RE: Argument against atheism
December 23, 2011 at 9:27 pm
(This post was last modified: December 23, 2011 at 9:30 pm by Perhaps.)
(December 23, 2011 at 9:19 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I cant make this any more plain to you. The things that I call facts are based on the production of results, not axioms or assumptions.
You're again trying to smuggle "truth" into science. I've already explained why this is inappropriate. You want to make it so because otherwise what is largely non-cognitive shit becomes irrelevant non-cognitive shit.
Speaking of perspective, nueroscience has done more to explain our perspective in the last fifty years than philosophy accomplished in hundreds of thousands......I hope you aren't referring to anything we've discussed here as "deep thought"...fuzzy thought maybe, deep thought...no.
Nothing you said is true or even exists if a.) You don't exist. and b.) Reason is not the source of truth.
Assumption is the root of everything. There is nothing objective, nothing true. We simply assume. Once this base assumption is made then we can 'prove' 'truths' to ourselves by means of reason and science. This does nothing but further validate these original assumptions as we can understand them.
Science does not exist outside of our conscious perception. Therefore, nothing science supports through verified evidence is true outside of our conscious perception. There are limits, regardless of what science says. Arrogance is an inherent part of human nature, humility must be realized.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
