Yanks better convert to Islam, or bad things will happen (AlQaeda)

[Pekka]

This faith thing can be only claimed if you believe science to be religion, and then you'd have to have pretty good arguments on that one.

Believing in proven facts is hardly faith. I think the definiton of faith pretty much is believing into something that can't be proven. And basing your beliefs on what can be proven is not a faith. And this leaves you with all kinds of options open, it's dynamic, when some things that weren't proven yesterday can be proven today, well, that's just a new fact we have, there's no contradiction.

[Pekka]

YEs but it's a good assertion, as long as it can not be proven.

Atheism is not defined by not believing in God under any circumstance.. agnostic is pretty much undecided or what ever, accepts both possibilities, however, that does not exclude atheist from believing in God if it can be proven, scientifically.

[Winston]

Originally posted by Combat Ingrid
I understand your point and it does have some merit. However, just like science has not disproved of god, neither has it disproved of the boogeyman. As there is no proof whatsoever for any of them, the rational conclusion for me is to consider them both as non-existant. Of course, if anyone would provide strong evidence that any of them exists, I would be forced to reconsider my position. It really doesn't have anything to do with faith as far as I'm concerned.

That's where we disagree. I think it has everything to do with faith, and nothing whatsoever to do with reason, evidence, proof, rational conclusions et cetera.

To me, the existance or non-existance of God is not within the realm of earthly science at all. That is why I see a connection between the emotional basis for atheism and religion.

But if you like, you may continue to think that your atheist beliefs are rationally founded.

[BeBMan]

Of course, if we could scientifically explain God there wouldn't be religion anymore......

[Pekka]

"the existance or non-existance of God is not within the realm of earthly science at all."

Exactly.

"That is why I see a connection between the emotional basis for atheism and religion."

And you came to this conclusion how?

Like I said, atheism is not defined by not believing in God under any circumstance. If we can prove God exists, scientifically, and someone still refuses to believe in God, well that's faith based. But since we have no evidence... and you're right, it can't be proven scientifically, at least not today.

[Elok]

Pekka...who are you replying to, and about what?

Science says nothing whatsoever about God. The supernatural is outside its domain entirely. Science can no more determine whose religion is right than it can determine which flavor of ice cream is objectively the best, chocolate or vanilla. Claiming that any scientific theory or evidence--I guess evolution is the most commonly used for this--"proves" that there is no God would be asinine.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Pekka
Atheism is not defined by not believing in God under any circumstance

...Uh, yes it is. A- (negatory prefix) + thei- (God) + -ism (system of belief or ideals).

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by CyberShy
Atheism is religion as well btw. It has it's own rules (Live to the max, do you what yourself think is the best) and prophets (Darwin, Nietzsche)

Bull****

[Pekka]

Elok, No, I'm trying to say that believing in facts provided by science is not faith based, plus that not believing in God because it hasn't been proven is not a faith.

That is all. And we don't have to prove something doesn't exists to be able to escape the faith circle. Hey, I can claim anything I want. Just saying, that science is not a religion and basing your beliefs on science, even if it's really out of the realm of science and say if it can't be proven, I don't believe it.. this is not faith. This is just ignoring everything that is beyond science. That doesn't mean faith.

[Pekka]

"The opposite of theism, this broad definition encompasses both people who assert that there are no gods and those who make no claim about whether gods exist or not. Narrower definitions of atheism typically include only those who assert the nonexistence of gods, excluding non-believing agnostics and other non-theists."

Wikipedia says you are wrong

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by CyberShy
budhism has no gods, neither has taoism or confucianism.

They do, however, express a belief in the supernatural.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Elok
Pekka...who are you replying to, and about what?

Science says nothing whatsoever about God. The supernatural is outside its domain entirely. Science can no more determine whose religion is right than it can determine which flavor of ice cream is objectively the best, chocolate or vanilla. Claiming that any scientific theory or evidence--I guess evolution is the most commonly used for this--"proves" that there is no God would be asinine.

Agreed, science can't prove/disprove God - that'swhy it's a matter of belief. But since science is the usual way we prove stuff the idea that stuff not supported by scientific evidence is not existent is - even when not proven - to me a rational thing, IMO more rational than to assume a higher being that's per se beyond the realm of science.

[Whoha]

Originally posted by ajbera
1) F*ck conversion. I'd rather pay the tax imposed on non-Muslims.

the taxation and legal system are designed to squeeze non-muslims out of existence.

[Elok]

No, it doesn't. Look at the latter half of what you quoted. The part about "only those who assert the nonexistence of gods." I'm pretty sure that's what we're all talking about when we discuss atheism. People who say nothing about it one way or another are classified as "agnostics" by me and most other people I know.

And if you're asserting the nonexistence of things "beyond science," you are NOT ignoring them, but making claims about them. Even if those claims are merely that they do not exist, you are still making a statement not based on empirical evidence.

[chequita guevara]

Of course, the reason why science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God is because the theists defined God outside the realm of reality. That way their claims can never be disproven.