One thing I've changed my mind about is this.https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1076418253398847488 …
-
Show this thread
-
Using religious mental models when doing science is indeed incompatible with doing science but a scientist can entertain the two modes of thought concurrently. The human mind is not built for scientific reasoning intuitively, as Robert Mccauley reminds us.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
In fact, my disagreement might come from a deeper disagreement with how much control we have over our own beliefs. My atheism didn't come from any rational analysis of the truth of religion, or not entirely, just as most people didn't reason into being religious.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Also, isn't focusing on the dichotomy between science and religion so last decade? Seems to me that one has been played out to death. The current challenges facing proper scientific development are either internal to science itself or are coming from seemingly secular entities
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Either way, New Atheism is boring and non-religious people should spend more time learning about why people hold seemingly irrational beliefs. It's a fascinating topic.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread
I recommend either @MndsMkSocieties's Religion Explained or Robert Mccauley's Why Religion is Natural and Science is Not, the best book I read this yearhttps://www.amazon.com/Why-Religion-Natural-Science-Not/dp/0199341540/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1526416940&sr=8-1&keywords=why+religion+is+natural …
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.