An Open Letter To Atheists, etc...

[wesmorris]

Not regarding athiesm, but just "beingism"... I submit that indeed whether or not you recognize it.. most people have "faith in reason" (logic becomes implicit).

 

[Abdiel]

Perhaps my favorite part of sciforums.com is the religion section, I still come to view and post even though we shall only agree to not agree with each other.

I consider myself a Christian and as such must argue against "crazy's" way of, what, defending our faith? This world has seen much bloodshed, most of it, as the facts confess from religious hands. Was it not Charlemange himself who executed 6,000 Norsemen in one day for not converting to Christianity? Was it not Muslim invaders who forced those they conquered to their own religious views? This can not be debated but what can be debated is the way in which people of any religion live together and argue together.

Even though in the end I think I will not be successful in converting anyone of any backround to my own personal views it doesn't justify degrading their own views. In this debate which I have just read it was not any religion that was at fault but the way in which certain opinions were expressed which must be addressed. If you wish to destroy or critisise such viewpoints in such a vile manner I pray thee do not do it in the name of Christ for it is certainly not what He would have wished for.

 

[MarcAC]

Originally posted by Cris
Marcac,
No that is incorrect.

I totally disagree. Why?

Faith is a basis for belief where evidence is absent.

Basis for belief, agreed. However, you need faith to accept the evidence as such (it's validity). How do you ascertain that this evidence is valid? Through your reasoning right (well logic for you - the logic king - or queen)?

One can always insist that they will not believe anything unless there is evidence. I.e. a belief based on faith is irrational, whereas a belief based on evidence is rational.

Fully Agree. But then why would you trust your rationale?

Rationality is inherent from logic where any valid premise has a factual basis.

Agreed, as long as you accept that your 'facts' may have no basis in truth. Or do you have faith that your 'logic-facts' are true?

If facts are absent then the belief will be irrational.

Agreed , irrational based on the 'facts' that are currently available, granted these facts could be/come fiction.

Hence faith based beliefs are irrational.

And all our beliefs are thus irrational.

One can simply always base their beliefs on rational ideas and hence faith is never needed.

You think so? I would think you need to have some degree of faith in your method or rationale.

If you mean opposite, e.g. faith versus no faith, then yes that is true.

Well, based on your idea of the manifestations of faith and 'no faith', I can see why you would say 'yes that is true'. However, alter-ego was used as a personification (type of analogy). You know, just like you have people with multiple personalities. It's the saaame person - just manifesting him/herself in a different manner? Yeah, like that. The interesting part is that that person fools him/herself into thinking he's someone else, but he doesn't fool the observer - think about that.

You seem to be confused about the meaning of the word faith.

I'm not.

What you are saying here is ‘I believe in reason and logic because there is no evidence that reason and logic are true’. This is what it would mean to claim a faith in reason and logic.

Actually, the acceptance of the evidence is a product of the stated 'reason and logic'. You almost got it.

Clearly the statement is untrue since there is abundant evidence that reason and logic do result in truthful conclusions.

With faith comes evidence, for you there is no evidence without faith in it's validity and the method by which it was identified as evidence and so on.

The basis for my belief in reason and logic is that there is overwhelming evidence that they have proved themselves capable of showing truth. I.e. faith plays no role in my belief.

You sure? What do you refer to as 'truth'? Care to provide an example? Here you seem to be doing exactly what I stated previously. How quickly we forget, we already went through this episode on the "God Does Exist" thread. Read the Dinosaur's post - he might make it a bit clearer.

 

[Mystech]

Originally posted by MarcAC
All need faith to believe in anything. Atheism is just the christian 'alter-ego'. Faith in reason and logic: then contradicting themselves through their reasoning saying they have no faith.

Logic and reasoning need no faith, that's what makes them so great, you can actually know something, not just feel that it could be and hope like hell that you're right Faith has no place in logic, as it is the very definition of illogic.

 

[wesmorris]

Originally posted by Mystech
Logic and reasoning need no faith, that's what makes them so great, you can actually know something, not just feel that it could be and hope like hell that you're right Faith has no place in logic, as it is the very definition of illogic.

The question becomes "why is logic valid?", doesn't it? I mean, you say 1 + 1 = 2 because it makes sense logically.. but who says that's the case? Who's to say it's not a trick? Blah blah.

IMO at that point, the sensible route to out is "faith".

 

[Mystech]

Basis for belief, agreed. However, you need faith to accept the evidence as such (it's validity). How do you ascertain that this evidence is valid? Through your reasoning right

why would you trust your rationale?

"Man can not have knowledge" MarcAC crys from the mountaintop, blind to the fact that he has just declaired knowledge.

Keep on fighting the good fight you blind fool.

 

[Mystech]

Originally posted by wesmorris
The question becomes "why is logic valid?", doesn't it? I mean, you say 1 + 1 = 2 because it makes sense logically.. but who says that's the case? Who's to say it's not a trick? Blah blah.

Wes in such an instance, reality is the referee. You've gotten too accustomed to thinking of concrete facts as being abstract. The fact is that it's true because it works. Go take yourself one of anything and then one more of that same thing, and I assure you that every time without fail, you will have two.

 

[wesmorris]

Originally posted by Mystech
Wes in such an instance, reality is the referee.

I'm speaking to the context of the argument... The argument is abstract..

Originally posted by Mystech

Go take yourself one of anything and then one more of that same thing, and I assure you that every time without fail, you will have two.

You cannot say with 100% confidence that you will always get the same results. I know it's anal.. but you know how that's how the argument works. *shrug*

And really.. how do you know you're not dreaming? I mean, sure.. "what's the difference" I agree 100%. I'm with you really.. but at the core.. well.. the core is about faith. The statement of faith is basically saying "what's the difference?". That's my point.

 

[Dinosaur]

Mystech: You (we) should know that neither logic nor evidence belong in the religion forum.

 

[wesmorris]

Originally posted by Dinosaur
Mystech: You (we) should know that neither logic nor evidence belong in the religion forum.

In this case I think it's good to put things where they don't belong.

 

[MarcAC]

Originally posted by Mystech
"Man can not have knowledge" MarcAC crys from the mountaintop, blind to the fact that he has just declaired knowledge.

Keep on fighting the good fight you blind fool.

One of the main problems on this site is that most people can't read properly - thus there is always miscommunication. Where did I state anything such as "Man can not have knowledge"? I'd rather be blind than be seeing things that aren't there.

Thanks for the encouragment though - I will keep on fighting the good fight.

 

[stu43t]

Originally posted by crazydanny
Okay, I have been reading these posts for some weeks now, and I've come to some conclusions. You probably won't like or agree with them, and I really don't care.

Atheists are cowards and liars

I bet there are many Christians that are cowards and liars, it doesn't make them bad Christians though. Christians are Christians because they are far from perfect

If you are a true Christian then shouldn't you forgive people even though you don't like them. And as for judging others, hmmm didn't Jesus mention something about a log.

Anyway if you find it too much to read other views, stop reading them and study more Bible. I'm not being facetious, read the Bible and you will find your answers there.

 

[Siddhartha]

"Crazy" Danny appears to have left. However, being an atheist myself (specifically a Buddhist), I am willing to answer any and every accusation he may lay at me. If he'd grace us with his presence, I'm sure it would prove interesting.