| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/17/2011 03:46:05 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by vawendy:
How strange. I think only those who don't believe in God would think that "that being encumbered by gods diminishes the experience of it [nature] for people". It completely and totally enhances it for me.
To each his own. I'm glad that, either way, people are as awed by nature as I am. |
Well yes... precisely! We have completely different viewpoints. We atheists just don't completely comprehend how those of faith can choose to ascribe our physical world to what seems to us as arbitrary acts of some unseen higher being, when there are rational, science-based explanations. And those of faith just look at us and ask how we can possibly not believe, with all the abundant "evidence" around us! And ne'er the twain shall meet, LOL. |
The funny thing is -- I believe in both. I have no problem believing in God and evolution. So I have the best of both worlds. :D |
Just thought I'd further clarify my previous post, so it doesn't look like I'm just saying this without thought.
They are completely opposite mindsets, one demands evidence, the other demands faith, I really don't feel that you can genuinely say that you both believe in a need for greatly detailed study and evidence, and then say that you believe no evidence should be needed, and that your feelings and intuition (plus a book and religious system) are proof enough for you, each requires a worldview that is the polar opposite of the other, and anyone who tells me otherwise is generally dismissed as silly or misinformed.
Instead, I suspect that you believe in God, but you aren't a creationist. Would that be fair?
Message edited by author 2011-02-17 15:47:45. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 05:25:07 PM · #27 |
I would disagree Cory, at least in my view.
For me Science is the how.
Faith is the why.
But I do understand where you are coming from. One cannot make or unmake a concious decision to believe, no more than one can make or unmake a concious decision to love. We feel what we feel. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 05:35:52 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
I would disagree Cory, at least in my view.
For me Science is the how.
Faith is the why.
But I do understand where you are coming from. One cannot make or unmake a concious decision to believe, no more than one can make or unmake a concious decision to love. We feel what we feel. |
I can see you are religious... I submit feeling is something that often deceives you and should never be given priority over evidence that has been tested. Of course, again, this is simply an example (for me) of why one cannot believe in both god and science.. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 07:26:25 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by ambaker:
I would disagree Cory, at least in my view.
For me Science is the how.
Faith is the why.
But I do understand where you are coming from. One cannot make or unmake a concious decision to believe, no more than one can make or unmake a concious decision to love. We feel what we feel. |
I can see you are religious... I submit feeling is something that often deceives you and should never be given priority over evidence that has been tested. Of course, again, this is simply an example (for me) of why one cannot believe in both god and science.. |
Cory,
I am certainly an atheist, but I can see how faith can be reconciled with science. It's not a black and white question, IMO. If I postulate that the physical evidence before me is a reflection of the universe as it exists, and has existed, I can still envision a belief set that includes a higher power, just not one that explicitly created the universe according to one of the many "creation stories." Or perhaps (s)he did create the nascent universe, i.e. initiated the Big Bang. Neither of these viewpoints is directly at odds with science. When all is said and done, neither the existence, nor the non-existence of a God is logically provable. Thus even my atheistic position is a matter of "faith!"
A couple years ago I attended a talk by Richard Dawkins, who as I recall stated that along a continuum between "certain atheist" and "certain theist," he was just imperceptibly shy of the atheist end. I share the view, because in fact there is no certainty. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 07:40:30 PM · #30 |
interesting and unique perspective. thanks for sharing.
|
|
|
|
02/17/2011 07:51:22 PM · #31 |
| Speaking of Richard Dawkins, some of the participants in this discussion may enjoy this talk that he gave at the annual TED event. |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 03:22:21 AM · #32 |
| An inspiring blog and a thought provoking discussion... |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 05:44:29 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Speaking of Richard Dawkins, some of the participants in this discussion may enjoy this talk that he gave at the annual TED event. |
You know...I listened to that whole talk...Thanks for posting it, Fritz! |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 08:00:43 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Speaking of Richard Dawkins, some of the participants in this discussion may enjoy this talk that he gave at the annual TED event. |
You know...I listened to that whole talk...Thanks for posting it, Fritz! |
You are welcome, Mae!
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 03:22:24 PM EDT.
