(June 16, 2009 at 7:41 am)fr0d0 Wrote:(June 16, 2009 at 4:39 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: OK .. explain how someone coming from an entirely different POV (such as Buddhism) can be considered as having the same philosophy as me.
Firstly, I don't understand Buddhism (much beyond the very basic). Secondly, did I say that or did you? (just asking). The Buddhists philosophical stance is one of no God, but a spiritual reality.. right? The difference isn't as clear as between theist and atheist - these are bare assertions, whereas Buddhism is a specific set of assertions much like Christianity is. Science isn't a specific set of philosophical assertions. As Richard Dawkins says, to science, theology isn't a subject.
First does not knowing something actually mean anything? I don't think you are ignorant but the remark seems to demonstrate ignorance. I suppose it depends on whether you accept atheism simply means you don't believe in god or not but if you accept that then Buddhism (which I am told holds there is no god, I don't know much about it either) is atheistic. Like the Greeks, I would (and have as you know from my opening debate post) argue that inductive reasoning (which is what science is) is the only truly valid form of philosophy in a real, knowledge acquisition sense. In one sense I suppose theology isn't a subject in the same way that geography isn't really a subject but I would say a "subject" is an area of study defined by people and in that sense it is.
(June 16, 2009 at 7:41 am)fr0d0 Wrote:(June 16, 2009 at 4:39 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: I think it's more than simply splitting hairs because it's wrong ... you see what you and Dagda don't seem to get is that if the scientific evidence indicated the existence of a god I would become a theist (granted I would not, probably could not, worship but I would believe).
Scientific proof of God is theoretically impossible, so that's horribly wrong. As above, I need to be convinced that Science is a philosophical stance. At present I just don't see it (see reasons above).
For reasons already given (primarily because in order to affect the world something, an effect, must happen and any effect will have measurable parameters) I do not accept that reasoning as valid. It's worth noting that a scientific theory represents the highest possible explanation available to science and in no way does referring to your ideas as "theoretical" grant them anything even approaching that level of explanation.
(June 16, 2009 at 7:41 am)fr0d0 Wrote:(June 16, 2009 at 4:39 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: I don't agree because, as I've said before, both atheism and theism are labels ... specific philosophies lead people to atheism (science, Buddhism even communism maybe) and specific philosophies lead people to theism (Christianity, Islam, Judaism). I'm genuinely surprised that you cannot see the difference ... I mean it's not even like I insist theism is (of itself) a philosophy.Well that seems very weird to me that you can understand/ claim that science is a philosophy along with Buddhism and Christianity.
I just did a quick google and the answers.com dictionary definition of 'philosophy' states:
"Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods."
What do you think?
Here's one I prepared earlier:
Philosophy seems to have (as is usual within the English language) a correct meaning and a number of common usage meanings but, thanks to Asimov (who was one of those dratted Doctor's of Philosophy as you probably know) and his "New Guide to Science", it appears that it derives from the ancient Greeks. Asimov devotes some space to philosophy where he referred to the Greek investigations of the universe and that they called (and I quote) 'their new manner of studying the universe [i]philosophia ("philosophy"), meaning "love of knowledge" or, in free translation, "the desire to know"'(page 8). I would argue that it is because current day philosophers seem to provide little or no direct value to the real world that much of the philosophy bandied about today is little more than academic psychobabble. The true philosophers are scientists. [/i]
That's a bit harsh (strict) in this context so I guess I would say a philosophy (in a more general sense) is something that guides your life, affects the way you think and evaluate things ... for me that is science and it is the science that has led me to atheism.
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator