Re: Paper+Exercises+Naming Issue

From: Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 16:03:33 -0800

Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le Jeudi 5 Janvier 2006 00:19, vous avez écrit :
>
>>Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Le Mercredi 4 Janvier 2006 19:21, Brent Meeker a écrit :
>>>
>>>>Theism is the belief that the world was created by a single omnipotent,
>>>>superhuman agent who cares about human behavoir and intervenes in worldly
>>>>events.
>>>>
>>>>Is that your theory??
>>>>
>>>>Brent Meeker
>>>>Atheism is not a religion, just as a vacant lot is not a type of
>>>>building, and health is not a form of sickness. Atheism is not a
>>>>religion.
>>>> --- Jim Heldberg, San Francisco Atheist Coordinator
>>>
>>>Atheïsm is a religion as I would say any metaphysical theories... (which
>>>are only set of beliefs... if not they are falsifiable and enter the
>>>realm of "physical" theories/science.
>>>
>>>Atheism is not science in that it is not falsifiable... Atheïsm is
>>>composed of dogma "negation of the existence of any god/suprem being" and
>>>is a set of beliefs and as such fit well in the religion category.
>>
>>That's your interpretation of atheism. Mine is simply a failure to believe
>>in the God of theism - which I think is different that the "negation of the
>>existence..." In any case atheism is certainly falsifiable - as soon as
>>God or God(s) appear I'll cease to be an atheist.
>>
>
>
> Then if it's the case.. religions are falsifiable too ;)

Yes, I think some religions are falsifiable. Some depend on logical
contradictions, e.g. God is perfectly just and perfectly merciful or God is all
loving and sends people to hell. Others are falsifiable only in the scientific
sense that observation provides no evidence for them and some evidence against
them. Some religions, like deism, I'd say are not falsifiable.

>but if you see god,
> before converting yourself to a religion, go see a psychiatrist (no offense
> here ;)

Why believe *before* the evidence?

Brent Meeker
"Though the chain of arguments . . . were ever so logical, there
must arise a strong suspicion, if not an absolute assurance, that it
has carried us quite beyond the reach of our faculties, when it leads
to conclusions so extraordinary, and so remote from common life and
experience. We are got into fairy land, long ere we have reached the
last steps of our theory; and there we have no reason to trust our
common methods of argument, or to think that our usual analogies and
probabilities have any authority. Our line is too short to fathom
such abysses."
       ---- David Hume
Received on Wed Jan 04 2006 - 19:05:04 PST