(May 9, 2013 at 12:19 pm)xdrgnh Wrote: This generation of Atheist is to reliant on science for truth.That's a gross generalisation which can't be used as a definition of 'atheist'. There are atheists who use science, there are atheists who don't. Their only conjoining factor is their lack of belief in theistic propositions.
Quote:Science can disprove not prove.I think it would be useful at this point for you to define what you mean by 'proof'. Assuming a useful definition, the scientific method can be used to do both; that's what facts are for.
Quote:You can prove Deism as I have shown using logic and reason.You have not 'proven' anything, all you've done is make an argument. As I, and others, have started showing, your argument is flawed on many points.
Quote:Are you saying logic and reason is not good enough for a proof?Yes. They are useful to demonstrate the coherence of an argument or hypothesis but alone they are not enough to qualify as 'proof'. In a hypothesis, logical coherence is essential to show that further investigation and/or experimentation is worth the investment; from there one can work towards 'proof'.
Quote:Even mathematics uses logic and reason to prove and not evidence.Nonsense. Maths is grounded in facts. Further, when mathematic models are proposed, they are not considered credible unless they're backed by evidence or based on other models which are backed by evidence. That's what makes maths so reliable.
Sum ergo sum
