Atheist, are you one??

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

I If you know it and cannot base this knowledge on proof, then it isn't scientific anymore; it is your own belief.

This is not how evidence or proof in science works.

It does not require 100% proof of a negative because that it is impossible.
Just because I can't 100% prove the 'spaghetti monster' doesn't exist it doesn't mean there is any scientific evidence to base a rational belief of it's existence.

You can 'believe' in the 'Spaghetti Monster' if you want but rationally discussing it is impossible.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by vinceprince

No it's not a faith. We don't say 'A-Ghostism' or 'A-Yetiism' are faiths.

Hmmm. That's only a question of definition.

What is the difference between some sects and religions?
Ok, sects are not religions, but religions are sects. Isn't it?
But people believing in religions don't want to be called as sectarian.

So... believing in nothing is a kind of a faith.

We don't say A-Ghotishm, because people in the past created "Atheism".

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Mal Hombre

There are no rational arguments for the existence of Gods,Blind faith is irrational by definition.

I think I agree with that. But my caveat there is that our knowledge of this world is not by any means complete; there is an awful lot we simply do not know and many things we think we know will turn out to be mistaken. Also, though we have a lot of power in the earth and mostly use it to do harm, we do not control our world at all; nature is the controlling force and we are forced to live with whatever nature decides.

In the past, nature has brought down civilisations; for example a drought lasting many years destroyed the Old Egyptian Empire and environmental degredation played a major role in the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. It is not really irrational to be keenly aware that other forces control our world and that we ourselves do not; provided we are also aware that we have a duty to look after our world as well as we can, for our own sake now and for the sake of generations not yet born, who will inherit our mistakes.

In my own assessment, a degree of natural piety is a good thing because it works against the pride and arrogance of our natures and inhibits some of our worse behaviours. There is nothing like enough straightforward reverence for life and for our natural world in our society now; usually the most arrogant and selfish actors profess to be religious (but are in no true sense religious) but measure them by their deeds and their religion is not worth a carrot. Only too often, "rational" becomes an alibi for disrespecting the world we live in and acting greedily, with no regard for future consequences. One thinks of President Trump and his casual contempt for the environment; he of course says he is "proud to be a Christian" without even realising what a self-betraying oxymoron this statement is, or that saying it don't make it true.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by vinceprince

This is not how evidence or proof in science works.

It does not require 100% proof of a negative because that it is impossible.
Just because I can't 100% prove the 'spaghetti monster' doesn't exist it doesn't mean there is any scientific evidence to base a rational belief of it's existence.

You can 'believe' in the 'Spaghetti Monster' if you want but rationally discussing it is impossible.

Yeah right, and I suppose you'll dispute actual photographic evidence too



I was feeling cannelloni so I used my noodle and put some pasta on and this happened, luckily I didn't have farfalle I just had to put penne to paper about it

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by vinceprince

This is not how evidence or proof in science works.

It does not require 100% proof of a negative because that it is impossible.
Just because I can't 100% prove the 'spaghetti monster' doesn't exist it doesn't mean there is any scientific evidence to base a rational belief of it's existence.

You can 'believe' in the 'Spaghetti Monster' if you want but rationally discussing it is impossible.

I think you can build a strong case against the Spaghetti Monster; the physiology would be extremely difficult, and no one has ever taken a photograph. Likewise the Loch Ness Monster: the loch has been extensively surveyed and anything that big would have been detected by now. People still do believe in such things but the scientific evidence is strong enough against it to consider the case proven beyond reasonable doubt; not beyond any doubt whatsoever, of course. I don't think they exist; but I don't know for a fact that they definitely don't exist, I just strongly doubt that they do.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

Yeah right, and I suppose you'll dispute actual photographic evidence too



I was feeling cannelloni so I used my noodle and put some pasta on and this happened, luckily I didn't have farfalle I just had to put penne to paper about it

Bugger, you have just ruined my whole case.

[Mal Hombre]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

People still do believe in such things but the scientific evidence is strong enough against it to consider the case proven beyond reasonable doubt; not beyond any doubt whatsoever, of course. I don't think they exist; but I don't know for a fact that they definitely don't exist, I just strongly doubt that they do.

You won't believe in a monster in a loch without proof but You 'll take a god of infinite love presiding over a world of pain and death on faith ?

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Mal Hombre

You won't believe in a monster in a loch without proof but You 'll take a god of infinite love presiding over a world of pain and death on faith ?

I am not exactly sure that I know what God is like; I have certainly never met Him.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

I am not exactly sure that I know what God is like; I have certainly never met Him.

I am sure that God does not exist, I cannot prove it however but let's face it if God did exist he would need to take a good long look at himself before he dare judge anyone else.
The ultimate absentee landlord

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

I think you can build a strong case against the Spaghetti Monster; the physiology would be extremely difficult, and no one has ever taken a photograph

Despite this strong case against just needs the Spaghetti believers to politically seize the reins of power for it to become the established faith of a state or society. Then label the non-believers as A-Spaghetteists.