable worldview (a lot here) probebly hasnt read a sceintific article scince the early 80`s.
These people should catch up with quantum knowledge a bit,... watch "Dr Quantum - Double Slit Experiment" on youtube.

>>947285
>That just opens more problems about god.
nop no problems at all, only benefits.

What if a myth can be usefully applied in practice?
You have no idea why and how it is a good explanation. But there seems to be something usefull (and maybe true) about the myth.

--------------
- Why have peace?
- explain good/bad
- free will

Sceince has no explanation for these things. You can look for an alternative ideas to fill in this emptyness. The ancient yet effective idea of a god explains a lot.
Only a theorie wich is similar usefull, and explains all subjects above can replace the idea of a god.

Ps. note that believing has an evolutionary benefit (hopefully atheism will extinguish).