I've been wondering (I don't want to read the whole thing) if at any point in this thread it was already pointed out that religion itself is a fact, if the OP meant "belief in gods" is a hypothesis, and finally, if anyone mentioned that, technically speaking, a hypothesis has to be falsifiable?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Religion is a hypothesis.
- Thread starter walter4
- Start date
And so because you do not have sufficient knowledge to understand the order that you perceive, you assume, with certainty, the existence of a god? What is the rationale for taking the bigger of the two leaps? If this alleged god is assumed to be beyond mere human comprehension, then who are you to form any steadfast beliefs about this alleged god, including its alleged existence? By definition, isn't it entirely beyond your capability to even toy with such notions?Quote from jficquette:
Just my opinion based on how much order exists in our Universe. I think the odds are too great for it not to be a creating orgnaizing force out there.
Evolution is the result of how this creating force operates.
Creator isn't a personality and is not the God of the Bible. God of the Bible is given human faults and emotions.
Quote from OPTIONAL777:
"...others get by on hallucinogens"
A self referral statement?
And you "know" this how?
By definition...
"you know" belief in the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is not blind faith, it's the fruit of pragmatism bred & refined over century's of experience, trial and error. you know.. :/
I understand you limit what you think you know to the senses, but it is absurd to do so because ideas and mental faculties of logic and reason influence the tools of physical perception...
No need to go all caps, no need to scream...unless you can't be calm and reasonable.
Science simply would not advance without the non physical field of the mind, yet this very field which is the real cornerstone of all scientific advancements exists independent of the physical...so why would a thinking person build their house out of the straw of the 5 senses alone?
No need to go all caps, no need to scream...unless you can't be calm and reasonable.
Science simply would not advance without the non physical field of the mind, yet this very field which is the real cornerstone of all scientific advancements exists independent of the physical...so why would a thinking person build their house out of the straw of the 5 senses alone?
Quote from killthesunshine:
"you know" belief in the utility of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is not blind faith, it's the fruit of pragmatism bred & refined over century's of experience, trial and error. you know.. :/
Don't find myself in corners, once again you just be speaking from your own personal experience (like the corner you have put yourself in now beginning with the red herring fallacy) and are projecting onto others...
Quote from Gabfly1:
Yes, I would imagine that you dislike those corners since you so often find yourself there.