Number of points:
As others have said you don't have to be a believer in science to reject belief in God or gods.
Whilst you can argue that implies faith in reasoning I see this as a weakness of this philosophical line of questioning as tends towards solipsism.
There has to be a fundamental difference between faith in the everyday and faith that demands worship of something unseen, unproven and un-disprovable.
The philosophical approach appears to assume that science evolved out of philosophy itself. I'd argue not, that science developed out of a try it and see approach as in, I have a problem I'd like to solve so I'll try a number of solutions until such time as I find something that works.
Over time this has yielded solutions but more than that it has yielded complex methodologies that appear to work time and time again.
As our lives are today it is hard to go a single minute without utilizing science and its related disciplines - the mattress you sleep on, the alarm clock that wakes you, the water you wash with, the kettle you boil...
Again, however, we must return to the idea that science doesn't require worship - it is free to change to better explanations of things as they are discovered. Its rigorous methods are based entirely on the best and most reliable results and it doesn't claim perfection.
In summary then - accepting science is a reasonable approach as it gives every appearance of working. This is not true for religious faith, which, even if it did work, hides any evidence to support it.
As others have said you don't have to be a believer in science to reject belief in God or gods.
Whilst you can argue that implies faith in reasoning I see this as a weakness of this philosophical line of questioning as tends towards solipsism.
There has to be a fundamental difference between faith in the everyday and faith that demands worship of something unseen, unproven and un-disprovable.
The philosophical approach appears to assume that science evolved out of philosophy itself. I'd argue not, that science developed out of a try it and see approach as in, I have a problem I'd like to solve so I'll try a number of solutions until such time as I find something that works.
Over time this has yielded solutions but more than that it has yielded complex methodologies that appear to work time and time again.
As our lives are today it is hard to go a single minute without utilizing science and its related disciplines - the mattress you sleep on, the alarm clock that wakes you, the water you wash with, the kettle you boil...
Again, however, we must return to the idea that science doesn't require worship - it is free to change to better explanations of things as they are discovered. Its rigorous methods are based entirely on the best and most reliable results and it doesn't claim perfection.
In summary then - accepting science is a reasonable approach as it gives every appearance of working. This is not true for religious faith, which, even if it did work, hides any evidence to support it.
Kuusi palaa, ja on viimeinen kerta kun annan vaimoni laittaa jouluvalot!
