Hey all,
If I may inject my own opinion, for what little it is worth. I can't differentiate 'evidence' from 'non-evidence'. I see repetition of the concept that atheism is based on evidence, and theism is based on a distortion, misunderstanding or lack of evidence. But please explain, what is evidence?
I see that our whole reality is very personal. Our minds and senses and cognition cannot be fully trusted to show us things as they really and truly are, in an absolute sense. So all of the evidence that the fundy holds true literally is 'true' in their personal reality. And the evidence that an atheist holds to be 'true' could also be considered to be only really true in their reality. But the actual truth, call it the 3rd reality in this though-experiment, is separate from the other two personal realities. Disconnected at best, and unknowable at worst. I call it factual exactitude. What really happened/is happening. But I don't fool myself into thinking I am very close to understanding this real world. My mind and body can or will not do such.
We are all doing our best to conform to or at least acknowledge reality, but we over-extend ourselves in saying we know truth, one way or the other.
I think to say "I know there is no God" is as foolish as "I know there is God". In fact, they are much the same thought. So only to add my log on the fire, I see atheism as a disbelief in gods, or a believing that there is no gods. To make a claim to any fundamental truth outside of your own reality is disingenuous.
This is only what I think, and I might well be wrong.
Thank you for your time,
"Do you believe in rock and roll, can music save your mortal soul?"
-Pip
If I may inject my own opinion, for what little it is worth. I can't differentiate 'evidence' from 'non-evidence'. I see repetition of the concept that atheism is based on evidence, and theism is based on a distortion, misunderstanding or lack of evidence. But please explain, what is evidence?
I see that our whole reality is very personal. Our minds and senses and cognition cannot be fully trusted to show us things as they really and truly are, in an absolute sense. So all of the evidence that the fundy holds true literally is 'true' in their personal reality. And the evidence that an atheist holds to be 'true' could also be considered to be only really true in their reality. But the actual truth, call it the 3rd reality in this though-experiment, is separate from the other two personal realities. Disconnected at best, and unknowable at worst. I call it factual exactitude. What really happened/is happening. But I don't fool myself into thinking I am very close to understanding this real world. My mind and body can or will not do such.
We are all doing our best to conform to or at least acknowledge reality, but we over-extend ourselves in saying we know truth, one way or the other.
I think to say "I know there is no God" is as foolish as "I know there is God". In fact, they are much the same thought. So only to add my log on the fire, I see atheism as a disbelief in gods, or a believing that there is no gods. To make a claim to any fundamental truth outside of your own reality is disingenuous.
This is only what I think, and I might well be wrong.
Thank you for your time,
"Do you believe in rock and roll, can music save your mortal soul?"
-Pip
