(February 14, 2013 at 10:22 am)AtlasS Wrote: I agree with you.
One problem is that the concept of science itself is not understood probably by many people. Science is the studying of a natural phenomena, its core but not its reason or why it behaves like that.
The atom is the best example. Until this day nobody would answer you -scientifically- why the atom exists, why it behaves like that. Nobody would also tell you why the human heart beats, why that electricity is there.
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/113/23/2775.full
Ahh, the old god of the gaps argument: we don't know yet, therefore god. That's nice and flawed.
Quote:It is why I believe that the issue of god is something that a human must solve with his/her own mind without any kind of prior feelings or emotions about the subject.
I have difficulty envisioning a person like that. Not all of us can be total amnesiacs, after all.
![Tongue Tongue](https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
Quote:When I came back to my religion, I remember starting to read by myself without any external intervention. Eventually it would all go to your logic, what you want and what you think about the world.
Except that reality is independent of what you personally want, and what you think. Sometimes those things can match up, but not always.
Quote:It is above conventional reason. And I'm a person who believes in science in any other field. But in this one pricelessly : science is not the best approach to prove god.
I can't help but wonder if you'd be saying that if science could prove what you want it to prove.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!