I notice this a lot. Seems you have to have a PhD in theology to argue against existence of God or criticise religion but anyone can say God does exist and that religion is great. Society respects the right to speak positively of faith much more than the right to speak negatively
-
-
Show this thread
-
For example, I have seen many people complain that atheists should just leave religious people alone when they write books about God not existing but almost no-one suggesting religious people should just leave atheists alone when they write books which assume he does exist.
Show this thread -
When religious people speak publicly abt God existing, this is just expression of views. When non-religious ppl speak publicly abt God not existing, this is an attack on religious people. Forcing your views on them! This happened so often, I felt the need to write this:pic.twitter.com/p55dvloK0z
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
PS - you can't really look at real (non-crank) relgious claims with science. They're what mathematicians would describe as orthogonal (independent).
-
Yes, you can. The claim that one can only look at them in the way they've always been looked at - through philosophy and theology - does not need to be respected. Dawkins addresses this in intro of TGD. I addressed it here:https://areomagazine.com/2017/05/15/where-now-for-new-atheists/ …
-
you mean if you define things scientifically, wow, you can address anything scientifically, wowee. wowzers. holy cow, stop the presses, the atheists have done it again. how did they get so smart these guys.
-
I don't know what that means. I know we don't always have to look at God according to theological and philosophical assumptions. Don't worry. There are still plenty of books that do if that's all you want. Centuries of them.
-
I think we'll end up disagreeing here. The ultimate tool of science generally is math proof. There is no proof that God exists, neither that He doesn't. Less strongly, evidence, but both sides look at the same facts as see them as evidence for opposite conclusions.
-
Well, no, proving a negative is impossible. That's why we wait for evidence before considering something a serious proposition.
-
That's a myth. Math, for example, abounds in negative proofs. One can prove that 1.0 has no immediately adjacent real number in a few seconds. Also possible in physics, ...
-
How? By showing something positive? How do you show that a being with no real description or location does not exist? You can't. There could be mermaids in some part of the universe. We can't prove there aren't.
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Right, he can talk. But he's not exactly the same as Joe the plumber.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.