SugarMyChurro
Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 He does not state "there is no proof"--he states "there is...no great reward at the end of your days...." and presents it as "obvious fact." That is well removed from the indeterminate posture that is the hallmark of agnosticism. Fair enough. But like my Santa Claus analogy no one has stepped up and shown me their god; so while I can't prove the negative, the positive proof for the existence of God is also absent. Like Dawkins, I also see a kind of continuum of philosophical positions between agnosticism and atheism. Certainly there is more of a connection between these two idea than between agnosticism and faith. The connection is simply this: in the absence of any evidence in support of a specific idea of god there is no reason to believe in god. Am I therefore slipping away from agnosticism? Not really, as I am still open to proof about god. At the same time, there is no reason to ignore the pragmatic uses of empirical knowledge and the various successes of science. In fact, an open mind and a healthy skepticism are also earmarks of the scientific process. So, to be perfectly fair, I am an agnostic with atheistic leanings. As to the question of whether god exists, I simply say: show me. That seems fair to me too. ----- BTW, Rule claims to have some kind of non-empirical method to show spiritual truths, but nothing has been offered as of yet. I'm really not discounting experiences like his or that of LadyEllen, I am just acknowledging - as they also must acknowledge - that there is no way to communicate this knowledge such that it will be believed by anyone else because of the obvious lack of empirical evidence. That such experiences are probably biochemical occurrences in the brain or body is something that I think science is very close to showing is exactly the case, from a theoretical perspective. I once saw a TV program in which they mapped brain activities during religious experiences and found it very helpful. So I joke about this stuff, but I do respect that people are having some kind of meaningful experience - at least to them. If people share a feel good religious experience, it doesn't provide any truth value their to their shared beliefs, it is simply proof of a shared feel good experience - the thing itself, only the thing itself, and not also something else.
|