RE: Atheism as the null hypothesis.
March 29, 2016 at 8:07 am
(This post was last modified: March 29, 2016 at 8:08 am by robvalue.)
Yes, I agree. It's the default position, that any claim should not initially be believed. It's the correct application of scepticism, hence atheism.
It's true that a good theist scientist puts their theistic beliefs to one side. Those that don't end up wasting time trying to force round blocks through square holes, or using questionable methods to try and force results (as we've seen on this forum several times). Either way, their work will fall down under proper peer review.
It almost seems like an admission that theistic beliefs are not to do with reality. And of course, they are not. If they were, they should survive scientific inquiry. It's more akin to a "favourite colour", in that it has no application.
It's true that a good theist scientist puts their theistic beliefs to one side. Those that don't end up wasting time trying to force round blocks through square holes, or using questionable methods to try and force results (as we've seen on this forum several times). Either way, their work will fall down under proper peer review.
It almost seems like an admission that theistic beliefs are not to do with reality. And of course, they are not. If they were, they should survive scientific inquiry. It's more akin to a "favourite colour", in that it has no application.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum