A New Way of Looking at Atheism..

[a moment]

However, there is quite a serious mistake in the premise of this argument. You assume that all atheists are atheists because there is no scientific evidence for god. That is invalid.

That is what I hear and read, especially by the famous atheist propagandists such as Sagan and Harris, if there are atheists who claim to be so but not on scientific grounds then this argument shouldn’t concern them so much.

Secondly, you assume that science only concerns itself with matter and energy. That too is an invalid assumption. Science concerns itself with all that exists. If something like immaterial reality exists, then it would not be beyond the realm of science.

How can we investigate an immaterial reality with a material tool? Science as we all know uses logic + material tools including our senses, unless you believe it is possible to see immaterial things under the microscope then that is a whole different issue. What are the contributions of science in the realm of metaphysics? Nothing! It can’t even tell if there is a world other than the material one or not.

Thirdly, there is something higher from which science itself derives its validity - logic and reason. Actually, the term validity of logic is redundant because the meaning of "valid" depends on logic and cannot be independent of it.

Since logic as you have said is higher than science, then it is impossible for science to investigate and study logic, because if it does it would be higher than logic. This contradicts what you have said earlier that science studies everything that exits.

This also supports the argument that atheism cannot be based on scientific foundations; it is rather based on philosophical ones.

Now, let us consider your argument itself. First of all, belief that matter and energy is all that exists is unnecessary fro atheism. I, for one, believe in existence of conceptual reality. That is the realm of ideas, concepts, theories etc. This reality is dependent upon consciousness or the human mind and consists of fields such as mathematics, logic etc.

What you said means you didn’t base your choice of atheism on scientific basis but on logical ones, in my argument I proved that atheism can’t be based on science, and so far no one refuted that.

Concerning your atheism, you claim to base it on logic. Logically, there is a creator for every created, nothing creates itself, which makes belief in god more reasonable than atheism. This is simple logic.

Since you admitted your belief in immaterial thing through logic, then what on what logic did you base your disbelief in the possibility of god‘s existence?

Now, moving away from my rant and coming back to the point of the argument itself. Even if you believe that the immaterial exists, you still cannot say that it is exempt from science or reason.

How can one say that the immaterial is unknowable while reason and even knowledge itself are immaterial?! This would be nonsensical, when I said the immaterial is outside the scope science I didn’t mean it is outside the scope of knowledge or reason, by science I mean the method of knowledge that utilizes material tools and starts from material phenomena, and that can’t be applicable to something immaterial like ideas, feelings or consciousness.

Since reason is the only means we have of gaining knowledge,

That statement needs proof. We have knowledge about things but we didn’t acquire it through reason, on what reason did we base our knowledge that music is beautiful? Or that a certain person is boring or lovable for example? Also, many ideas come to us without thinking about them, and creative people know this very well, like when you walk on the street and suddenly strikes you a new idea for a project, or a solution for a difficult problem you had, or when you are watching a comedy show suddenly strikes the idea that you need reconsider your whole path in life, such ideas didn’t come after thinking but before it, and your statement implies that all knowledge and ideas come after a process of reasoning,
,,,,

I apologize for my late response ,and I appreciate your serious reply, which is quite rare to find among atheists..