Castanet

The atheist's lack of belief in gods is a belief in itself, as opposed to the agnostic, who is content with uncertainty. New atheists, such as Dennett, Dawkins, and Harris go one step further and "believe" anything beyond science is not real, suggested by their writings, although sometimes they say otherwise. That's the type portrayed in the picture showing materialism.

Sneaksuit wrote:But they are affected by their belief in atheism.

How can you be affected by a non-belief? What are the affects?

Sneaksuit wrote:The atheist's lack of belief in gods is a belief in itself, as opposed to the agnostic, who is content with uncertainty. New atheists, such as Dennett, Dawkins, and Harris go one step further and "believe" anything beyond science is not real, suggested by their writings, although sometimes they say otherwise. That's the type portrayed in the picture showing materialism.

Science is a religion to many. Science can be just as dogmatic as any religion.

Sneaksuit wrote:The atheist's lack of belief in gods is a belief in itself, as opposed to the agnostic, who is content with uncertainty. New atheists, such as Dennett, Dawkins, and Harris go one step further and "believe" anything beyond science is not real, suggested by their writings, although sometimes they say otherwise. That's the type portrayed in the picture showing materialism.

It's not just believe in one thing or believe in another. We do have facts and you can look at them and come to a methodical, logical conclusion that there are no deities. It is a lack of belief based on a lack of evidence.

jennylives wrote: We do have facts and you can look at them and come to a methodical, logical conclusion that there are no deities. It is a lack of belief based on a lack of evidence.

Then you would believe in scientism. As the name implies, it is the idea that science represents the only path to discovering the truth about reality. The philosophy of scientism is old and many scientists don't even believe it as truth because there are many things that science cannot explain. Further, just as theology cannot prove the existence of God, science cannot prove the non-existence of God.

There are many things science can't explain yet. As we discover new things it opens new questions. That is the nature of discovery. There is no end to knowledge, just more to learn. Science is the method we use to deduce what is fact and what is fiction. It is how we determine what we believe and what we know.

...yet scientists sometimes can't agree on simplest things - kinda like religious folks.

jennylives wrote:There are many things science can't explain yet.... Science is the method we use to deduce what is fact and what is fiction. It is how we determine what we believe and what we know.

Not true. You have a gross overconfidence and mis-understanding of science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

jennylives wrote:There are many things science can't explain yet. As we discover new things it opens new questions. That is the nature of discovery. There is no end to knowledge, just more to learn. Science is the method we use to deduce what is fact and what is fiction. It is how we determine what we believe and what we know.

Everything we know as individuals comes from personal experience. Accepting what scientists say without personally proving it for ourselves is not much more than what the religious do. Everything we read written by someone else is just conjecture and their opinion. Belief is the blind acceptance of what someone else said. Knowing is actually having personally experienced it.

cliffy1 wrote: Everything we read written by someone else is just conjecture and their opinion. Belief is the blind acceptance of what someone else said. Knowing is actually having personally experienced it.

So, I only believe in WW2, and don't actually know it took place?

Captain Awesome wrote:...yet scientists sometimes can't agree on simplest things - kinda like religious folks.

What simple things?

Sneaksuit wrote:
Not true. You have a gross overconfidence and mis-understanding of science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

Philosophy asks why, science asks how.

Although asking if philosophy is a science is a whole new can of worms.

jennylives wrote:What simple things?

Like evolution. Or global warming.

I would hardly consider those cases worthy of calling them something science doesn't agree upon. Especially evolution, we have observed it. It's how we have flu shots.

And to tie it back in the with topic, these are reasons why people are increasingly becoming secular. Science is filling in the gaps we used to hand over to god.